Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

Clinical Research

Clinicopathological predictors of systemic progression and prostate cancer mortality in patients with a positive surgical margin at radical prostatectomy

Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases volume 15, pages 56–62 (2012)Cite this article

Abstract

Background:

Although a positive surgical margin (PSM) at radical prostatectomy (RRP) has been consistently linked to an increased risk of biochemical recurrence, the impact of margin status on patient survival continues to be debated. We evaluated long-term outcomes of patients with a PSM at RRP and determined predictors of systemic progression (SP) and mortality in these men.

Methods:

We reviewed our institutional registry of 16 749 patients who underwent RRP between 1990 and 2008 to identify 2895 patients with a PSM. Median follow-up was 10.6 years. Postoperative survival was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to analyze clinicopathological variables associated with SP and death from prostate cancer.

Results:

A 15-year SP-free and cancer-specific survival was 90 and 93%, respectively. On multivariate analysis, higher tumor volume, increased pathological Gleason score and advanced pathological tumor stage were associated with significantly increased risks of SP and death from prostate cancer, whereas number and location of PSM did not predict mortality.

Conclusions:

The risks of SP and prostate cancer death in patients with a PSM remain low on long-term follow-up. Tumor variables are the primary determinants of cancer death. These results should be considered when evaluating patients with a PSM for adjuvant therapy.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1
Figure 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Chang SS, Cookson MS . Impact of positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy. Urology 2006; 68: 249–252.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Blute ML, Bergstralh EJ, Iocca A, Scherer B, Zincke H . Use of Gleason score, prostate specific antigen, seminal vesicle and margin status to predict biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2001; 165: 119–125.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Stephenson AJ, Scardino PT, Eastham JA, Bianco Jr FJ, Dotan ZA, DiBlasio CJ et al. Postoperative nomogram predicting the 10-year probability of prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 7005–7012.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bolla M, van Poppel H, Collette L, van Cangh P, Vekemans K, Da Pozzo L et al. Postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy: a randomized controlled trial (EORTC trial 22911). Lancet 2005; 366: 572–578.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Thompson IM, Tangen CM, Paradelo J, Lucia MS, Miller G, Troyer D et al. Adjuvant radiotherapy for pathologically advanced prostate cancer. JAMA 2006; 296: 2329–2335.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Wieder JA, Soloway MS . Incidence, etiology, location, prevention, and treatment of positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Urol 1998; 160: 299–315.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Grossfeld GD, Chang JJ, Broering JM, Miller DP, Yu J, Flanders SC et al. Impact of positive surgical margins on prostate cancer recurrence and the use of secondary cancer treatment: data from the CaPSURE database. J Urol 2000; 163: 1171–1177.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Vis AN, Schröder FH, Van der Kwast TH . The actual value of the surgical margin status as a predictor of disease progression in men with early prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2006; 50: 258–265.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Boorjian SA, Karnes RJ, Crispen PL, Carlson RE, Rangel LJ, Bergstralh EJ et al. The impact of positive surgical margins on mortality following radical prostatectomy during the prostate specific antigen era. J Urol 2010; 183: 1003–1009.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Mann MJ, DeCastro GJ, Desai M, Benson MC, McKiernan JM . Predictive significance of surgical margin status after prostatectomy for prostate cancer during the PSA era. Urology 2008; 72: 1203–1207.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Epstein JI . Incidence and significance of positive margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. Urol Clin North Am 1996; 23: 651–663.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Simon MA, Kim S, Soloway MS . Prostate specific antigen recurrence rates are low after radical retropubic prostatectomy and positive margins. J Urol 2006; 175: 140–144.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Swindle P, Eastham JA, Ohori M, Kattan MW, Wheeler T, Maru N et al. Do margins matter? The prognostic significance of positive surgical margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol 2005; 174: 903–907.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Karakiewicz PI, Eastham JA, Graefen M, Cagiannos I, Stricker PD, Klein E et al. Prognostic impact of positive surgical margins in surgically treated prostate cancer: multi-institutional assessment of 5831 patients. Urology 2005; 66: 1245–1250.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Eastham JA, Kuroiwa K, Ohori M, Serio AM, Gorbonos A, Maru N et al. Prognostic significance of location of positive margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. Urology 2007; 70: 965–969.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ward JF, Blute ML, Slezak J, Bergstralh EJ, Zincke H . The long-term clinical impact of biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer 5 or more years after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2003; 170: 1872–1876.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Roehl KA, Han M, Ramos CG, Antenor JA, Catalona WJ . Cancer progression and survival rates following anatomical radical retropubic prostatectomy in 3478 consecutive patients: long-term results. J Urol 2004; 172: 910–914.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Freedland SJ, Humphreys EB, Mangold LA, Eisenberger M, Dorey FJ, Walsh PC et al. Risk of prostate cancer-specific mortality following biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. JAMA 2005; 294: 433–439.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Boorjian SA, Thompson RH, Tollefson MK, Rangel LJ, Bergstralh EJ, Blute ML et al. Long-term risk of clinical progression after biochemical recurrence following radical prostatectomy: the impact of time from surgery to recurrence. Eur Urol 2011; 59: 893–899.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Albertsen PC, Hanley JA, Gleason DF, Barry MJ . Competing risk analysis of men aged 55 to 74 years at diagnosis managed conservatively for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 1998; 280: 975–980.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Pfitzenmaier J, Pahernik S, Tremmel T, Haferkamp A, Buse S, Hohenfellner M . Positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy: do they have an impact on biochemical or clinical progression. BJU Int 2008; 102: 1413–1418.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Wright JL, Dalkin BL, True LD, Ellis WJ, Stanford JL, Lange PH et al. Positive surgical margins at radical prostatectomy predict prostate cancer specific mortality. J Urol 2010; 183: 2213–2218.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Bostwick DG, Myers RP, Oesterling JE . Staging of prostate cancer. Semin Surg Oncol 1994; 10: 60–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Amling CL, Bergstralh EJ, Blute ML, Slezak JM, Zincke H . Defining prostate specific antigen progression after radical prostatectomy: what is the most appropriate cut point? J Urol 2001; 165: 1146–1151.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Stephenson AJ, Kattan MW, Eastham JA, Dotan ZA, Bianco Jr FJ, Lilja H et al. Defining biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy: a proposal for a standardized definition. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 3973–3978.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Jayachandran J, Bañez LL, Levy DE, Aronson WJ, Terris MK, Presti Jr JC et al. Risk stratification for biochemical recurrence in men with positive surgical margins or extracapsular disease after radical prostatectomy: results from the SEARCH database. J Urol 2008; 179: 1791–1796.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Resnick MJ, Canter DJ, Guzzo TJ, Magerfleisch L, Tomaszewski JE, Brucker BM et al. Defining pathological variables to predict biochemical failure in patients with positive surgical margins at radical prostatectomy: implications for adjuvant radiotherapy. BJU Int 2009; 105: 1377–1380.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Budäus L, Isbarn H, Eichelberg C, Lughezzani G, Sun M, Perrotte P et al. Biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy: multiplicative interaction between surgical margin status and pathologic stage. J Urol 2010; 184: 1341–1346.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Alkhateeb S, Alibhai S, Fleshner N, Finelli A, Jewett M, Zlotta A et al. Impact of positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy differs by disease risk group. J Urol 2010; 183: 145–150.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Stephenson AJ, Wood DP, Kattan MW, Klein EA, Scardino PT, Eastham JA et al. Location, extent and number of positive surgical margins do not improve accuracy of predicting prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2009; 182: 1357–1363.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Van der Kwast TH, Bolla M, Van Poppel H, Van Cangh P, Vekemans K, Da Pozzo L et al. Identification of patients with prostate cancer who benefit from immediate postoperative radiotherapy: EORTC 22911. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 4178–4186.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Dillman RO, Hafer R, Cox C, McClure SE . Overall survival benefit from postoperative radiation therapy for organ-confined, margin-positive prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011; 79: 719–723.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Boorjian SA, Karnes RJ, Crispen PL, Rangel LJ, Bergstralh EJ, Blute ML . Radiation therapy after radical prostatectomy: impact on metastases and survival. J Urol 2009; 182: 2708–2714.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Trock BJ, Han M, Freedland SJ, Humphreys EB, DeWeese TL, Partin AW et al. Prostate cancer-specific survival following salvage radiotherapy vs observation in men with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. JAMA 2008; 299: 2760–2769.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Stephenson AJ, Shariat SF, Zelefsky MJ, Kattan MW, Butler EB, Teh BS et al. Salvage radiotherapy for recurrent prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. JAMA 2004; 291: 1325–1332.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Wiegel T, Bottke D, Steiner U, Siegmann A, Golz R, Störkel S et al. Phase III postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy compared with radical prostatectomy along in pT3 prostate cancer with postoperative undetectable prostate-specific antigen: ARO96-02/AUO AP 09/95. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27: 2924–2930.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Thompson IM, Tangen CM, Paradelo J, Lucia MS, Miller G, Troyer D et al. Adjuvant radiotherapy for pathological T3N0M0 prostate cancer significantly reduces risk of metastases and improves survival: long-term followup of a randomized clinical trial. J Urol 2009; 181: 956–962.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Mehta SS, Lubeck DP, Sadetsky N, Pasta DJ, Carroll PR . Patterns of secondary cancer treatment for biochemical failure following radical prostatectomy: data from CaPSURE. J Urol 2004; 171: 215–219.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Mayo Medical School and Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA

    S A Boorjian, M K Tollefson & R J Karnes

  2. Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Medical School and Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA

    L J Rangel & E J Bergstralh

Authors
  1. S A Boorjian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M K Tollefson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. L J Rangel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. E J Bergstralh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. R J Karnes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S A Boorjian.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Boorjian, S., Tollefson, M., Rangel, L. et al. Clinicopathological predictors of systemic progression and prostate cancer mortality in patients with a positive surgical margin at radical prostatectomy. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 15, 56–62 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2011.36

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2011.36

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links