Clinical Significance of Perineural Invasion in Men With Grade Group 1 Prostate Cancer on Active Surveillance.
retrospective_cohort · Level III
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 36073925.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1097/JU.0000000000002963.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
We aimed to evaluate the clinical significance of perineural invasion in men on active surveillance for Grade Group 1 prostate cancer. We identified 1,969 men with Grade Group 1 prostate cancer and at least 1 follow-up biopsy. A time-dependent Cox model and a logistic regression model were used to assess the association between biopsy-detected perineural invasion and grade reclassification (defined as the detection of Grade Group ≥2 prostate cancer on a surveillance biopsy), and adverse pathology (defined as Grade Group ≥3 ± seminal vesicle invasion ± lymph node involvement) at radical prostatectomy, respectively. The 198 men with perineural invasion detected during active surveillance had lower rates of grade reclassification-free survival than those without perineural invasion (<i>P < .</i>001). On multivariable analysis perineural invasion was significantly associated with grade reclassification (HR 3.25, 95% CI 2.54-4.16, <i>P < .</i>001); an association that persisted in the multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging subset. At radical prostatectomy, men with biopsy-detected perineural invasion had more extraprostatic extension than men without perineural invasion (Relative Risk 1.71, 95% CI 1.15-2.56). However, on multivariable analysis biopsy-detected perineural invasion was not associated with adverse pathology (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.27-1.68, <i>P = .</i>40) and these patients did not exhibit more biochemical recurrence at 5 years (<i>P</i> > .05). Perineural invasion during active surveillance was associated with grade reclassification. At radical prostatectomy biopsy-detected perineural invasion patients exhibited more extraprostatic extension but biopsy-detected perineural invasion was not independently associated with more adverse pathology. In addition, these patients did not have more biochemical recurrence during follow-up. Perineural invasion should not preclude Grade Group 1 patients from active surveillance but they may warrant more stringent monitoring.
Medical subject headings
- Clinical Relevance
- Prostatic Neoplasms