Indian Journal of Urology Users online:1802  
IJU
Home Current Issue Ahead of print Editorial Board Archives Symposia Guidelines Subscriptions Login 
Print this page  Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size


 
  Table of Contents 
LETTER TO EDITOR
Year : 2017  |  Volume : 33  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 176-177
 

Reply to: Biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy in intermediate-risk group men increases with the number of risk factors


Vattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, Michigan, USA

Date of Submission08-Jan-2017
Date of Acceptance12-Mar-2017
Date of Web Publication30-Mar-2017

Correspondence Address:
Sohrab Arora
Vattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, Michigan
USA
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/iju.IJU_71_17

Rights and Permissions

 

How to cite this article:
Arora S. Reply to: Biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy in intermediate-risk group men increases with the number of risk factors. Indian J Urol 2017;33:176-7

How to cite this URL:
Arora S. Reply to: Biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy in intermediate-risk group men increases with the number of risk factors. Indian J Urol [serial online] 2017 [cited 2019 Nov 21];33:176-7. Available from: http://www.indianjurol.com/text.asp?2017/33/2/176/203425




Dear Editor,

With great interest, I read the recent work by Furubayashi et al. published in the Indian Journal of Urology.[1] The great heterogeneity in oncological outcomes among D'Amico risk groups, particularly in the “intermediate-risk group,” let the authors to further address this issue. Therefore, “intermediate”-risk patients were substratified by the amount of single risk factors exhibited, and the impact of risk factor combinations studied with regard to biochemical recurrence following radical prostatectomy. In part, the authors relied on a multivariate analysis using a combination of pre- and post-operative risk factors to predict the risk of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) failure. Not surprisingly, it was revealed that within the intermediate-risk category, an increasing number of risk factors are significantly associated with the PSA failure-free survival at 5 years of follow-up.

This timely study adds to a growing body of evidence that addresses heterogeneity in outcomes within D'Amico risk strata. Indeed, a recent study used a combined number of risk factors to create five risk categories among 10,139 men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer and showed that that the new classification outperformed not only intermediate-risk category but also the high-risk category.[2] Before that, a similar analysis of 12,821 patients at the Johns Hopkins University by Reese et al. showed significant heterogeneity among the intermediate-risk category.[3] To overcome heterogeneity in biochemical recurrence rates within Gleason score-based risk groups, Epstein et al. have recently proposed a simplified five-grade grading system which has a higher discrimination score than traditional Gleason score.[4]

While the present study confirms these findings, two aspects deserve further consideration. First, overfitting of data might have compromised the accuracy of results. A common rule of thumb suggests 10–20 events per predictor variable in Cox and logistic regression.[5] However, as nine predictor variables were fitted on a very limited number of outcomes (patients having PSA failure in this study was n = 26) in the multivariate Cox regression model, it would be inappropriate to draw conclusions based on these data. Second, the authors conclude that the number of intermediate-risk factors (including stage, Gleason score, and PSA) is predictive of biochemical recurrence. These findings are in contradiction to their multivariate analysis where PSA and Gleason score do not independently predict biochemical recurrence.

Notwithstanding, the study is a step in the right direction. Furthermore, the availability of multiparametric magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and MR-guided biopsy will allow us to advance from the Digital Rectal Examination (DRE)-based D'Amico classification and devise new and more precise prognostic criteria for prostate cancer.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
   References Top

1.
Furubayashi N, Negishi T, Iwai H, Nagase K, Taguchi K, Shimokawa M, et al. Biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy in intermediate-risk group men increases with the number of risk factors. Indian J Urol 2017;33:64-9.  Back to cited text no. 1
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  
2.
Gnanapragasam VJ, Lophatananon A, Wright KA, Muir KR, Gavin A, Greenberg DC, et al. Improving clinical risk stratification at diagnosis in primary prostate cancer: A prognostic modelling study. PLoS Med 2016;13:e1002063.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Reese AC, Pierorazio PM, Han M, Partin AW. Contemporary evaluation of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network prostate cancer risk classification system. Urology 2012;80:1075-9.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Epstein JI, Zelefsky MJ, Sjoberg DD, Nelson JB, Egevad L, Magi-Galluzzi C, et al. A contemporary prostate cancer grading system: A validated alternative to the gleason score. Eur Urol 2016;69:428-35.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Peduzzi P, Concato J, Kemper E, Holford TR, Feinstein AR. A simulation study of the number of events per variable in logistic regression analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 1996;49:1373-9.  Back to cited text no. 5
    




 

Top
Print this article  Email this article
 

    

 
   Search
 
  
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
    Article in PDF (319 KB)
    Citation Manager
    Access Statistics
    Reader Comments
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  


    References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1408    
    Printed12    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded41    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal

HEALTHWARE INDIA