Association between pelvic lymph node dissection and survival among patients with prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy

Isaac E Kim Jr; Aaron H Wang; George S Corpuz; Preston C Sprenkle; Michael S Leapman; Joseph M Brito; Joseph Renzulli; Isaac Yi Kim

doi:10.1016/j.prnil.2024.01.002

Association between pelvic lymph node dissection and survival among patients with prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy

Prostate Int. 2024 Jun;12(2):70-78. doi: 10.1016/j.prnil.2024.01.002. Epub 2024 Feb 7.

Authors

Isaac E Kim Jr¹, Aaron H Wang¹, George S Corpuz², Preston C Sprenkle³, Michael S Leapman³, Joseph M Brito³, Joseph Renzulli³, Isaac Yi Kim³

Affiliations

¹ Warren Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.
² Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
³ Department of Urology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.

Abstract

Introduction: Although the clinical benefits of pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) at the time of radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer remain uncertain, major guidelines recommend PLND based on risk profile. Thus, the objective of this study was to examine the association between PLND and survival among patients undergoing RP stratified by Gleason grade group (GG) with the aim of allowing patients and physicians to make more informed care decisions about the potential risks and benefits of PLND.

Materials and methods: From the SEER-17 database, we examined overall (OS) and prostate cancer-specific (PCSS) survival of prostate cancer patients who underwent RP from 2010 to 2015 stratified by GG. We applied propensity score matching to balance pre-operative characteristics including race, age, PSA, household income, and housing status (urban/rural) between patients who did and did not undergo PLND for each GG. Statistical analyses included log-rank test and Kaplan-Meier curves.

Results: We extracted a matched cohort from 80,287 patients with GG1-5 who underwent RP. The median PSA value was 6.0 ng/mL, and the median age was 62-years-old. 49,453 patients underwent PLND (61.60%), while 30,834 (38.40%) did not. There was no difference in OS and PCSS between patients who received PLND and those who did not for all Gleason GG (OS-GG1: P = 0.20, GG2: P = 0.34, GG3: P > 0.05, GG4: P = 0.55, GG5: P = 0.47; PCSS-GG1: P = 0.11, GG2: P = 0.96, GG3: P = 0.81, GG4: P = 0.22, GG5: P = 0.14).

Conclusions: In this observational study, PLND at the time of RP was not associated with improved OS or PCSS among patients with cGS of 3 + 3, 3 + 4, 4 + 3, 4 + 4, 4 + 5, and 5 + 4. These findings suggest that until definitive clinical trials are completed, prostate cancer patients who have elected RP should be appropriately counseled on the potential risks and lack of proven survival benefit of PLND.

Keywords: Cancer-specific survival; Pelvic lymph node dissection; Prostate cancer; Radical prostatectomy.