title: Positive surgical margins at radical prostatectomy predict prostate cancer specific mortality.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Positive surgical margins in men undergoing radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer are associated with an increased risk of biochemical recurrence. Few data are available on the role of positive surgical margins in prostate cancer specific mortality. Using a large, population based national cancer registry we evaluated the risk of prostate cancer specific mortality associated with margin status.
  
  
  METHODS
  The SEER cancer registry data for patients diagnosed between 1998 and 2006 were used to identify men undergoing radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. Margin status, pathological stage, Gleason grade and postoperative radiation therapy were recorded along with demographic data. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was used to estimate the risk of prostate cancer specific mortality associated with positive surgical margins.
  
  
  RESULTS
  A total of 65,633 patients comprised the cohort in which 291 (0.44%) prostate cancer specific deaths occurred during an average followup of 50 months. Positive surgical margins were reported in 21.2% of cases and were more common in pT3a than pT2 tumors (44% vs 18%, p <0.001) and higher grade tumors (28% vs 18%, p <0.001). The 7-year disease specific survival rates for those at highest risk for prostate cancer specific mortality (higher grade pT3a) were 97.6% for cases with negative surgical margins and 92.4% for those with positive surgical margins. Positive surgical margins were associated with a 2.6-fold increased unadjusted risk of prostate cancer specific mortality (HR 2.55, 95% CI 2.02-3.21). Positive surgical margins remained an independent predictor of prostate cancer specific mortality on multivariate analysis (HR 1.70, 95% CI 1.32-2.18).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  These data demonstrate the independent role of positive surgical margins in prostate cancer specific mortality. These findings support the importance of optimizing surgical techniques to achieve a sound oncological surgical outcome with negative surgical margins when possible.
authors.affiliation: Department of Urology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington, USA. jlwright@u.washington.edu
authors.forename: Jonathan L
authors.initials: JL
authors.lastname: Wright
authors.forename: Bruce L
authors.initials: BL
authors.lastname: Dalkin
authors.forename: Lawrence D
authors.initials: LD
authors.lastname: True
authors.forename: William J
authors.initials: WJ
authors.lastname: Ellis
authors.forename: Janet L
authors.initials: JL
authors.lastname: Stanford
authors.forename: Paul H
authors.initials: PH
authors.lastname: Lange
authors.forename: Daniel W
authors.initials: DW
authors.lastname: Lin
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011379:Prognosis; D011468:Prostatectomy; D011471:Prostatic Neoplasms / Q000401:mortality* / Q000473:pathology* / Q000601:surgery; D012307:Risk Factors
references.citation: Hum Pathol. 2001 May;32(5):494-9
references.pmid: 11381367
references.citation: Urology. 1999 Oct;54(4):682-8
references.pmid: 10510928
references.citation: J Urol. 2005 Sep;174(3):903-7
references.pmid: 16093984
references.citation: Cancer. 2009 Jan 15;115(2):303-10
references.pmid: 19025977
references.citation: Am J Surg Pathol. 2008 Nov;32(11):1709-14
references.pmid: 18769336
references.citation: J Urol. 2004 Oct;172(4 Pt 1):1328-32
references.pmid: 15371834
references.citation: Urology. 2005 Dec;66(6):1245-50
references.pmid: 16360451
references.citation: N Engl J Med. 2005 May 12;352(19):1977-84
references.pmid: 15888698
references.citation: J Urol. 2009 Feb;181(2):601-7; discussion 607-8
references.pmid: 19084864
references.citation: J Clin Oncol. 2007 Sep 20;25(27):4178-86
references.pmid: 17878474
references.citation: Urology. 2007 Jun;69(6):1095-101
references.pmid: 17572194
references.citation: J Urol. 2005 May;173(5):1572-6
references.pmid: 15821488
references.citation: Eur Urol. 2008 Jan;53(1):6-9
references.pmid: 17764823
references.citation: Eur Urol. 2009 Jan;55(1):87-99
references.pmid: 18838211
references.citation: Am J Surg Pathol. 2008 Oct;32(10):1503-12
references.pmid: 18708939
references.citation: J Urol. 2005 Jun;173(6):1938-42
references.pmid: 15879786
references.citation: Urology. 2007 Nov;70(5):965-9
references.pmid: 18068455
references.citation: J Urol. 2006 Jan;175(1):140-4; discussion 144-5
references.pmid: 16406892
references.citation: Cancer. 2008 Mar 15;112(6):1254-63
references.pmid: 18286530
references.citation: J Urol. 2004 May;171(5):1844-9; discussion 1849
references.pmid: 15076291
references.citation: Urology. 2002 Oct;60(4):670-4
references.pmid: 12385931
references.citation: J Clin Oncol. 2005 Oct 1;23(28):7005-12
references.pmid: 16192588
references.citation: BJU Int. 2008 Nov;102(10):1413-8
references.pmid: 18537951
references.citation: J Clin Oncol. 2006 Aug 20;24(24):3973-8
references.pmid: 16921049
references.citation: J Urol. 2004 Jul;172(1):129-32
references.pmid: 15201752
references.citation: JAMA. 2005 Jul 27;294(4):433-9
references.pmid: 16046649