Functional and oncological outcomes of patients aged &lt;50 years treated with radical prostatectomy for localised prostate cancer in a <scp>E</scp>uropean population

Becker, Andreas; Tennstedt, Pierre; Hansen, Jens; Trinh, Quoc‐Dien; Kluth, Luis A.; Atassi, Nabil; Schlomm, Thorsten; Salomon, Georg; Haese, Alexander; Budaeus, Lars; Michl, Uwe; Heinzer, Hans; Huland, Hartwig; Graefen, Markus; Steuber, Thomas

doi:10.1111/bju.12407

Cited by 40 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…14 However, thoroughly designed and executed fMRI remains a relatively time-efficient, well-established, and widely available method for functional mappings of language and reaches sensitivities > 90% depending on examination parameters. 22,23 New developments in scanning hardware and pulse sequences may further add to its utility. Clustered acquisition methods can be one way to reduce significantly the time needed for fMRI in presurgical clinical applications, providing an advantage to other, timeintensive functional mapping methods.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accelerated Clustered Sparse Acquisition to Improve Functional MRI for Mapping Language Functions

Keil

Nettekoven

Weiss

et al. 2019

J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) is a useful method for noninvasive presurgical functional mapping. However, the scanner environment is inherently unsuitable for the examination of auditory and language functions, due to the loud acoustic noise produced by the scanner. Interleaved acquisition methods alleviate this problem by providing a silent period for stimulus presentation and/or response control (sparse sampling) but at the expense of a diminished amount of data collected. There are possible improvements to these sparse acquisition methods that increase the amount of data by acquiring several images per event (clustered sampling). We tested accelerated clustered fMRI acquisition in comparison with conventional sparse sampling in a pilot study. Methods The clustered and sparse acquisition techniques (7.4 minutes scanning time per protocol) were directly compared in 15 healthy subjects (8 men; mean age: 24 ± 3 years) using both a motor (tongue movement) and a language (overt picture-naming) task. Functional imaging data were analyzed using Statistical Parametric Mapping software (SPM12 Wellcome Department of Imaging Neuroscience, London, UK). For both tasks, activation levels were compared and Euclidean distances (EDs) between cluster centers (i.e., local activation maxima and centers of gravity) were calculated. Overlaps and laterality indices were computed for the picture-naming task. In addition, the feasibility of the clustered acquisition protocol in a clinical setting was assessed in one pilot patient. Results For both tasks, activation levels were higher using the clustered acquisition protocol, reflected by bigger cluster sizes (p < 0.05). Mean ED between cluster centers ranged between 9.9 ± 5.4 mm (left superior temporal gyrus; centers of gravity) and 16.6 ± 13.2 mm (left inferior frontal gyrus; local activation maxima) for the picture-naming task. Overlaps between sparse and clustered acquisition reached 88% (Simpson overlap coefficient). A similar activation pattern for both acquisition methods was also confirmed in the clinical case. Conclusion Despite some drawbacks inherent to the acquisition technique, the clustered sparse sampling protocol showed increased sensitivity for activation in language-related cortical regions with short scanning times. Such scanning techniques may be particularly advantageous for investigating patients with contraindications for long scans (e.g., reduced attention span).

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accelerated Clustered Sparse Acquisition to Improve Functional MRI for Mapping Language Functions

Keil

Nettekoven

Weiss

et al. 2019

J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this group, only 26.4% of patients were diagnosed at the limited-disease stage (T2 stage), which differs significantly from the percentage in developed countries [8]. The causes were outlined as follows: patients have no typical clinical symptoms, and when a progressed tumor is involved in the urethra and other adjacent organs, it is easily mixed up with prostatic hyperplasia.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinicopathological and Prognostic Factors in 106 Prostate Cancer Patients Aged ≤55 Years: A Single-Center Study in China

Yang

et al. 2016

Med Sci Monit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundEarly-onset prostate cancer patients (aged ≤55 years) from Western countries have been well characterized in previous studies. However, the clinicopathological and prognostic characteristics of early-onset Chinese prostate cancer patients have not yet been assessed. This study aimed to examine the clinicopathological and prognostic factors of prostate cancer patients aged ≤55 years in a single Chinese center.Material/MethodsOne hundred six prostate cancer patients aged ≤55 years with complete clinicopathological data who were treated at our hospital between January 2000 and June 2014 were selected for this study. Survival rate was investigated by Kaplan-Meier analysis, and prognostic factors were examined by univariate and multivariate analysis.ResultsThe median time from the onset of symptoms to diagnosis was 3.5 months (range, 2–55 months). The median time after endocrine therapy to development of androgen-independent prostate cancer was 10.5 months. A total of 54 patients died (50.9%), of whom 96.2% died from prostate cancer. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates were 88.7%, 66.2%, and 36.0%, respectively. Univariate and multivariate analysis showed that T staging, visceral metastasis, pathological pattern, and Gleason sum were independent prognostic factors in these patients.ConclusionsProstate cancer patients aged ≤55 years are often omitted or misdiagnosed in China. Furthermore, the pathology patterns in this age group were mostly complicated with a high degree of malignancy. Late staging, visceral metastasis, pathological pattern, and high Gleason score were independent prognostic factors in these patients. Comprehensive therapy combined with local therapy is an effective treatment strategy.

show abstract

“…After excluding case reports, non-published materials, editorials, reviews, commentaries, conference abstracts, and animal experiments, as well as irrelevant-topic studies with the first browse of title and abstract, the full-text of 191 papers, were read in detail to determine the eligibility. Finally, a total of 26 studies published from 2000 to 2019 with 391 068 patients in PSA era were included in the current study ( Table 1, Stable 1), 12,15,18,19,[22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47] and the majority of these studies were of relatively high quality with seven or more stars according to the NOS assessment ( Table 1). Seven out of the 26 studies which provided the data on comparing clinicopathological characteristics between younger (age ≤ 50) and older (age > 50) patients were suitable for odds ratio (OR) meta-analyses (Table 2).…”

Section: Literature Searchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinicopathological characteristics of localized prostate cancer in younger men aged ≤ 50 years treated with radical prostatectomy in the PSA era: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Zheng

Lin

et al. 2020

Cancer Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives With the rapid increase in younger age prostate cancer (PCa) patients, the impact of younger age on decision‐making for PCa treatment needs to be revaluated in the new era. Materials and Methods A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science up to October 2019 to identify the eligible radical prostatectomy (RP) studies focusing on understanding the impact of age on clinicopathological features and oncological prognosis in patients with localized PCa in PSA era. Meta‐analyses were conducted using available hazard ratios (HRs) from both univariate and multivariate analyses. Results Twenty‐six studies including 391 068 patients with RP treatments from the PSA era were included. Of these studies, age of 50 years old (age50) is the most commonly used cut‐off age to separate the younger patient group (including either age < 50 or age ≤ 50) from the older patient group. In these studies, the incidence of younger patients varied between 2.6% and 16.6% with a median of 8.3%. Younger patients consistently showed more favorable clinicopathological features correlated with better BCR prognosis. Meta‐analyses showed a 1.38‐fold improved BCR survival of younger patients in multivariate analysis. Among the high‐risk PCa patients, younger age was independently associated with worse oncological outcomes in multivariate analyses. Conclusion In this study, we found younger age correlated with favorable clinicopathological characteristics and better BCR prognosis in low‐ to intermediate‐risk patients. In high‐risk group patients, younger patients often showed significantly worse oncological outcomes. Our study results suggest that age 50 could be used as a practical cut‐off age to separate younger age patients from older age PCa patients.

show abstract

Functional and oncological outcomes of patients aged <50 years treated with radical prostatectomy for localised prostate cancer in a European population

Cited by 40 publications

References 30 publications

Accelerated Clustered Sparse Acquisition to Improve Functional MRI for Mapping Language Functions

Accelerated Clustered Sparse Acquisition to Improve Functional MRI for Mapping Language Functions

Clinicopathological and Prognostic Factors in 106 Prostate Cancer Patients Aged ≤55 Years: A Single-Center Study in China

Clinicopathological characteristics of localized prostate cancer in younger men aged ≤ 50 years treated with radical prostatectomy in the PSA era: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About