Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

Àü¸³¼±¾ÏÀÇ º´¸®ÇÐÀû º´±â ¿¹ÃøÀÎÀÚ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ °íÂû Role of clinical Stage, PSA and Gleason's Score in Predicting Pathologic Outcome in Prostate Cancer

´ëÇѺñ´¢±â°úÇÐȸÁö 1997³â 38±Ç 12È£ p.1318 ~ 1324
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
¾ÈÇÑÁ¾/Hanjong Ahn ÃÖÀºÈ£/±èÁ¤±Õ/È«¹ü½Ä/Á¤Å±Ô/¹ÚÇü±Ù/±èû¼ö/¹ÚÅÂÇÑ/°ø°æ¿±/Eun Ho Ch oi/Jung Gyun Kim/Beom Sik Hong/Taegyu Chung/Hyungkeun Park/Choung-Soo Kim/Taehan Park/Gyungyub Gong

Abstract

°á·Ð
±ÙÄ¡Àû Àü¸³¼±ÀûÃâ¼ú ÈÄ º´¸®ÇÐÀû º´±â¸¦ ¼úÀü¿¡ ¿¹ÃøÇϴµ¥ ÀÖ¾î ´ÜÀÏ ¿¹ÃøÀÎÀڷδÂ
PSA°¡ °¡Àå À¯¿ëÇÑ °ÍÀ¸·Î ÆǴܵǸç, MRI µîÀÇ ¹æ»ç¼±ÇÐÀû °Ë»ç¸¦ Æ÷ÇÔÇÑ ÀÓ»óÀû º´±â´Â
À¯¿ëÇÏÁö ¸øÇÏ¿´´Ù. Gleason score´Â ¸²ÇÁÀý ÀüÀ̸¦ ¿¹ÃøÇϴµ¥´Â À¯¿ëÇÑ °ÍÀ¸·Î ÆǴܵdzª
Àü¸³¼±¾ÏÀÇ ±¹¼Òº´±â¸¦ ¿¹ÃøÇϱ⿡´Â ºÎÀûÀýÇÏ¿´´Ù. ÀÌ¿Í °°Àº °á°ú·Î¼­ ¼ú Àü PSAÄ¡°¡
20ng/§¢ÀÌÇÏÀÌ°í Gleason score°¡ 7ÀÌÇÏÀÏ ¶§ ±×¸®°í MRI¿¡¼­ Àü¸³¼±¾È¿¡ Á¾¾çÀÌ ±¹ÇѵǾî
ÀÖ´Ù°í ÆÇ´ÜµÉ ¶§´Â º´¸®ÇÐÀû º´±âµµ Àü¸³¼±³»¿¡ ±¹ÇѵǾî ÀÖÀ» °¡´É¼ºÀÌ ³ôÀ¸¹Ç·Î ȯÀÚÀÇ
¿¬·É°ú °Ç°­»óŸ¦ °í·ÁÇÏ¿© ±ÙÄ¡Àû Àü¸³¼±ÀûÃâ¼úÀ» ½ÃÇàÇÏ´Â °ÍÀÌ ÀûÀýÇÑ Ä¡·á¹æ¹ýÀÌ µÉ
¼ö ÀÖÀ» °ÍÀÌ´Ù.
#ÃÊ·Ï#
Properative clinical staging in the prostate cancer does not always accurately predict
the surgical-pathological outcome. We evaluated how the clinical staging, and other
clinical parameters including preoperative PSA and Gleason's score could reflect on the
surgico-pathological findings in 30 patients with prostate cancer, who underwent radical
prostatectomy
Twelve of 24 patients with clinical 71 or 72 disease were understaged by clinical
staging determined by digital rectal examination, bone scan, and radiologic studies
including CT and MRI with endorectal coil. MRI with endorectal coil accurately reflected
the extracapsular disease only in 59.1% of 22 patients studied. At the same time, it also
showed low sensitivity (50%) with high specificity (100%) in detecting Iymph node
metastasis
Preoperative levels of PSA in patients with P2, P3, and N+ disease were 17.8¡¾4.5,
47.9¡¾11.3, 93.5¡¾20.5ng/§¢, respectively. The level of PSA was less than 20ng/§¢ in 9 of
12 patients with P2 disease, while they were greater than 20ng/m1 in 9 of 12 patients
with P3 disease. PSA may have a role to nile out Iymph node metastasis when its level
is less than 10ng/§¢ although it did not reach tile statistical significance because of
small sample size.
Gleason's scores in patients with P2 disease were quite similar to those in patients
with P3 disease (5.92¡¾0.69 vs 5.67¡¾0.56), whereas Gleason's scores in all 6 patients
with N disease were 9 or greater.
Neoadjuvant hormonal therapy with LH-RH analogue and androgen receptor blocker
for 1.5 to 3 months had no impact on the reduction of margin positivity or downstaging
in 10 patients. PSA failure rate in patients with P2 and P3 disease was 25% at 1 year
after operation.
PSA is a good marker for differentiating between P2 and P3 disease (p=0.0214) and
can safely rule out N+ disease if its level is below 10ng/§¢, while Gleason's score may
reflect the Iymph node metastasis when it is 9 or greater (p=0.0012). Among the
candidates for radical prostatectomy, selection of the patients on the basis of PSA and
Gleason's score might improve the_ surgical-pathological outcome.

Å°¿öµå

Prostate cancer; Radical prostatectomy; PSA; Gleason's score; MR imaging;

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

   

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI
KoreaMed
KAMS