TY - JOUR
T1 - Lack of Progress in Early Diagnosis of Bladder Cancer
AU - Araki, Motoo
AU - Nieder, Alan M.
AU - Manoharan, Murugesan
AU - Yang, Yulong
AU - Soloway, Mark S.
PY - 2007/2/1
Y1 - 2007/2/1
N2 - Objectives: The stage of presentation of prostate cancer has changed dramatically in the past two decades, largely because of prostate-specific antigen screening and increased public awareness regarding the disease. Recently, strides have been made in the validation, development, and approval of bladder cancer (BC) markers. We sought to evaluate whether any stage migration has occurred for patients with BC during the same period. Methods: A total of 351 and 1262 patients underwent radical cystectomy and radical retropubic prostatectomy, respectively, between 1992 and 2005 by one surgeon. The patients were divided into two consecutive groups: group 1 (1992 to 1998) and group 2 (1999 to 2005). The baseline and pathologic characteristics of the patients were compared. Results: No differences were found in the clinical or pathologic staging between the two groups of patients undergoing radical cystectomy. The 5-year overall and disease-specific survival also was not different between the two groups. For patients with prostate cancer, those in group 2 presented at a younger age, with a lower prostate-specific antigen level, and had a lower clinical stage. Group 2 patients had a decrease in the incidence of extracapsular extension, a decreased tumor volume, and a decrease in the incidence of Gleason 8 to 10 tumors. Conclusions: During two consecutive periods, our patients with prostate cancer presented with the cancer at an earlier stage and had more favorable pathologic features after radical retropubic prostatectomy. However, our patients with BC did not demonstrate any stage migration. Physicians need to be more aggressive in diagnosing BC, especially in patients at high risk of the disease. Risk factors must be emphasized, urine markers should be used in a screening strategy, and the indications for radical cystectomy should be liberalized.
AB - Objectives: The stage of presentation of prostate cancer has changed dramatically in the past two decades, largely because of prostate-specific antigen screening and increased public awareness regarding the disease. Recently, strides have been made in the validation, development, and approval of bladder cancer (BC) markers. We sought to evaluate whether any stage migration has occurred for patients with BC during the same period. Methods: A total of 351 and 1262 patients underwent radical cystectomy and radical retropubic prostatectomy, respectively, between 1992 and 2005 by one surgeon. The patients were divided into two consecutive groups: group 1 (1992 to 1998) and group 2 (1999 to 2005). The baseline and pathologic characteristics of the patients were compared. Results: No differences were found in the clinical or pathologic staging between the two groups of patients undergoing radical cystectomy. The 5-year overall and disease-specific survival also was not different between the two groups. For patients with prostate cancer, those in group 2 presented at a younger age, with a lower prostate-specific antigen level, and had a lower clinical stage. Group 2 patients had a decrease in the incidence of extracapsular extension, a decreased tumor volume, and a decrease in the incidence of Gleason 8 to 10 tumors. Conclusions: During two consecutive periods, our patients with prostate cancer presented with the cancer at an earlier stage and had more favorable pathologic features after radical retropubic prostatectomy. However, our patients with BC did not demonstrate any stage migration. Physicians need to be more aggressive in diagnosing BC, especially in patients at high risk of the disease. Risk factors must be emphasized, urine markers should be used in a screening strategy, and the indications for radical cystectomy should be liberalized.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33847055912&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33847055912&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.urology.2006.10.016
DO - 10.1016/j.urology.2006.10.016
M3 - Article
C2 - 17320662
AN - SCOPUS:33847055912
SN - 0090-4295
VL - 69
SP - 270
EP - 274
JO - Urology
JF - Urology
IS - 2
ER -