Attenzione: i dati modificati non sono ancora stati salvati. Per confermare inserimenti o cancellazioni di voci è necessario confermare con il tasto INSERISCI in fondo alla pagina
CINECA IRIS Institutional Research Information System
Purpose: Therapeutic strategies for prostate cancer (PCa) have been evolving dramatically worldwide. The current article reports on the evolution of surgical management strategies for PCa in Italy. Methods: The data from two independent Italian multicenter projects, the MIRROR-SIU/LUNA (started in 2007, holding data of 890 patients) and the Pros-IT-CNR project (started in 2014, with data of 692 patients), were compared. Differences in patients’ characteristics were evaluated. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify characteristics associated with robot-assisted (RA) procedure, nerve sparing (NS) approach, and lymph node dissection (LND). Results: The two cohorts did not differ in terms of age and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels at biopsy. Patients enrolled in the Pros-IT-CNR project more frequently were submitted to RA (58.8% vs 27.6%, p < 0.001) and NS prostatectomy (58.4% vs. 52.9%, p = 0.04), but received LND less frequently (47.7% vs. 76.7%, p < 0.001), as compared to the MIRROR-SIU/LUNA patients. At multivariate logistic models, Lower Gleason Scores (GS) and PSA levels were significantly associated with RA prostatectomy in both cohorts. As for the MIRROR-SIU/LUNA data, clinical T-stage was a predictor for NS (OR = 0.07 for T3, T4) and LND (OR = 2.41 for T2) procedures. As for Pros-IT CNR data, GS ≥ (4 + 3) and positive cancer cores ≥ 50% were decisive factors both for NS (OR 0.29 and 0.30) and LND (OR 7.53 and 2.31) strategies. Conclusions: PCa management has changed over the last decade in Italian centers: RA and NS procedures without LND have become the methods of choice to treat newly medium–high risk diagnosed PCa.
How radical prostatectomy procedures have changed over the last 10 years in Italy: a comparative analysis based on more than 1500 patients participating in the MIRROR-SIU/LUNA and the Pros-IT CNR study
Purpose: Therapeutic strategies for prostate cancer (PCa) have been evolving dramatically worldwide. The current article reports on the evolution of surgical management strategies for PCa in Italy. Methods: The data from two independent Italian multicenter projects, the MIRROR-SIU/LUNA (started in 2007, holding data of 890 patients) and the Pros-IT-CNR project (started in 2014, with data of 692 patients), were compared. Differences in patients’ characteristics were evaluated. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify characteristics associated with robot-assisted (RA) procedure, nerve sparing (NS) approach, and lymph node dissection (LND). Results: The two cohorts did not differ in terms of age and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels at biopsy. Patients enrolled in the Pros-IT-CNR project more frequently were submitted to RA (58.8% vs 27.6%, p < 0.001) and NS prostatectomy (58.4% vs. 52.9%, p = 0.04), but received LND less frequently (47.7% vs. 76.7%, p < 0.001), as compared to the MIRROR-SIU/LUNA patients. At multivariate logistic models, Lower Gleason Scores (GS) and PSA levels were significantly associated with RA prostatectomy in both cohorts. As for the MIRROR-SIU/LUNA data, clinical T-stage was a predictor for NS (OR = 0.07 for T3, T4) and LND (OR = 2.41 for T2) procedures. As for Pros-IT CNR data, GS ≥ (4 + 3) and positive cancer cores ≥ 50% were decisive factors both for NS (OR 0.29 and 0.30) and LND (OR 7.53 and 2.31) strategies. Conclusions: PCa management has changed over the last decade in Italian centers: RA and NS procedures without LND have become the methods of choice to treat newly medium–high risk diagnosed PCa.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/2318/1845715
Citazioni
0
0
0
social impact
simulazione ASN
Il report seguente simula gli indicatori relativi alla produzione scientifica in relazione alle soglie ASN 2018-2020 del proprio SC/SSD. Si ricorda che il superamento dei valori soglia (almeno 2 su 3) è requisito necessario ma non sufficiente al conseguimento dell'abilitazione.
La simulazione si basa sui dati IRIS e presenta gli indicatori calcolati alla data indicata sul report. Si ricorda che in sede di domanda ASN presso il MIUR gli indicatori saranno invece calcolati a partire dal 1° gennaio rispettivamente del quinto/decimo/quindicesimo anno precedente la scadenza del quadrimestre di presentazione della domanda (art 2 del DM 598/2018).
In questa simulazione pertanto il valore degli indicatori potrà differire da quello conteggiato all’atto della domanda ASN effettuata presso il MIUR a seguito di:
Correzioni imputabili a eventuali periodi di congedo obbligatorio, che in sede di domanda ASN danno diritto a incrementi percentuali dei valori.
Presenza di eventuali errori di catalogazione e/o dati mancanti in IRIS
Variabilità nel tempo dei valori citazionali (per i settori bibliometrici)
Variabilità della finestra temporale considerata in funzione della sessione di domanda ASN a cui si partecipa.
La presente simulazione è stata realizzata sulla base delle regole riportate nel DM 598/2018 e dell'allegata Tabella A e delle specifiche definite all'interno del Focus Group Cineca relativo al modulo IRIS ER. Il Cineca non si assume alcuna responsabilità in merito all'uso che il diretto interessato o terzi faranno della simulazione.