Premium
Prognostic value of Caveolin‐1 in patients treated with radical prostatectomy: a multicentric validation study
Author(s) -
Mathieu Romain,
Klatte Tobias,
Lucca Ilaria,
Mbeutcha Aurélie,
Seitz Christian,
Karakiewicz Pierre I.,
Fajkovic Harun,
Sun Maxine,
Lotan Yair,
Scherr Douglas S.,
Montorsi Francesco,
Briganti Alberto,
Rouprêt Morgan,
Margulis Vitaly,
Rink Michael,
Kluth Luis A.,
Rieken Malte,
Kenner Lukas,
Susani Martin,
Robinson Brian D.,
Xylinas Evanguelos,
Loidl Wolgang,
Shariat Shahrokh F.
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
bju international
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.773
H-Index - 148
eISSN - 1464-410X
pISSN - 1464-4096
DOI - 10.1111/bju.13224
Subject(s) - biochemical recurrence , prostatectomy , prostate cancer , medicine , hazard ratio , proportional hazards model , pathological , interquartile range , caveolin 1 , breakpoint cluster region , oncology , tissue microarray , cancer , urology , confidence interval , receptor
Objective To validate Caveolin‐1 as an independent prognostic marker of biochemical recurrence (BCR) in a large multi‐institutional cohort of patients with prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy (RP). Patients and Methods Caveolin‐1 expression was evaluated by immunochemistry on a tissue microarray in 3 117 patients treated with RP for prostate cancer at five institutions. Univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models assessed the association of Caveolin‐1 status with BCR. Harrell's c ‐index quantified prognostic accuracy. Results Caveolin‐1 was overexpressed in 644 (20.6%) patients and was associated with higher pathological Gleason sum ( P = 0.002) and lymph node metastases ( P = 0.05). Within a median (interquartile range) follow‐up of 38 (21–66) months, 617 (19.8%) patients experienced BCR. Patients with overexpression of Caveolin‐1 had worse BCR‐free survival than those with normal expression (log‐rank test, P = 0.004). Caveolin‐1 was an independent predictor of BCR in multivariable analyses that adjusted for the effects of standard clinicopathological features (hazard ratio 1.21, P = 0.037). Addition of Caveolin‐1 in a model for prediction of BCR based on these standard prognosticators did not significantly improve the predictive accuracy of the model. In subgroup analyses, Caveolin‐1 was associated with BCR in patients with favourable pathological features (pT2pN0 and Gleason score = 6; P = 0.021). Conclusions We confirmed that overexpression of Caveolin‐1 is associated with adverse pathological features in prostate cancer and independently predicts BCR after RP, especially in patients with favourable pathological features. However, it did not add prognostically relevant information to established predictors of BCR, limiting its use in clinical practice.