• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Impact of tertiary Gleason pattern 5 on prostate cancer aggressiveness:Lessons from a contemporary single institution radical prostatectomy series

    2015-04-26 17:12:16ZhryKoloffDnielHmstrJohnWeiJeffreyMontgomerySottTomlinsAngelWuToddMorgnJvedSiddiquiKelliePihArulChinniynFelixFengAlonWeizerLkshmiKunjuBrentHollenekDvidMillerGneshPlpttuRohitMehr
    Asian Journal of Urology 2015年1期

    Zhry B.Koloff,Dniel A.Hmstr,John T.Wei, Jeffrey S.Montgomery,Sott A.Tomlins,Angel J.Wu, Todd M.Morgn,Jved Siddiqui,Kellie Pih, Arul M.Chinniyn,Felix Y.Feng,Alon Z.Weizer, Lkshmi P.Kunju,Brent K.Hollenek,Dvid C.Miller, Gnesh S.Plpttu,Rohit Mehr,*

    aDepartment of Urology,University of Michigan Medical School,Ann Arbor,MI,USA

    bDepartment of Radiation Oncology,University of Michigan Medical School,Ann Arbor,MI,USA

    cDepartment of Pathology,University of Michigan Medical School,Ann Arbor,MI,USA

    ORIGINAL ARTICLE

    Impact of tertiary Gleason pattern 5 on prostate cancer aggressiveness:Lessons from a contemporary single institution radical prostatectomy series

    Zachary B.Koloffa,Daniel A.Hamstrab,John T.Weia, Jeffrey S.Montgomerya,Scott A.Tomlinsc,Angela J.Wuc, Todd M.Morgana,Javed Siddiquia,Kellie Paicha, Arul M.Chinnaiyanc,Felix Y.Fengc,Alon Z.Weizera, Lakshmi P.Kunjuc,Brent K.Hollenbecka,David C.Millera, Ganesh S.Palapattua,Rohit Mehrac,*

    aDepartment of Urology,University of Michigan Medical School,Ann Arbor,MI,USA

    bDepartment of Radiation Oncology,University of Michigan Medical School,Ann Arbor,MI,USA

    cDepartment of Pathology,University of Michigan Medical School,Ann Arbor,MI,USA

    Tertiary Gleason

    pattern;

    Prostate cancer;

    Prostatic neoplasm;

    Gleason score;

    Radical

    prostatectomy;

    Disease-free survival

    Objective:To better evaluate tertiary Gleason pattern reporting and to evaluate the impact of tertiary Gleason pattern 5(TP5)on prostate cancer pathological features and biochemical recurrence at our large single institution.

    Methods:We retrospectively reviewed 1962 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP)for prostate cancer;TP5 was reported in 159 cases(8.1%).Men with Gleason score(GS) 7 and GS 8 disease were divided into subgroups with and without TP5,and histopathological features were compared.Multivariate analyses were conducted to assess the impact on TP5 on biochemical-free survival(BFS).

    Results:Tumors possessing GS 3+4 with TP5 were more likely to exhibit extraprostatic extension(EPE)and had a larger tumor diameter(TD)than GS 3+4 alone.GS 3+4 with TP5 was also associated with positive surgical margins(SM),seminal vesicle involvement(SVI),and higher pre-operative prostate-specific antigen(PSA)values,but without statistical signif icance.GS 4+3 with TP5 more commonly presented with EPE,positive SM,SVI,and greater TD and pre-operative PSA level than GS 4+3 alone.In multivariate analysis,Gleason score,EPE,and TP5 were overall independent risk factors for PSA recurrence in this cohort.Additionally,GS 4+3 with TP5 was associated with shorter time to recurrence versus GS 4+3 alone.Conclusion:Our results emphasize the importance of TP5 and suggest that criteria for tertiary pattern reporting in prostate cancer should be standardized.Further studies are needed to evaluate the role of tertiary patterns in prognostic models.

    ?2015 Editorial Office of Asian Journal of Urology.Production and hosting by Elsevier (Singapore)Pte Ltd.This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license(http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

    1.Introduction

    The original Gleason scoring system proposed that the overall grade of prostate cancer was best determined by the sum of the two most common architectural patterns of the tumor[1—3].The most prevalent pattern was described as theprimarygradeandthesecondmostprevalentpatternthe secondary grade.These primary and secondary patterns have been well studied,and higher Gleason scores are significantly associated with adverse pathological factors (e.g.,positivesurgicalmargins[SM],seminalvesicleinvasion [SVI],lymph node involvement[LNI],and extraprostatic extension[EPE])and prostate-specific antigen(PSA)recurrence[1—3].Over the years,the Gleason scoring system has continued to demonstrate strong prognostic power[4—6].

    Although Gleason scores or sums are typically reported based on a combination of primary and secondary grades (for example,3+4=7),even in 1977 Donald Gleason noted that“occasionally,small areas of a third pattern were observed”[7].Increasingly in recent years there has been investigation into the criteria and relevance of this third,“tertiary”Gleason component.Currently,however, there is no consensus definition of this tertiary component. Some pathologists might report a tertiary pattern(TP)as any third most common architectural pattern,while others only report a TP when it is higher grade than the two more prevalent patterns[8—11].Several authors have suggested that TP should be reported if the area is higher grade and comprises less than 5%of the tumor volume,and reported as the secondary grade if it is more prevalent[12,13].In 2005,an international consensus conference on urologic pathology recommended that the tertiary grade should be commented on in pathology reports,however,the specific criteria for reporting TP were not addressed then[14].

    Despite the variable TP definitions of previous studies, some studies have demonstrated that high-grade TP is associated with adverse tumor characteristics and biochemical recurrence[11,12,15—17].Thecurrent studywasconducted using a database of patients who underwent RP for clinically localizedprostatecancertobetterevaluateTPreportingand toevaluatetheimpactoftertiaryGleasonpattern5(TP5)on tumor pathological features and biochemical recurrence in this large single institution series.

    2.Materials and methods

    Thestudydatawereobtainedretrospectivelyandanalyzedin accordance with University of Michigan Medical School’s Institutional Review Board(IRB)approved protocol.All men in this study underwent radical prostatectomy(RP)and all surgical specimens were uniformly processed.The prostate and seminal vesicles were fixed in formalin after inking the outer surface.The most proximal urethra at the prostate base and apical 3-mm were embedded on end after radial sectioning in a cone-like fashion to assess the inked bladder neck and apical margins.The remaining prostate was serially sectionedfromapextobase at3-mmintervalsandsubmitted as quadrisected sections for examination.A subset of prostatectomytissuesunderwenttissueprocurementprotocolfor research purposes.Insuch cases,all peripheralmarginswere submitted from the procured sections to ensure a complete evaluation of margins and EPE(including extracapsular extensioninanylocationandseminalvesicleinvasion).Cases were signed out by a spectrum of pathologists including general surgical pathologists as well as sub-specialty trained genitourinary pathologists.A tumor component was designated as TP5 if it constituted less than 10%of the tumor mass by microscopic visual inspection(all cases where surgical pathology reports stated a TP comprising less than 10%of the tumor were included for this study).Small foci of a lower tertiary grade pattern were not recorded in this series.

    Biochemicalrecurrencewasdefinedasanypostoperative elevation of PSA>0.2 ng/mL.There were incomplete data regarding PSA follow-up for a small proportion of patients(3%),therefore,these patients were excluded in the analysis of PSA recurrence.The data regarding which patients received adjuvant treatment following RP were not consistently available.

    Statistical analyses were performed using SAS program version 9.3(SAS Institute Inc.,Cary,NC,USA)and MedCalc version 12.7(MedCalc Software,Ostend,Belgium).Univariate analyses for subjects with and without tertiary Gleason scores were based on chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests for categorical variables,andt-tests and Wilcoxon rank sums for continuous variables.Multivariate analyses were performed using Cox Proportional Hazards Model.The log rank test was used to compare Kaplan—Meier probabilities for PSA recurrence between subjects with and without tertiary Gleason components.P-values<0.05 were considered statistically significant.

    3.Results

    We retrospectively reviewed RP pathology reports between September 2005 and December 2012 to identify cases with a reported tertiary Gleason component.This time period was selected since the International Society of Urological Pathology(ISUP)releasedaconsensusstatementin September 2005 recommending that tumor grades be assigned a Gleason score based on the primary andsecondary patterns with a comment regarding the tertiary score,if present[14].However,without formal parameters to guide tertiary Gleason component reporting,and since the evaluation of involvement is subjective based on visual inspection,there is some variability in the literature.

    Amongatotalof1962RPspecimensthatwerereviewedin this study,159 cases with TP5 were reported.Three pathologyreportsincludedcommentsthatthetertiaryGleason 5 component comprised approximately 15%of the index tumor.Thesecaseswithrelativelylargetertiarycomponents were excluded from our analysis based on previous studies [12,13].We set the cut-off point at 10%for our study and hence all other cases that reported a tertiary component remained in our analysis.These remaining 156 cases with TP5 were analyzed compared to control patients with the same primary and secondary Gleason patterns without tertiary components.Among the cohort of patients with TP5, majority of patients were histologically determined to have eitherGleasonscore3+4or4+3disease.Thebreakdownof Gleason scores(GS)is detailed in Table 1.

    Table 1 Distribution of Gleason scores.

    Table2Gleason7and8patientcharacteristics (n=1398).

    ?

    General characteristics of all GS 7 and 8 patients included in this study are presented in Table 2.Tumor grades and histopathological characteristics are detailed in Table 3.GS 3+4 with TP5 tumors were significantly associated with EPE and larger tumor diameters(TD)than GS 3+4 alone(p<0.0001 for both).GS 3+4 with TP5 tumors also tended to present with positive SM,LNI,SVI,and have higher pre-operative PSA than GS 3+4 tumors,but without significance.GS 4+3 with TP5 tumors were more likely to demonstrate EPE,positive SM,SVI,have larger TD,andpresent with higher pre-operative PSA levels than GS 4+3 alone(p<0.0001,p=0.02,p<0.0001,p<0.0001,andp<0.0001,respectively).GS 4+3 with TP5 also tended to present with LNI more often than GS 4+3,but without significance.

    Kaplan—Meier PSA recurrence-free survival curves for GS 3+4and4+3patientswithandwithoutTP5werecompared using log rank tests.When comparing GS 3+4 patients to those with GS 3+4 with TP5,there was no significant difference in PSA recurrence-free survival,and only one patient with GS 3+4 with TP5 recurred.However,there was a shorter time to PSA recurrence among GS 4+3 with TP5 patients compared to GS 4+3 patients(p=0.005,Fig.1).

    Since TP5 was associated with other adverse pathologic features,a multivariable analysis was performed to investigate whether TP5 was independently associated with biochemical-free survival(BFS).Gleason score was categorized into four compartments(GS 2-6,3+4,4+3,and 8—10),as the majority of our patient population had GS 7 disease.When multivariate analysis of BFS was conducted, the presence of TP5 was associated with decreased BFS with an HR of 1.8(95%CI:1.1-2.7,p=0.017;Table 4).Preoperative PSA,GS,and EPE were also significant factors related to PSA recurrence.However,in our patient population,patients with GS 7 were the most likely to have TP5, so we performed another multivariate analysis limited to those patients(GS 3+4 and GS 4+3).Again,TP5 was an independent risk factor for PSA recurrence with an HR of 1.9(95%CI:1.1-3.3,p=0.035;data not shown).

    Table4Effectofvariousvariablesonbiochemical recurrence based on Cox Proportional Hazards Model.

    4.Discussion

    The Gleason scoring system remains one of the most important prognostic parameters for prostate cancer.Over nearly 50 years,this grading system has remained largely intact aside from minor modifications to adapt to changes in the clinical practice of screening and management of prostate cancer[4—6].In 2005,the ISUP met to establish a new consensus regarding prostatic carcinoma grading.Among the debatable topics within the field of urologic pathology is the presence of a tertiary architectural pattern within a prostate specimen.For RP specimen,the ISUP stated that“one assigns the Gleason score based on the primary and secondary patterns with a comment as to the tertiary pattern”[14].

    However,to date,pathologists have variable criteria of when to report this tertiary pattern.At our institution,TP5 was reported in 8.1%of pathology specimens.Although this was a somewhat lower incidence compared to other studies reporting TP5 in 10%—27%of cases,this may be reflective of the variable interpretation of when to report a tertiary pattern[12,16].Some pathologists report the presence of any Gleason pattern that is less prevalent than the primary or secondary grades[8,10].Others only report the third most prevalent pattern if it is higher grade than the primary and secondary patterns[11,15].Recently,several authors suggested that a tertiary Gleason pattern only be reported if the area is higher grade than the primary and secondary patterns,and the area comprises less than 5%of the tumor volume[12,13,16].In our current study,all cases where comments reported a TP comprising less than 10%of the tumor were included for this analysis.

    In general,it is well established that the presence of a high grade Gleason pattern is a poor prognostic indicator.In fact,McNeal et al.[18,19]suggested modifying the Gleason scoring system to include the proportion of high grade (Gleason 4 or 5)cancer in a tumor specimen,as their studies found poor architectural differentiation to correlate with tumor volume,nodal metastasis,and tumor progression. Similarly,Cheng et al.[20]concluded that the combined percentage of Gleason patterns 4 and 5 was superior to conventional Gleason scoring in predicting patient outcome and PSA recurrence.Stamey and his colleagues[21]found the percentage of Gleason grade 4 or 5 disease to be independentlyassociatedwithprostatecancerprogressionwhile other common predictors of progression,such as positive margins and capsular invasion,did not reliably predict recurrence following RP.A recent study at our institution found that the presence of Gleason pattern 5 was the single strongest pathological predictor of recurrence,metastasis, and prostate cancer-specific death in patients receiving salvage radiation therapy following RP[22].

    Several groups have investigated whether high grade Gleason patterns are correlated with tumor aggressiveness and poor outcomes,even when present in small amounts and reported as a tertiary component.Similar to our study, Mosse et al.[12]reported that Gleason 7 tumors with TP5 were more likely to be higher stage and have worse prognostic clinico-pathological features.A systematic review and meta-analysis on the significance of high grade TP published in 2007 concluded that high tertiary grades were associated with poorer outcomes[17].However,that review only included one study published after the ISUP Consensus Conference on Gleason grading and the metaanalysis failed to take into account the variable definitions of the tertiary Gleason pattern.More recent studies such as those by Turker et al.[15],Trock et al.[16],Pierorazio et al.[23],and Servoll et al.[24]concluded that high-grade TP is important as an independent predictor of PSA recurrence in Gleason 7 and 8 prostate cancers.In fact, Nanda et al.[25]found the risk of PSA recurrence in patients with Gleason 7 disease with TP5 to be similar to patients with Gleason 9 or 10 diseases.In contrast to those studies,others found that tertiary Gleason patterns were not consistently independent predictors of PSA recurrence [8,11].

    In our study,Gleason 7 tumors with TP5 were more likely to present at higher stages and have larger tumor diameters.In the sub-group of GS 4+3 tumors,those with TP5 were also more likely to have positive SM,SVI,and present with higher pre-operative PSA values than those tumors with the same Gleason score without TP5.GS 3+4 and 4+4 tumors with TP5 also tended to present with those worse clinico-pathological parameters and higher pre-operative PSA levels,however,differences were not statistically significant perhaps due to the relatively small sample size in those subgroups.

    In regards to BFS,as defined by undetectable PSA,TP5 was found to be an independent predictor of worse outcome.GS 4+3 with TP5 tumors demonstrated a shorter time to recurrence compared to GS 4+3 tumors.However, GS 3+4 with TP5 tumors did not significantly differ from GS 3+4 tumors in terms of time to recurrence.Again,this may be a reflection of the small number of patients with GS 3+4 with TP5.Nevertheless,even when accounting for these other pathologic and clinical features on multivariate analysis,the presence of TP5 remained a strong prognostic factorimpartinga1.8-foldincreaseintheriskof biochemical recurrence.

    In current practice,many clinicians rely on various tables or algorithms,such as Partin tables and Kattan nomograms, in order to predict pathological stage and outcomes and to guide treatment strategies in prostate cancer[5,26].However,when assessing tumor grades,the comments and notes from pathological reports are often not included in prognostic models.Therefore,although recent evidence seems to suggest that a high-grade tertiary component worsens prognosis in prostate cancer,that parameter is often dismissedwhencrucialdecisionsaboutcancermanagementare made.The ISUP conference in 2005 acknowledged the importance of high-grade tertiary patterns in RP specimens, but did not propose any formal criteria for diagnosis and simplyrecommendedthatitspresencebecommentedupon. Therefore,based upon our study we recommend the inclusion of several concepts.Firstly,standardized criteria for TP scoring needs to be established.Secondly,further prospective studies should be conducted to evaluate for the role of tertiary Gleason components in multivariable predictive and prognostic models.

    There are some limitations to our study.One limitation is its retrospective design.Additionally,despite the large overall sample size,there were certain subgroups which were relatively small and the power of analysis may have been too low to detect small differences.We were not able to compare the differences between patients with TP5 comprising less than 5%of the index tumor versus cases where TP5 comprised less than 10%due to inconsistent detail in pathology comments.However,during this time period at our institution,Gleason pattern 5 in less than 10% of the tumor was primarily used as the criteria for reporting tertiary patterns.Another limitation of this study was that we were not able to confidently report which patients received salvage or adjuvant treatment after RP as somepatients may have received subsequent treatment at other institutions,but were lost for primary follow-up at our hospital.Based on our institutional experience,the number of patients with Gleason 7 disease receiving adjuvant therapy is very low,but this information was not reliably available in our current dataset.It is also unusual that SVI, LNI,and margin status were not predictive of biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy at the multivariate level in this cohort.We suspect that an interplay of factors including strong influence of TP5,impact of unknown adjuvant therapies,and a relatively small number of cases might have influenced this pattern.

    In conclusion,our study using a large population of prostatecancerpatientswhounderwentRPatasingleinstitution with consistent pathologic evaluation demonstrates that prostate cancer with TP5 is associated with aggressive features and is an independent risk factor of biochemical recurrence.Given the strong evidence that TP is a relevant risk factor in prostate cancer,prospective studies are needed to evaluate for the potential role of high-grade tertiary patterns in prostate cancer prognostic models.

    Conflicts of interest

    The authors declare no conflict of interest.

    Acknowledgment

    R.M.and A.M.C.are supported by the Prostate Cancer Foundation.

    [1]Chan TY,Partin AW,Walsh PC,Epstein JI.Prognostic signif icance of Gleason score 3+4 versus Gleason score 4+3 tumor at radical prostatectomy.Urology 2000;56:823—7.

    [2]Herman CM,Kattan MW,Ohori M,Scardino PT,Wheeler TM. Primary Gleason pattern as a predictor of disease progression in Gleason score 7 prostate cancer:a multivariate analysis of 823 men treated with radical prostatectomy.Am J Surg Pathol 2001;25:657—60.

    [3]Hoedemaeker RF,Rietbergen JB,Kranse R,Schroder FH,van der Kwast TH.Histopathological prostate cancer characteristicsatradicalprostatectomyafterpopulationbased screening.J Urol 2000;164:411—5.

    [4]Epstein JI,Partin AW,Sauvageot J,Walsh PC.Prediction of progression following radical prostatectomy.A multivariate analysis of 721 men with long-term follow-up.Am J Surg Pathol 1996;20:286—92.

    [5]Partin AW,Kattan MW,Subong EN,Walsh PC,Wojno KJ, Oesterling JE,et al.Combination of prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage,and Gleason score to predict pathological stage of localized prostate cancer.A multi-institutional update.J Am Med Assoc 1997;277:1445—51.

    [6]Epstein JI.An update of the Gleason grading system.J Urol 2010;183:433—40.

    [7]Gleason DF.Histological grading and clinical staging of prostaticcarcinoma.Philadelphia:Lea&Feibiger;1977. p.171—98.

    [8]Hashine K,Yuasa A,Shinomori K,Shirato A,Ninomiya I, Teramoto N.Tertiary Gleason pattern 5 and oncological outcomes after radical prostatectomy.Jan J Clin Oncol 2011;41: 571—6.

    [9]Rasiah KK,Stricker PD,Haynes AM,Delprado W,Turner JJ, Golovsky D,et al.Prognostic significance of Gleason pattern in patients with Gleason score 7 prostate carcinoma.Cancer 2003;98:2560—5.

    [10]Sim HG,Telesca D,Culp SH,Ellis WJ,Lange PH,True LD,et al. Tertiary Gleason pattern 5 in Gleason 7 prostate cancer predicts pathological stage and biochemical recurrence.J Urol 2008;179:1775—9.

    [11]Whittemore DE,Hick EJ,Carter MR,Moul JW,Miranda-Sousa AJ,Sexton WJ.Significance of tertiary Gleason pattern 5 in Gleason score 7 radical prostatectomy specimens.J Urol 2008;179:516—22.

    [12]Mosse CA,Magi-Galluzzi C,Tsuzuki T,Epstein JI.The prognostic significance of tertiary Gleason pattern 5 in radical prostatectomy specimens.Am J Surg Pathol 2004;28:394—8.

    [13]Pan CC,Potter SR,Partin AW,Epstein JI.The prognostic significance of tertiary Gleason patterns of higher grade in radical prostatectomy specimens:a proposal to modify the Gleason grading system.Am J Surg Pathol 2000;24:563—9.

    [14]EpsteinJI,AllsbrookJrWC,AminMB,EgevadLL, Committee IG.The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology(ISUP)consensus conference on Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma.Am J Surg Pathol 2005;29:1228—42.

    [15]TurkerP,BasE,Bozkurt S,Gu¨nlu¨soyB,SezginA,Postac? H,etal. Presence of high grade tertiary Gleason pattern upgrades the Gleason sum score and is inversely associated with biochemical recurrence-free survival.Urol Oncol 2013;31:93—8.

    [16]Trock BJ,Guo CC,Gonzalgo ML,Magheli A,Loeb S,Epstein JI. Tertiary Gleason patterns and biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy:proposal for a modified Gleason scoring system.J Urol 2009;182:1364—70.

    [17]Harnden P,Shelley MD,Coles B,Staffurth J,Mason MD.Should the Gleason grading system for prostate cancer be modified to account for high-grade tertiary components?A systematic review and meta-analysis.Lancet Oncol 2007;8:411—9.

    [18]McNealJE,BostwickDG,KindrachukRA,RedwineEA, Freiha FS,Stamey TA.Patterns of progression in prostate cancer.Lancet 1986;1:60—3.

    [19]McNeal JE,Villers AA,Redwine EA,Freiha FS,Stamey TA. Histologic differentiation,cancer volume,and pelvic lymph node metastasis in adenocarcinoma of the prostate.Cancer 1990;66:1225—33.

    [20]Cheng L,Koch MO,Juliar BE,Daggy JK,Foster RS,Bihrle R, et al.The combined percentage of Gleason patterns 4 and 5 is the best predictor of cancer progression after radical prostatectomy.J Clin Oncol 2005;23:2911—7.

    [21]Stamey TA,McNeal JE,Yemoto CM,Sigal BM,Johnstone IM. Biological determinants of cancer progression in men with prostate cancer.J Am Med Assoc 1999;281:1395—400.

    [22]Jackson W,Hamstra DA,Johnson S,Zhou J,Foster B,Foster C, et al.Gleason pattern 5 is the strongest pathologic predictor of recurrence,metastasis,and prostate cancer-specific death in patients receiving salvage radiation therapy following radical prostatectomy.Cancer 2013;119:3287—94.

    [23]Pierorazio PM,Walsh PC,Partin AW,Epstein JI.Prognostic Gleason grade grouping:data based on the modified Gleason scoring system.BJU Int 2013;111:753—60.

    [24]Servoll E,Saeter T,Vlatkovic L,Lund T,Nesland J,Waaler G, et al.Impact of a tertiary Gleason pattern 4 or 5 on clinical failure and mortality after radical prostatectomy for clinically localised prostate cancer.BJU Int 2012;109:1489—94.

    [25]Nanda A,Chen MH,Renshaw AA,D’Amico AV.Gleason pattern 5 prostate cancer:further stratification of patients with highrisk disease and implications for future randomized trials.Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009;74:1419—23.

    [26]Di Blasio CJ,Rhee AC,Cho D,Scardino PT,Kattan MW.Predicting clinical end points:treatment nomograms in prostate cancer.Semin Oncol 2003;30:567—86.

    Received 18 July 2014;received in revised form 15 August 2014;accepted 26 August 2014

    Available online 16 April 2015

    *Corresponding author.

    E-mail address:mrohit@med.umich.edu(R.Mehra).

    Peer review under responsibility of Chinese Urological Association and SMMU.

    http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajur.2015.04.007

    2214-3882/?2015 Editorial Office of Asian Journal of Urology.Production and hosting by Elsevier(Singapore)Pte Ltd.This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

    精品国产一区二区三区四区第35| 99久久精品国产亚洲精品| 亚洲精品国产精品久久久不卡| 久久中文看片网| 91成年电影在线观看| 日韩高清综合在线| 成人18禁在线播放| 女同久久另类99精品国产91| 两个人免费观看高清视频| av在线天堂中文字幕| 美女 人体艺术 gogo| 免费在线观看日本一区| 麻豆久久精品国产亚洲av| 亚洲片人在线观看| 欧美zozozo另类| 免费在线观看亚洲国产| 亚洲av片天天在线观看| 国产av在哪里看| 男女床上黄色一级片免费看| 琪琪午夜伦伦电影理论片6080| 成人国产综合亚洲| 久久天躁狠狠躁夜夜2o2o| 色播亚洲综合网| 亚洲精品国产精品久久久不卡| 变态另类丝袜制服| 国产av不卡久久| 午夜免费激情av| 日本在线视频免费播放| 波多野结衣巨乳人妻| 精品一区二区三区av网在线观看| avwww免费| av天堂在线播放| 哪里可以看免费的av片| 中文字幕人妻熟女乱码| 一级毛片高清免费大全| 国产三级在线视频| 一夜夜www| 欧美中文日本在线观看视频| 国产精品乱码一区二三区的特点| 草草在线视频免费看| 大型av网站在线播放| www国产在线视频色| 性欧美人与动物交配| 天堂影院成人在线观看| 熟女电影av网| 十八禁网站免费在线| 禁无遮挡网站| 国产精品电影一区二区三区| 91字幕亚洲| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区| 国产成人一区二区三区免费视频网站| 亚洲精品av麻豆狂野| 亚洲全国av大片| 啦啦啦 在线观看视频| 后天国语完整版免费观看| 久久久久久久久免费视频了| 少妇粗大呻吟视频| 一个人免费在线观看的高清视频| 久久久久久亚洲精品国产蜜桃av| 国产免费男女视频| 亚洲国产精品sss在线观看| 免费看美女性在线毛片视频| 色av中文字幕| 白带黄色成豆腐渣| 可以在线观看毛片的网站| 亚洲国产精品sss在线观看| 久久 成人 亚洲| 一级毛片女人18水好多| 日韩一卡2卡3卡4卡2021年| 免费高清在线观看日韩| 90打野战视频偷拍视频| 精品乱码久久久久久99久播| 亚洲精品国产精品久久久不卡| 99在线视频只有这里精品首页| 夜夜躁狠狠躁天天躁| 精品一区二区三区视频在线观看免费| 久久久久久久午夜电影| 国产亚洲欧美98| 国产成+人综合+亚洲专区| 国产又爽黄色视频| 在线观看免费日韩欧美大片| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜添小说| 亚洲 国产 在线| 欧美日韩中文字幕国产精品一区二区三区| 欧美色欧美亚洲另类二区| 欧美乱色亚洲激情| 久热这里只有精品99| 最近最新免费中文字幕在线| 国产成人av激情在线播放| 不卡一级毛片| 国产一区二区三区在线臀色熟女| 亚洲欧美精品综合久久99| 色老头精品视频在线观看| 国产蜜桃级精品一区二区三区| 欧美成人一区二区免费高清观看 | 亚洲熟妇中文字幕五十中出| 麻豆成人午夜福利视频| 香蕉久久夜色| 男女做爰动态图高潮gif福利片| 中亚洲国语对白在线视频| 久久国产精品人妻蜜桃| 亚洲精品在线观看二区| 欧美zozozo另类| 黄色丝袜av网址大全| 午夜两性在线视频| 成人免费观看视频高清| 91麻豆av在线| 成年版毛片免费区| 十八禁网站免费在线| 午夜老司机福利片| av电影中文网址| 一级a爱片免费观看的视频| 一个人观看的视频www高清免费观看 | 亚洲 欧美 日韩 在线 免费| 色综合站精品国产| 中出人妻视频一区二区| 亚洲三区欧美一区| 成人亚洲精品一区在线观看| 色av中文字幕| 国产一级毛片七仙女欲春2 | 黄色成人免费大全| 久久久水蜜桃国产精品网| 免费在线观看黄色视频的| 99久久99久久久精品蜜桃| 亚洲精品一区av在线观看| 搡老妇女老女人老熟妇| 91老司机精品| 国产野战对白在线观看| 中国美女看黄片| 夜夜躁狠狠躁天天躁| 此物有八面人人有两片| 狠狠狠狠99中文字幕| 日本在线视频免费播放| 欧美+亚洲+日韩+国产| 叶爱在线成人免费视频播放| 中文在线观看免费www的网站 | 在线天堂中文资源库| 久久这里只有精品19| 欧美乱色亚洲激情| 中文字幕人妻丝袜一区二区| 在线av久久热| 精品少妇一区二区三区视频日本电影| 波多野结衣av一区二区av| avwww免费| 看片在线看免费视频| 成人永久免费在线观看视频| 少妇 在线观看| 国产99白浆流出| 亚洲精品在线观看二区| 久久久久久久午夜电影| 成人18禁在线播放| av天堂在线播放| 99久久无色码亚洲精品果冻| 一区二区三区国产精品乱码| av在线播放免费不卡| 成人手机av| 看片在线看免费视频| 亚洲国产精品sss在线观看| 久久久久国内视频| 亚洲国产日韩欧美精品在线观看 | 婷婷丁香在线五月| 免费在线观看影片大全网站| 亚洲黑人精品在线| 国产激情偷乱视频一区二区| 亚洲国产毛片av蜜桃av| 成年人黄色毛片网站| 欧美乱码精品一区二区三区| 久久精品国产清高在天天线| 桃色一区二区三区在线观看| 国产99白浆流出| 岛国视频午夜一区免费看| 日韩一卡2卡3卡4卡2021年| 777久久人妻少妇嫩草av网站| 国产欧美日韩精品亚洲av| 国产成人一区二区三区免费视频网站| 熟女电影av网| 日日干狠狠操夜夜爽| 最新美女视频免费是黄的| 97碰自拍视频| 又大又爽又粗| 搞女人的毛片| 女性生殖器流出的白浆| 天堂影院成人在线观看| 午夜福利18| 一边摸一边抽搐一进一小说| 亚洲自偷自拍图片 自拍| 1024香蕉在线观看| 国产97色在线日韩免费| 国产一级毛片七仙女欲春2 | 亚洲精品国产区一区二| 成人午夜高清在线视频 | av在线天堂中文字幕| 黄色丝袜av网址大全| 日韩精品青青久久久久久| 国产成人精品久久二区二区91| 人妻丰满熟妇av一区二区三区| 国产精品久久久av美女十八| 亚洲一卡2卡3卡4卡5卡精品中文| 精品福利观看| 成在线人永久免费视频| 日本一本二区三区精品| 日韩 欧美 亚洲 中文字幕| 日韩大码丰满熟妇| 97超级碰碰碰精品色视频在线观看| 国产三级黄色录像| 国产精品爽爽va在线观看网站 | 国产亚洲欧美精品永久| 国产伦在线观看视频一区| 日本免费一区二区三区高清不卡| 深夜精品福利| 亚洲国产欧美一区二区综合| 亚洲欧美精品综合久久99| 白带黄色成豆腐渣| 在线永久观看黄色视频| 狠狠狠狠99中文字幕| 日本一区二区免费在线视频| 色综合婷婷激情| 国产在线观看jvid| 欧美黑人巨大hd| 一卡2卡三卡四卡精品乱码亚洲| 中文字幕高清在线视频| 国产午夜福利久久久久久| 国产视频一区二区在线看| 美女大奶头视频| 久久久精品欧美日韩精品| 久99久视频精品免费| 国产精品一区二区免费欧美| 国产精品99久久99久久久不卡| 巨乳人妻的诱惑在线观看| 亚洲av电影在线进入| 在线观看日韩欧美| 在线播放国产精品三级| 欧美不卡视频在线免费观看 | 香蕉av资源在线| 在线观看免费日韩欧美大片| 亚洲va日本ⅴa欧美va伊人久久| 国产av不卡久久| 国产成人啪精品午夜网站| 亚洲 国产 在线| 一边摸一边抽搐一进一小说| 曰老女人黄片| 欧美日韩中文字幕国产精品一区二区三区| 国产又黄又爽又无遮挡在线| avwww免费| 非洲黑人性xxxx精品又粗又长| 在线观看免费视频日本深夜| 男女视频在线观看网站免费 | 神马国产精品三级电影在线观看 | 国产成人av激情在线播放| 啦啦啦免费观看视频1| 亚洲人成电影免费在线| 身体一侧抽搐| 日韩大码丰满熟妇| 亚洲专区国产一区二区| 国产精品久久久久久人妻精品电影| 一级毛片女人18水好多| 亚洲精品色激情综合| 久久草成人影院| 成人国产一区最新在线观看| 一级作爱视频免费观看| 日本黄色视频三级网站网址| 麻豆av在线久日| 成人永久免费在线观看视频| 国产精品自产拍在线观看55亚洲| 亚洲av中文字字幕乱码综合 | 亚洲国产日韩欧美精品在线观看 | 久久久久国产精品人妻aⅴ院| 国产黄a三级三级三级人| www.精华液| 精品人妻1区二区| 给我免费播放毛片高清在线观看| 国产黄片美女视频| 最近最新中文字幕大全免费视频| 搞女人的毛片| 欧美日韩乱码在线| 成人永久免费在线观看视频| 极品教师在线免费播放| 色播在线永久视频| 亚洲熟妇熟女久久| 亚洲人成网站高清观看| 欧美午夜高清在线| 午夜成年电影在线免费观看| 欧美三级亚洲精品| 在线天堂中文资源库| 伊人久久大香线蕉亚洲五| 久久天堂一区二区三区四区| 搡老妇女老女人老熟妇| 国产精品亚洲av一区麻豆| 超碰成人久久| 午夜a级毛片| 亚洲五月天丁香| 国产在线精品亚洲第一网站| 久久久久久人人人人人| av在线天堂中文字幕| 日本三级黄在线观看| 国产成人欧美| 欧美激情高清一区二区三区| 成人18禁在线播放| 亚洲精品在线美女| 亚洲狠狠婷婷综合久久图片| 人妻久久中文字幕网| 日本黄色视频三级网站网址| 在线天堂中文资源库| 久久这里只有精品19| 一本综合久久免费| 国产精品日韩av在线免费观看| 最近最新中文字幕大全电影3 | 黄色视频,在线免费观看| 丁香六月欧美| 黄色视频不卡| 国产99久久九九免费精品| 99热只有精品国产| 久久中文字幕一级| 波多野结衣巨乳人妻| 欧美黑人欧美精品刺激| 91老司机精品| 1024香蕉在线观看| 日本一本二区三区精品| 中文字幕人妻丝袜一区二区| 高潮久久久久久久久久久不卡| 少妇被粗大的猛进出69影院| 色综合欧美亚洲国产小说| 人人妻人人澡欧美一区二区| 亚洲一区高清亚洲精品| 国产成人系列免费观看| 精品日产1卡2卡| 波多野结衣av一区二区av| 99久久精品国产亚洲精品| www.自偷自拍.com| 午夜激情福利司机影院| 男人舔奶头视频| 可以在线观看的亚洲视频| 精品国产超薄肉色丝袜足j| 麻豆av在线久日| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av| 69av精品久久久久久| 亚洲va日本ⅴa欧美va伊人久久| 叶爱在线成人免费视频播放| 中文字幕精品免费在线观看视频| 中文字幕另类日韩欧美亚洲嫩草| 欧美性长视频在线观看| а√天堂www在线а√下载| 女人爽到高潮嗷嗷叫在线视频| 亚洲av电影在线进入| 热re99久久国产66热| 亚洲精品美女久久av网站| 久久热在线av| 久久精品国产清高在天天线| 黄片播放在线免费| 免费电影在线观看免费观看| 精品第一国产精品| 国产精品二区激情视频| 人妻丰满熟妇av一区二区三区| 国产成年人精品一区二区| 精品第一国产精品| 国产av不卡久久| 免费观看精品视频网站| 国产午夜精品久久久久久| 国产激情欧美一区二区| 国产精品日韩av在线免费观看| 成人欧美大片| 美女高潮到喷水免费观看| 久久青草综合色| 亚洲久久久国产精品| 精品国产乱子伦一区二区三区| 久久99热这里只有精品18| av片东京热男人的天堂| 操出白浆在线播放| 级片在线观看| 999久久久精品免费观看国产| 欧美日韩中文字幕国产精品一区二区三区| 国产视频内射| 欧美日韩精品网址| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三| 婷婷丁香在线五月| 91成人精品电影| 夜夜爽天天搞| 波多野结衣巨乳人妻| 男女下面进入的视频免费午夜 | 日本撒尿小便嘘嘘汇集6| 一级黄色大片毛片| 免费高清在线观看日韩| 91大片在线观看| 精品久久久久久,| 99精品久久久久人妻精品| 国产精品一区二区精品视频观看| 露出奶头的视频| 久久人妻av系列| 美女大奶头视频| 日本一区二区免费在线视频| 又紧又爽又黄一区二区| 制服丝袜大香蕉在线| 50天的宝宝边吃奶边哭怎么回事| 国产成人系列免费观看| 99久久国产精品久久久| 老熟妇仑乱视频hdxx| bbb黄色大片| 嫩草影视91久久| 亚洲人成伊人成综合网2020| 亚洲第一av免费看| 久久久久精品国产欧美久久久| 免费av毛片视频| 男女那种视频在线观看| 色综合站精品国产| 熟妇人妻久久中文字幕3abv| 一级片免费观看大全| 国产精品免费视频内射| 久久久久国内视频| 少妇粗大呻吟视频| e午夜精品久久久久久久| 亚洲美女黄片视频| √禁漫天堂资源中文www| 一进一出好大好爽视频| 国产激情欧美一区二区| 免费高清在线观看日韩| 成人国产综合亚洲| 久久性视频一级片| 欧美一区二区精品小视频在线| x7x7x7水蜜桃| 国产一区在线观看成人免费| 中文在线观看免费www的网站 | 操出白浆在线播放| 久久国产乱子伦精品免费另类| 校园春色视频在线观看| 美女高潮喷水抽搐中文字幕| 成人欧美大片| 欧美日韩乱码在线| 日本成人三级电影网站| av福利片在线| 日韩成人在线观看一区二区三区| 日本三级黄在线观看| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 亚洲中文日韩欧美视频| 亚洲一码二码三码区别大吗| 精品少妇一区二区三区视频日本电影| 国产真实乱freesex| 亚洲av成人不卡在线观看播放网| 欧美中文日本在线观看视频| 日韩欧美一区二区三区在线观看| 国产激情欧美一区二区| 国产亚洲精品久久久久5区| 午夜激情av网站| 十八禁人妻一区二区| 色哟哟哟哟哟哟| 亚洲人成伊人成综合网2020| 日韩精品免费视频一区二区三区| 亚洲天堂国产精品一区在线| 亚洲中文av在线| 又黄又粗又硬又大视频| a在线观看视频网站| 悠悠久久av| 亚洲成a人片在线一区二区| avwww免费| 国产成人av激情在线播放| 国产精品爽爽va在线观看网站 | 亚洲狠狠婷婷综合久久图片| 欧美不卡视频在线免费观看 | 精品熟女少妇八av免费久了| 97碰自拍视频| 精品欧美一区二区三区在线| 免费在线观看完整版高清| 成人精品一区二区免费| 亚洲aⅴ乱码一区二区在线播放 | 啦啦啦 在线观看视频| 香蕉久久夜色| 丝袜人妻中文字幕| 男人舔奶头视频| 色av中文字幕| 免费高清视频大片| 老司机深夜福利视频在线观看| 1024视频免费在线观看| 国产高清视频在线播放一区| 国产v大片淫在线免费观看| 少妇被粗大的猛进出69影院| 看片在线看免费视频| а√天堂www在线а√下载| 亚洲熟女毛片儿| 国产成人一区二区三区免费视频网站| 国产不卡一卡二| 50天的宝宝边吃奶边哭怎么回事| 久久人妻福利社区极品人妻图片| 国产精品亚洲一级av第二区| 中文字幕精品亚洲无线码一区 | 国产成人av教育| 亚洲第一av免费看| 我的亚洲天堂| 制服丝袜大香蕉在线| 国产亚洲av高清不卡| 国产精品美女特级片免费视频播放器 | 啦啦啦韩国在线观看视频| 日韩视频一区二区在线观看| 精品福利观看| 18禁黄网站禁片午夜丰满| 国产精品久久久av美女十八| 亚洲人成网站高清观看| 制服丝袜大香蕉在线| 亚洲成人免费电影在线观看| 日本撒尿小便嘘嘘汇集6| 久久婷婷人人爽人人干人人爱| 啦啦啦韩国在线观看视频| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区黑人| 身体一侧抽搐| 精品午夜福利视频在线观看一区| 天堂动漫精品| 国产精品乱码一区二三区的特点| 久久午夜亚洲精品久久| 搡老岳熟女国产| 50天的宝宝边吃奶边哭怎么回事| 国产黄色小视频在线观看| 亚洲 欧美 日韩 在线 免费| 欧美丝袜亚洲另类 | 国产成人系列免费观看| 91老司机精品| 精品免费久久久久久久清纯| 动漫黄色视频在线观看| 夜夜夜夜夜久久久久| 国产一卡二卡三卡精品| 国产成人精品久久二区二区免费| 精品久久久久久久末码| 韩国精品一区二区三区| 黄色丝袜av网址大全| 国产精品爽爽va在线观看网站 | а√天堂www在线а√下载| 亚洲精品在线美女| 亚洲第一欧美日韩一区二区三区| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 搞女人的毛片| 国产熟女午夜一区二区三区| 男人舔女人下体高潮全视频| 免费一级毛片在线播放高清视频| cao死你这个sao货| 亚洲 国产 在线| svipshipincom国产片| 国产三级黄色录像| 亚洲午夜精品一区,二区,三区| 中文字幕人妻熟女乱码| 久久亚洲精品不卡| 波多野结衣巨乳人妻| 色精品久久人妻99蜜桃| 人人妻,人人澡人人爽秒播| 久久伊人香网站| 一个人免费在线观看的高清视频| 在线观看免费视频日本深夜| 久久久久久亚洲精品国产蜜桃av| 岛国视频午夜一区免费看| 两性午夜刺激爽爽歪歪视频在线观看 | 岛国视频午夜一区免费看| 中文字幕最新亚洲高清| 丰满的人妻完整版| 成熟少妇高潮喷水视频| 巨乳人妻的诱惑在线观看| 久久久久国产一级毛片高清牌| 97人妻精品一区二区三区麻豆 | 国产精品综合久久久久久久免费| 最新在线观看一区二区三区| 久久狼人影院| 最新美女视频免费是黄的| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区| 亚洲专区字幕在线| 日本 欧美在线| 免费在线观看影片大全网站| 欧美人与性动交α欧美精品济南到| 神马国产精品三级电影在线观看 | 一级毛片高清免费大全| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区黑人| 在线观看免费视频日本深夜| 禁无遮挡网站| 男人舔奶头视频| 中出人妻视频一区二区| 丰满的人妻完整版| 一级毛片精品| 免费在线观看完整版高清| 黄色毛片三级朝国网站| 国产一区二区三区在线臀色熟女| 成人国产综合亚洲| 91国产中文字幕| 18禁观看日本| 十分钟在线观看高清视频www| av在线播放免费不卡| 精品一区二区三区av网在线观看| 国产精品日韩av在线免费观看| 国产成人精品久久二区二区免费| 久久久久久国产a免费观看| 成人永久免费在线观看视频| 嫩草影院精品99| 变态另类成人亚洲欧美熟女| 免费在线观看黄色视频的| 精华霜和精华液先用哪个| 少妇的丰满在线观看| 久久狼人影院| 制服人妻中文乱码| 午夜福利免费观看在线| 亚洲va日本ⅴa欧美va伊人久久| 国产成人精品久久二区二区91| 国产精品99久久99久久久不卡| 91国产中文字幕| 91字幕亚洲| 亚洲av电影不卡..在线观看| 午夜福利一区二区在线看| 国产片内射在线| 19禁男女啪啪无遮挡网站| 91九色精品人成在线观看| 国产伦人伦偷精品视频| 国产乱人伦免费视频| 真人一进一出gif抽搐免费| 伊人久久大香线蕉亚洲五| 亚洲欧美精品综合久久99| 国产一卡二卡三卡精品| 99精品在免费线老司机午夜| 久久人妻福利社区极品人妻图片| 国产精品免费视频内射| 国产欧美日韩一区二区精品| 亚洲自拍偷在线| svipshipincom国产片| 黄色视频不卡|