Correlation of High Body Mass Index With More Advanced Localized Prostate Cancer at Radical Prostatectomy Is Not Reflected in PSA Level and PSA Density but Is Seen in PSA Mass
Published in
American Journal of Clinical Pathology, August 2015
Prostate cancer screening algorithms and preoperative nomograms do not include patients' body mass index (BMI). We evaluated outcomes at radical prostatectomy (RP) adjusted to BMI.
Serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, PSA mass, PSA density (PSAD), and RP findings were analyzed with respect to BMI in 4,926 men who underwent RP between 2005 and 2014.
In total, 1,001 (20.3%) men were normal weight, 2,547 (51.7%) were overweight, and 1,378 (28%) were obese. Median PSA levels (ng/mL) were normal weight, 5.0; overweight, 5.1; and obese, 5.2 (P = .094). Median PSA mass increased with increasing BMI: 15.9 vs 17.4 vs 19.4 μg (P < .001). Median PSAD was not significantly different: 0.11 vs 0.11 vs 0.11 ng/mL/g (P = .084). Median prostate weight increased with increasing BMI: 44 vs 45 vs 49 g (P < .001). Median prostatectomy tumor volume increased with increasing BMI: 3.9 vs 4.7 vs 5.9 cm(3) (P < .001). Overweight and obese patients had a higher Gleason score and more locally advanced cancer (P < .001). Frequency of positive surgical margins increased with higher BMIs (P < .001). Frequency of lymph node metastasis did not differ significantly (P = .088).
While BMI correlates with tumor volume, Gleason score, and extent of disease at RP, there is no routinely measured clinical parameter reflecting this. Only PSA mass highlights this correlation. Thus, BMI and potentially PSA mass should be taken into account in predictive algorithms pertaining to prostate cancer and its surgical treatment.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 August 2015.
All research outputs
#19,942,887
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Clinical Pathology
#3,352
of 3,937 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#188,877
of 276,409 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Clinical Pathology
#36
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,937 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 276,409 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
