Mp05-08 Comparison of Prostate Cancer Incidence Stratified by Prostate Gland Volume in the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trials (Pcpt)

You have accessJournal of UrologyProstate Cancer: Basic Research & Pathophysiology I (MP05)1 May 2024MP05-08 COMPARISON OF PROSTATE CANCER INCIDENCE STRATIFIED BY PROSTATE GLAND VOLUME IN THE PROSTATE CANCER PREVENTION TRIALS (PCPT) Zheyar J. Seyan, John Wolpert, Stephanie Stroever, and Werner T.W. de Riese Zheyar J. SeyanZheyar J. Seyan , John WolpertJohn Wolpert , Stephanie StroeverStephanie Stroever , and Werner T.W. de RieseWerner T.W. de Riese View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0001008740.27639.cc.08AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and prostate cancer (PCa) are the most prevalent diseases of the prostate, and both are often coexistent. Recent studies support the hypothesis of an inverse relationship between prostate/BPH-size and the incidence of PCa. The PCPT study is a well-designed prospective cohort study, but the data has never been stratified and analyzed by prostate volume and the incidence of PCa. After the SWOG Cancer research group granted us access to the dataset, we investigated if prostate volume is a relevant confounding variable for the incidence of PCa. METHODS: The obtained data of the SWOG Cancer research group were reviewed. Study participants in the control arm, who did not receive finasteride treatment, and whose cancer status was verified per biopsies during the 7-year study period, were included for analysis. Patients without documented prostate volume measurements or assigned to the finasteride treatment were excluded. Simple and multivariable logistic regression analyses including parameters such as age and race were applied. RESULTS: After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the original 18,880 PCPT participants, only 4,668 men, with a mean age of 63 years, were included in our analysis. PCa was diagnosed in 1,132 (24.3%) patients during the study, while the remaining patients had negative biopsies at closure of the study. Simple logistic regression demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in PCa incidence for patients with prostate volumes larger than 60 cc when compared to those with small prostate volumes (Table 1). There was not a statistically significant difference in cancer risk between moderate size (36-60cc) and small prostates (≤35 cc) (p=0.285). CONCLUSIONS: The PCPT data stratified by prostate size and with its large statistical power due to study proportions revealed a highly significant (p<.001) difference between the incidence of PCa in large (≥60cc) and moderate to small (<60cc) prostates. These results further support the clinical hypothesis presented in the current literature that prostate/ BPH-size may have a protective effect on the incidence of PCa. If further studies confirm this hypothesis, it will have relevant clinical implications on future diagnostics and treatment of both BPH and PCa. Source of Funding: We have no financial disclosures © 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 211Issue 5SMay 2024Page: e45 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Metrics Author Information Zheyar J. Seyan More articles by this author John Wolpert More articles by this author Stephanie Stroever More articles by this author Werner T.W. de Riese More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...