Long-term oncological outcomes of prostate cancer upgrading following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

M Milagros Secin (University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH) A Abdulrahman Al-Bayati (Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH) N Nicolas Soputro (Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH) M Mohamad Watfa (Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH) C Christopher Weight J Jane K. Nguyen (Center for Urologic Oncology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH) J Jihad Kaouk (Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH) R Ruben Olivares (Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH)

Abstract

351 Background: Pathologic upgrading from biopsy to final pathology at the time of Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RARP) is a frequent finding and may reflect more aggressive disease biology, potentially leading to adverse long-term oncologic outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the association between upgrading and oncologic outcomes beyond five years after RARP. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted using an IRB-approved database to identify 4,910 consecutive patients who underwent RARP between 2015 and 2020. Patients were included if they had at least five years of postoperative follow-up. Biochemical recurrence (BCR) was defined according to AUA guidelines. Results: A total of 1,210 patients met inclusion criteria. Pathologic upgrading was identified in 361 patients (29.8%). While the upgraded and non-upgraded groups were similar in terms of adverse pathological features, the upgraded group had a significantly higher incidence of positive surgical margins (42.1% vs. 35.4%, p = 0.039). At a median follow-up of 82.4 months (IQR 69.5-97.4), these differences did not translate into a significant difference in BCR-free survival ( p = 0.32). Conclusions: Despite a relatively high incidence of pathologic upgrading in patients undergoing RARP, most of which originated from Grade Group 1, this finding was not associated with worse BCR outcomes. With long term follow-up, upgrading at the time of RARP did not significantly impact BCR-free survival, and overall BCR rates did not differ meaningfully between upgraded and non-upgraded patients. Baseline clinicodemographics and oncological outcomes of all included patients. Overall cohort ( n =1210) Equivocal ( n =841) Upgrading ( n =361) p Age (years) 63 (58 –68) 63 (59-68) 63 (58-67) 0.077 PSA (ng/mL) 5.7 (4.2 - 8.6) 6.5 (4.8-11.6) 7.3 (5.2-11.5) 0.201 Biopsy ISUP Grade Group <0.001  1 256 (21.2%) 66 (7.9%) 188 (52.1%)  2 517 (42.7%) 405 (48.2%) 108 (29.9%)  3 234 (19.3%) 195 (23.2%) 42 (11.6%)  4-5 203 (16.8%) 178 (21.1%) 25 (6.9%) RARP ISUP Grade Group <0.001  1 70 (5.8%) 70 (8.3%) 0  2 639 (53.2%) 474 (56.4%) 165 (45.5%)  3 300 (25.0%) 188 (22.4%) 112 (32.0%)  4 78 (6.5%) 51 (6.1%) 27 (7.5%)  5 114 (9.5%) 57 (6.8%) 57 (15.8%) Positive Surgical Margin 455 (37.6%) 298 (35.5%) 152 (12.6%) 0.039 Biochemical Recurrence (BCR) 321 (26.5%) 217 (25.8%) 102 (28.25%) 0.514 Distant Metastasis 145 (12.0%) 102 (12.14%) 41 (11.36%) 0.786 Follow-up Duration (months) 82.4 (69.5-97.4) 81.8(69.4-96.7) 84.7 (70.2 -101.8) 0.105 IQR = Interquartile Range; ISUP = International Society of Urological Pathology; BCR = Biochemical Recurrence; IQR = Interquartile Range; ISUP = International Society of Urological Pathology; BCR = Biochemical Recurrence; Categorical variables are presented as n (%), and continuous variables as median (IQR).

Article Details

Volume / Issue Vol. 44, Issue 7_suppl
Published March 01, 2026
Pages 351-351
ISSN 0732-183X
Publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Journal Info

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

ISSN: 0732-183X Health Sciences

Authors (8)

M

Milagros Secin

University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH

A

Abdulrahman Al-Bayati

Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH

N

Nicolas Soputro

Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH

M

Mohamad Watfa

Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH

C

Christopher Weight

J

Jane K. Nguyen

Center for Urologic Oncology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH

J

Jihad Kaouk

Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH

R

Ruben Olivares

Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH