Table 1

Impact of spatial tumour distribution (transition zone vs peripheral zone tumours) on histological features, PSA trend and clinical outcome in radical prostatectomy PCa cohorts. All comparison is transition zone vs peripheral zone tumours unless stated

PublicationPatient cohort (n)Proportions (%)T stage (%)Gleason scoreMean/median PSA (ng/mL)Clinical outcome (%)
*Lee et al, 199146Cross-sectional
(116)
7 vs 93cT2: 76 vs 81
≥cT3: 20 vs 19
Mean: 6.2 vs 7.4N/AN/A
Stamey et al, 199847Cross-sectional (791)14 vs 86cT1c=25 vs 75*
cT2=9 vs 92
NANANA
Noguchi et al, 200023Case–control
(158)
50 vs 50 (matched)cT1c=73 vs 2
cT2=27 vs 78
Gleason grade ≥4/5=35 vs 30%18.2 vs 215 years bRFS: 71.5 vs 49.2
Shannon et al, 200348Case–control
(152)
50 vs 50 (matched)N/AGleason grade 4/5≥50%: 54% vs 91%N/AN/A
Augustin et al, 200349Cross-sectional
(186)
25 vs 75≤pT2: 74 vs 56
≥pT3: 26 vs 44
Gleason ≤6: 78 vs 37%
Gleason ≥7: 22 vs 63%
15.5 vs 10.9N/A
Augustin et al, 200329Cross-sectional (307)21 vs 79≤pT2: 76 vs 55
≥pT3: 24 vs 45
Gleason ≤6: 73 vs 37%
Gleason ≥7: 27 vs 63%
14.8 vs 115 years bRFS: 80 vs 70
Steuber et al, 200528Cross-sectional
(1990)
11 vs 89≤pT2: 73 vs 64
≥pT3: 27 vs 36
Gleason 6: 78 vs 66%
Gleson 3+4: 16 vs 23%
Gleason ≥4+3: 7 vs 10%
14.0 vs 9.3N/A
Steuber et al, 200627Cross-sectional
(945)
12 vs 88≤pT2b: 82 vs 69
≥pT3a: 27 vs 36
Gleason 6: 74 vs 65%
Gleson 3+4: 20 vs 24%
Gleason ≥4+3: 5 vs 11%
14 vs 8N/A
Sakai et al, 200626Cross-sectional
(134)
20 vs 80≤pT2: 63 vs 48
≥pT3: 37 vs 52
Mean Gleason sum: 6.2 vs 5.916.1 vs 12.8N/A
Chun et al, 200725Cross-sectional (1262)9 vs 91NAGleason ≤6: 57 vs 39%
Gleason ≥7: 43 vs 61%
17.7 vs 10.5N/A
†Cohen et al, 200812Cross-sectional (726)7 vs 90 vs 3N/AGleason ≤6: 45 vs 18 vs 0%
Gleason 7: 49 vs 78 vs 73%
Gleason ≥8: 6 vs 3 vs 27%
7.8 vs 10.8 vs 11.82 years bRFS: 72.7 vs 80.9 vs 38.3
King et al, 200917Cross-sectional
(494)
18 vs 82cT1c: 78 vs 69% cT2: 22 vs 49%Gleason 6: 24 vs 18%
Gleason 3+4: 46 vs 63%
Gleason ≥4+3: 30 vs 21%
10.8 vs 7.45 years bRFS: 85 vs 77
Iremashvili et al, 201213Cross-sectional (1188)11 vs 89cT1c: 71 vs 68% cT2: 29 vs 32%Gleason 6: 54 vs 41%
Gleason 3+4: 28 vs 35%
Gleason ≥4+3: 18 vs 24%
6.6 vs 5.65 years bRFS: 91 vs 82%
Lee et al, 201514Cross-sectional
(1354)
17 vs 83cT1c: 75 vs 49%
cT2: 24 vs 51%
Gleason ≤6: 72.2 vs 72.6%
Gleason 3+4: 50 vs 54%
Gleason ≥4+3: 28 vs 27%
12.1 vs 7.85 years bRFS: 80 vs 72
5 years PCM: 99 vs 97
*Teloken et al, 201715Cross-sectional
Gleason ≤3+4 (4374)
25 vs 75N/AGleason ≤6: 41 vs 19%
Gleason 3+4: 59 vs 81%
7.5 vs 6.35 years bRFS: 94 vs 95
Gleason ≥4+3 (2677)ten vs 90N/AGleason 4+3: 75.1 vs 73.5%
Gleason ≥4+4: 25 vs 26.5%
11 vs 8.75 years bRFS: 86 vs 76
Asvadi et al, 201824Cross-sectional
(323)
23 vs 77≤pT2: 64 vs 57%
≥pT3: 36 vs 42%
Gleason 3+3: 12 vs 8%
Gleason 3+4: 59 vs 51%
Gleason ≥4+3: 19 vs 30%
7.7 vs 5.9N/A
Takamatsu et al, 201918Cross-sectional
(638)
46 vs 54≤pT2: 75 vs 62%
≥pT3: 25% vs 38%
Gleason 3+3: 14 vs 9%
Gleason 3+4: 37 vs 32%
Gleason ≥4+3: 49 vs 59%
>10: 25% vs 15%7 years bRFS: 88 vs 80
Sato et al, 202016Cross-sectional
(252)
37 vs 63≤pT2: 69 vs 48%
≥pT3: 31 vs 52%
Gleason 3+3: 24 vs 9%
Gleason 3+4: 53 vs 45%
Gleason ≥4+3: 23 vs 46%
7.7 vs 8.38 years bRFS: 82 vs 53
  • *Comparison between TZ vs PZ/CZ.

  • †Comparison between TZ vs PZ vs CZ.

  • bRFS, biochemical relapse-free survival; CZ, central zone; N/A, not available; PCa, prostate cancer; PCM, prostate cancer mortality; PSA, prostate specific antigen; PZ, peripheral zone; TZ, transition zone.