What effect does % involvement have on prognosis with organ contained disease?

I don't know if percent of involvement affects the actual grading of PCa (others more knowledgable can weigh in on that), but something to remember is that it can and does impact treatment decision.

In my own case, even though I was Dx'd as a Gleason 6 (low end of the scale), and early on might have thought of AS as an option, the fact that the percent involvement of two of the twelve cores biopsied in my case were 90% and 70%, tipped the decision over into a more aggressive treatment (IMRT in my case).

So percent of involvement does make a difference in how one approaches how to deal with this disease.

It depends{no pun intended re.another thread}, If the urologist gets lucky or can spot a suspicious area via sonagram and stuck a couple or more core needles there, he could theoretically get 90-100% of, lets say a solid, in the sense of reputable, and density grade 6. A grade 6 is a grade 6 and does not need aggressive treatment, tho one could argue with good merit, that if the tumor was near the bladder neck, aggressive treatment may be needed.
Conversely, If a needle hits a small tumor, not a cluster of cells but again a solid tumor and again a solid grade 5, you could get 10-15% in the core. This would need aggressive treatment…. sooner….and most assuredly if later. Wordy, but thats why my tag is what it is. If offended{ kidding…setting up a punch line} I will claim…..your tag….

Sanctuary,
As far as I know, grading defines how similar the Pca cells are to normal cells. A good link to understanding the grading system can be found below:

http://www.macmillan.org.uk/Cancerinformation/Cancertypes/Prostate/Symptomsdiagnosis/Gradingandstaging/Gradingstaging.aspx

I would think that lower % of the Prostate being cancerous would be better. So if 5% of Prostate involved by tumor on surgical pathology (which is what Sanctuary is asking) your prognosis would be better than 30% of Prostate involved by tumor, ALL OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL .

But common sense doesn't always rule I guess, in this disease.

I also found this site, by an individual surgeon: Tumor Volume and Prostate Cancer. A pertinent snippet:

Dr. William Catalona said...
My research group completed a study on my 3,000 plus radical prostatectomy patients to see if tumor volume can predict the frequency of recurrence of the cancer in those patients whose pathology reports showed the cancer to be confined to the organ.

In our studies, we found the following:

The 5-year progression-free survival rates were as follows
94% for men who had less than a 10% tumor volume; 91% for men who had a 10-20% tumor volume; 85% for a 21- 30% tumor volume; and 79% for over 30% tumor volume.

The 10-year progression-free survival rates were as follows:
88% for men who had less than a 10% tumor volume; 86% for men who has a 10-20 tumor volume; 79% for those who had a 21-30% tumor volume and 59% for over 30% tumor volume.

It would seem that it can be a predictor. Of course, other factors should be looked at, as well, such as Gleason score, stage, organ-confined, etc. He does mention that his study was only for those with organ-confined disease.

-Bob

My surgeon told me my final pathology was between 15 and 20%. I haven't seen the written report (something to ask for next call). With the info posted here, that helps make sense of it all. And confirms that I did the right thing.

Thanks for the responses to my question. I am always trying to get as much information as possible about this disease. Inquiring minds MUST know!