Lymphovascular invasion

New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> ]

Arrayscout
New Member


Date Joined Jul 2011
Total Posts : 2
   Posted 7/30/2011 5:07 PM (GMT -7)   
Hi everyone,
Any significance to 'lymphovascular invasion identified' on surgical pathology report following radical prostatectomy?

Ken
-----------
Age 54
PSA 5.7, DRE RT firm
Biopsy results 6/1/11
GS8 (4+4) 2 of 12 cores
CT & Bone scan negative
Robot assisted RP 7/21/11, cath removed 7/29/11
 
Surgical pathology carcinoma summary:
Site:  bilateral
Gleason score:  4+4
Margin status:  negative
Seminal vesicle invasion:  not identified
Extraprostatic extension:  identified, bilateral
Lymphovascular incision:  identified
Large venous invasion:  not identified
Lymph node status:  RT 0/4 negative, LT 0/3 negative
TNM stage:  pT3a pN0

James C.
Veteran Member


Date Joined Aug 2007
Total Posts : 4454
   Posted 7/30/2011 5:46 PM (GMT -7)   
From a breast cancer site, but the description is valid for abdominal lymph nodes:

What is lymphovascular invasion? How does it differ from having positive nodes? And how does it affect my treatment choices?

When a pathologist examines tissue removed during a lumpectomy or mastectomy, one of the things she looks to see is whether cancer cells are present in any of the blood vessels or lymphatic vessels. If they are, it is referred to as vascular invasion, lymphatic invasion, or lymphovascular invasion (LVI).

A woman can have lymphovascular invasion but not have positive lymph nodes. This could be because the invasion hasn't spread to the lymph nodes or because it has bypassed the nodes and moved on to other areas of the body.

When LVI is present, doctors assume this means that the cancer has acquired the genetic mutation it needs to create its own blood vessels, a process called angiogenesis. Because a tumor that has the ability to create its own blood vessels may have already begun to spread cancer cells to other parts of the body, the presence of LVI is an indicator that treatment should most likely include chemotherapy or hormone therapy (if the tumor is hormone sensitive).



www.dslrf.org/breastcancer/content.asp?CATid=28&L2=1&L3=6&L4=0&Pid=&sid=132&cid=1104

Hope this helps explain it. The last sentence needs to be discussed with your doc.

Ozbob
Regular Member


Date Joined Jul 2011
Total Posts : 218
   Posted 7/30/2011 6:34 PM (GMT -7)   
Hi Ken
 
My Path report included Lymohovascular invasion. My LN's were also clear. See my post "Robotic Surgery". I received some good information from some of the guys.
Age 59
3 May 11 Biopsy Dx Cancer, Gleason Grade 9, PSA 3.7
Bone & CT Scans normal
14 July PSA 4.4
20 July 11 Surgery RALP
Pathology Report:
Stage pT2c pNO
Gleason 4+3=7+tertiary 5
EPE: Absent
Surgical margins: Negative
SVI: Not involved
LN's (right 23, left 17) Clear
Lymphovascular invasion: Present
Perineural invasion: Present
PIN: Present

az4peaks
Regular Member


Date Joined Feb 2011
Total Posts : 110
   Posted 7/30/2011 7:36 PM (GMT -7)   
Hi Ken, - Yes, it MAY have some significance. Generally speaking, some studies have shown that LVI increases the statistical possibility of recurrence and decreased the effectiveness of salvage Radiation. If you will E-mail me, I will E-mail back you some abstracts regarding the subject, and you can make your own interpretation. -John@newPCa.org (aka) az4peaks.

K2
Regular Member


Date Joined Feb 2011
Total Posts : 51
   Posted 8/1/2011 6:20 PM (GMT -7)   
As I understand it,
 
LVI indicates the cancer has acheived an intital step necessary for metastasis - but there are still many more required steps for sucessful metastasis - my radiation oncologist said there were roughly 40 steps necessary for prostate cancer metastasis. Accordingly, it is a negaitive prognostic indicator and should be routinely reported in pathology reports when present.
 
However, LVI is frequently accompanied by other well established negative factors i.e., high pre-op PSA, high G-score, positive margins etc. which are commonly used in monograms. Due to the lack of consensus regarding LVI's contribution to overall risk it appears to not to be used in most monograms (I've seen one). The degree of prognostic value of LVI above and beyond existing well established risk factors is not agree upon within the medical PC community.
 
Currently, many of the studies are based on a small sample sizes and more study is needed to quantify LVI's contribution to risk. Developing meaningfull statistically models with prognostic value requires larger sample sizes and controls for all the other various negaive factors often present with LVI.
 
If you believe the article cited below then current monograms tell most of the risk story already.
 
Urology - Volume 68, Issue 1, July 2006, Pages 99-103
"LVI is found in fewer than 10% of radical prostatectomy specimens for clinically localized disease. It is seen almost exclusively in high-volume tumors in conjunction with other adverse pathologic features. On univariate analysis, LVI was significantly associated with biochemical progression, but not with a preoperative PSAV greater than 2 ng/mL/yr. When combined with all other clinical and pathologic features in a multivariate model, LVI lost its independent prognostic significance. Thus, although the finding of LVI on a pathology report is certainly an adverse prognostic feature, it appears that its effect on the biochemical progression rate is mediated through its strong association with other adverse pathologic features."
 
K2

Arrayscout
New Member


Date Joined Jul 2011
Total Posts : 2
   Posted 8/2/2011 12:21 PM (GMT -7)   
Thanks for everyone's response. Seems that LVI is associated with more aggressive cancer but the stats don't indicate much significance and that there are more significant measures for recurrence risk. K2 seemed to sum up LVI the best. My uro didn't seem too concerned in that we already intend to watch my PCa closely, no more closer with LVI.

Ken
Age 54
PSA 5.7, DRE RT firm
Biopsy results 6/1/11
GS8 (4+4) 2 of 12 cores
CT & Bone scan negative
Robot assisted RP NS 7/21/11, Stanford University/Gonzalgo
 
Surgical pathology carcinoma summary:
Site:  bilateral
Gleason score:  4+4
Margin status:  negative
Seminal vesicle invasion:  not identified
Extraprostatic extension:  identified, bilateral
Lymphovascular incision:  identified
Large venous invasion:  not identified
Lymph node status:  RT 0/4 negative, LT 0/3 negative
TNM stage:  pT3a pN0
New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
Forum Information
Currently it is Sunday, November 23, 2014 2:32 AM (GMT -7)
There are a total of 2,275,774 posts in 252,950 threads.
View Active Threads


Who's Online
This forum has 158674 registered members. Please welcome our newest member, jamsonleo.
180 Guest(s), 3 Registered Member(s) are currently online.  Details
jamsonleo, THE HAPPY TURTLE, tony w


Follow HealingWell.com on Facebook  Follow HealingWell.com on Twitter  Follow HealingWell.com on Pinterest  Follow HealingWell.com on YouTube
Advertisement
Advertisement

©1996-2014 HealingWell.com LLC  All rights reserved.

Advertise | Privacy Policy & Disclaimer