Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Zhaoyong Feng is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Zhaoyong Feng.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2011

Active surveillance program for prostate cancer: An update of the Johns Hopkins experience

Jeffrey J. Tosoian; Bruce J. Trock; Patricia Landis; Zhaoyong Feng; Jonathan I. Epstein; Alan W. Partin; Patrick C. Walsh; H. Ballentine Carter

PURPOSE We assessed outcomes of men with prostate cancer enrolled in active surveillance. PATIENTS AND METHODS Since 1995, a total of 769 men diagnosed with prostate cancer have been followed prospectively (median follow-up, 2.7 years; range, 0.01 to 15.0 years) on active surveillance. Enrollment criteria were for very-low-risk cancers, defined by clinical stage (T1c), prostate-specific antigen density < 0.15 ng/mL, and prostate biopsy findings (Gleason score ≤ 6, two or fewer cores with cancer, and ≤ 50% cancer involvement of any core). Curative intervention was recommended on disease reclassification on the basis of biopsy criteria. The primary outcome was survival free of intervention, and secondary outcomes were rates of disease reclassification and exit from the program. Outcomes were compared between men who did and did not meet very-low-risk criteria. RESULTS The median survival free of intervention was 6.5 years (range, 0.0 to 15.0 years) after diagnosis, and the proportions of men remaining free of intervention after 2, 5, and 10 years of follow-up were 81%, 59%, and 41%, respectively. Overall, 255 men (33.2%) underwent intervention at a median of 2.2 years (range, 0.6 to 10.2 years) after diagnosis; 188 men (73.7%) underwent intervention on the basis of disease reclassification on biopsy. The proportions of men who underwent curative intervention (P = .026) or had biopsy reclassification (P < .001) were significantly lower in men who met enrollment criteria than in those who did not. There were no prostate cancer deaths. CONCLUSION For carefully selected men, active surveillance with curative intent appears to be a safe alternative to immediate intervention. Limiting surveillance to very-low-risk patients may reduce the frequency of adverse outcomes.


The Journal of Urology | 2011

Predicting 15-Year Prostate Cancer Specific Mortality After Radical Prostatectomy

Peter T. Scardino; Patrick C. Walsh; Misop Han; Alan W. Partin; Bruce J. Trock; Zhaoyong Feng; David P. Wood; James A. Eastham; Ofer Yossepowitch; Danny M. Rabah; Michael W. Kattan; Changhong Yu; Eric A. Klein; Andrew J. Stephenson

PURPOSE Long-term prostate cancer specific mortality after radical prostatectomy is poorly defined in the era of widespread screening. An understanding of the treated natural history of screen detected cancers and the pathological risk factors for prostate cancer specific mortality are needed for treatment decision making. MATERIALS AND METHODS Using Fine and Gray competing risk regression analysis we modeled clinical and pathological data, and followup information on 11,521 patients treated with radical prostatectomy at a total of 4 academic centers from 1987 to 2005 to predict prostate cancer specific mortality. The model was validated on 12,389 patients treated at a separate institution during the same period. Median followup in the modeling and validation cohorts was 56 and 96 months, respectively. RESULTS The overall 15-year prostate cancer specific mortality rate was 7%. Primary and secondary Gleason grade 4-5 (each p<0.001), seminal vesicle invasion (p<0.001) and surgery year (p=0.002) were significant predictors of prostate cancer specific mortality. A nomogram predicting 15-year prostate cancer specific mortality based on standard pathological parameters was accurate and discriminating with an externally validated concordance index of 0.92. When stratified by patient age at diagnosis, the 15-year prostate cancer specific mortality rate for pathological Gleason score 6 or less, 3+4, 4+3 and 8-10 was 0.2% to 1.2%, 4.2% to 6.5%, 6.6% to 11% and 26% to 37%, respectively. The 15-year prostate cancer specific mortality risk was 0.8% to 1.5%, 2.9% to 10%, 15% to 27% and 22% to 30% for organ confined cancer, extraprostatic extension, seminal vesicle invasion and lymph node metastasis, respectively. Only 3 of 9,557 patients with organ confined, pathological Gleason score 6 or less cancer died of prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS Poorly differentiated cancer and seminal vesicle invasion are the prime determinants of prostate cancer specific mortality after radical prostatectomy. The prostate cancer specific mortality risk can be predicted with remarkable accuracy after the pathological features of prostate cancer are known.


European Urology | 2012

Upgrading and Downgrading of Prostate Cancer from Biopsy to Radical Prostatectomy: Incidence and Predictive Factors Using the Modified Gleason Grading System and Factoring in Tertiary Grades

Jonathan I. Epstein; Zhaoyong Feng; Bruce J. Trock; Phillip M. Pierorazio

BACKGROUND Prior studies assessing the correlation of Gleason score (GS) at needle biopsy and corresponding radical prostatectomy (RP) predated the use of the modified Gleason scoring system and did not factor in tertiary grade patterns. OBJECTIVE To assess the relation of biopsy and RP grade in the largest study to date. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A total of 7643 totally embedded RP and corresponding needle biopsies (2004-2010) were analyzed according to the updated Gleason system. INTERVENTIONS All patients underwent prostate biopsy prior to RP. MEASUREMENTS The relation of upgrading or downgrading to patient and cancer characteristics was compared using the chi-square test, Student t test, and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS A total of 36.3% of cases were upgraded from a needle biopsy GS 5-6 to a higher grade at RP (11.2% with GS 6 plus tertiary). Half of the cases had matching GS 3+4=7 at biopsy and RP with an approximately equal number of cases downgraded and upgraded at RP. With biopsy GS 4+3=7, RP GS was almost equally 3+4=7 and 4+3=7. Biopsy GS 8 led to an almost equal distribution between RP GS 4+3=7, 8, and 9-10. A total of 58% of the cases had matching GS 9-10 at biopsy and RP. In multivariable analysis, increasing age (p<0.0001), increasing serum prostate-specific antigen level (p<0.0001), decreasing RP weight (p<0.0001), and increasing maximum percentage cancer/core (p<0.0001) predicted the upgrade from biopsy GS 5-6 to higher at RP. Despite factoring in multiple variables including the number of positive cores and the maximum percentage of cancer per core, the concordance indexes were not sufficiently high to justify the use of nomograms for predicting upgrading and downgrading for the individual patient. CONCLUSIONS Almost 20% of RP cases have tertiary patterns. A needle biopsy can sample a tertiary higher Gleason pattern in the RP, which is then not recorded in the standard GS reporting, resulting in an apparent overgrading on the needle biopsy.


The Journal of Urology | 2011

Adult UrologyOncology: Prostate/Testis/Penis/UrethraPredicting 15-Year Prostate Cancer Specific Mortality After Radical Prostatectomy

Peter T. Scardino; Patrick C. Walsh; Misop Han; Alan W. Partin; Bruce J. Trock; Zhaoyong Feng; David P. Wood; James A. Eastham; Ofer Yossepowitch; Danny M. Rabah; Michael W. Kattan; Changhong Yu; Eric A. Klein; Andrew J. Stephenson

PURPOSE Long-term prostate cancer specific mortality after radical prostatectomy is poorly defined in the era of widespread screening. An understanding of the treated natural history of screen detected cancers and the pathological risk factors for prostate cancer specific mortality are needed for treatment decision making. MATERIALS AND METHODS Using Fine and Gray competing risk regression analysis we modeled clinical and pathological data, and followup information on 11,521 patients treated with radical prostatectomy at a total of 4 academic centers from 1987 to 2005 to predict prostate cancer specific mortality. The model was validated on 12,389 patients treated at a separate institution during the same period. Median followup in the modeling and validation cohorts was 56 and 96 months, respectively. RESULTS The overall 15-year prostate cancer specific mortality rate was 7%. Primary and secondary Gleason grade 4-5 (each p<0.001), seminal vesicle invasion (p<0.001) and surgery year (p=0.002) were significant predictors of prostate cancer specific mortality. A nomogram predicting 15-year prostate cancer specific mortality based on standard pathological parameters was accurate and discriminating with an externally validated concordance index of 0.92. When stratified by patient age at diagnosis, the 15-year prostate cancer specific mortality rate for pathological Gleason score 6 or less, 3+4, 4+3 and 8-10 was 0.2% to 1.2%, 4.2% to 6.5%, 6.6% to 11% and 26% to 37%, respectively. The 15-year prostate cancer specific mortality risk was 0.8% to 1.5%, 2.9% to 10%, 15% to 27% and 22% to 30% for organ confined cancer, extraprostatic extension, seminal vesicle invasion and lymph node metastasis, respectively. Only 3 of 9,557 patients with organ confined, pathological Gleason score 6 or less cancer died of prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS Poorly differentiated cancer and seminal vesicle invasion are the prime determinants of prostate cancer specific mortality after radical prostatectomy. The prostate cancer specific mortality risk can be predicted with remarkable accuracy after the pathological features of prostate cancer are known.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2010

Prostate-Specific Antigen Kinetics During Follow-Up Are an Unreliable Trigger for Intervention in a Prostate Cancer Surveillance Program

Ashley E. Ross; Stacy Loeb; Patricia Landis; Alan W. Partin; Jonathan I. Epstein; Anna Kettermann; Zhaoyong Feng; H. Ballentine Carter; Patrick C. Walsh

PURPOSE To assess the predictive ability of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) velocity (PSAV) and doubling time (PSADT) for biopsy progression and adverse pathology at prostatectomy among men with low-risk prostate cancer enrolled on an active-surveillance program. METHODS We evaluated 290 men who met criteria for active surveillance (ie, PSA density < 0.15 ng/mL/cm(3) and Gleason score < or = 6 with no pattern > or = 4, involving < or = 2 cores with cancer, and < or = 50% involvement of any core by cancer) with two or more serial PSA measurements after diagnosis from 1994 to 2008. Follow-up included twice-yearly digital rectal exam and PSA measurements and yearly surveillance biopsy. Treatment was recommended for biopsy progression (ie, Gleason score > or = 7, or > 2 positive cores, or > 50% core involvement). Sensitivity and specificity of postdiagnostic PSAV and PSADT were explored by using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. RESULTS Overall, 188 (65%) men remained on active surveillance, and 102 (35%) developed biopsy progression at a median follow-up of 2.9 years. PSADT was not significantly associated with subsequent adverse biopsy findings (P = .83), and PSAV was marginally significant (P = .06). No PSAV or PSADT cut point had both high sensitivity and specificity (area under the curve, 0.61 and 0.59, respectively) for biopsy progression. In those who eventually underwent radical prostatectomy, PSAV (P = .79) and PSADT (P = .87) were not associated with the presence of unfavorable surgical pathology. CONCLUSION Postdiagnostic PSA kinetics do not reliably predict adverse pathology and should not be used to replace annual surveillance biopsy for monitoring men on active surveillance.


BJUI | 2012

The natural history of metastatic progression in men with prostate-specific antigen recurrence after radical prostatectomy: long-term follow-up.

Emmanuel S. Antonarakis; Zhaoyong Feng; Bruce J. Trock; Elizabeth B. Humphreys; Michael A. Carducci; Alan W. Partin; Patrick C. Walsh; Mario A. Eisenberger

Study Type – Prognosis (cohort)


The Journal of Urology | 2012

Association of [−2]proPSA with Biopsy Reclassification During Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer

Jeffrey J. Tosoian; Stacy Loeb; Zhaoyong Feng; Sumit Isharwal; Patricia Landis; Debra J. Elliot; Robert W. Veltri; Jonathan I. Epstein; Alan W. Partin; H. Ballentine Carter; Bruce J. Trock; Lori J. Sokoll

PURPOSE Previous studies have suggested an association between [-2]proPSA expression and prostate cancer detection. Less is known about the usefulness of this marker in following patients with prostate cancer on active surveillance. Thus, we examined the relationship between [-2]proPSA and biopsy results in men enrolled in an active surveillance program. MATERIALS AND METHODS In 167 men from our institutional active surveillance program we used Cox proportional hazards models to examine the relationship between [-2]proPSA and annual surveillance biopsy results. The outcome of interest was biopsy reclassification (Gleason score 7 or greater, more than 2 positive biopsy cores or more than 50% involvement of any core with cancer). We also examined the association of biopsy results with total prostate specific antigen, %fPSA, [-2]proPSA/%fPSA and the Beckman Coulter Prostate Health Index phi ([-2]proPSA/free prostate specific antigen) × (total prostate specific antigen)(½)). RESULTS While on active surveillance (median time from diagnosis 4.3 years), 63 (37.7%) men demonstrated biopsy reclassification based on the previously mentioned criteria, including 28 (16.7%) of whom had reclassification based on Gleason score upgrading (Gleason score 7 or greater). Baseline and longitudinal %fPSA, %[-2]proPSA, [-2]proPSA/%fPSA and phi measurements were significantly associated with biopsy reclassification, and %[-2]proPSA and phi provided the greatest predictive accuracy for high grade cancer. CONCLUSIONS In men on active surveillance, measures based on [-2]proPSA such as phi appear to provide improved prediction of biopsy reclassification during followup. Additional validation is warranted to determine whether clinically useful thresholds can be defined, and to better characterize the role of %[-2]proPSA and phi in conjunction with other markers in monitoring patients enrolled in active surveillance.


The Prostate | 2012

Treatment decision-making for localized prostate cancer: what younger men choose and why.

Abhinav Sidana; David J. Hernandez; Zhaoyong Feng; Alan W. Partin; Bruce J. Trock; Surajit Saha; Jonathan I. Epstein

The literature lacks knowledge about information preferences and decision‐making in young prostate cancer patients. This study provides insight into information sources consulted and factors dictating treatment decision‐making in young prostate cancer patients.


BJUI | 2013

Nightly vs on‐demand sildenafil for penile rehabilitation after minimally invasive nerve‐sparing radical prostatectomy: results of a randomized double‐blind trial with placebo

Christian P. Pavlovich; Adam W. Levinson; Li-Ming Su; Lynda Z. Mettee; Zhaoyong Feng; Trinity J. Bivalacqua; Bruce J. Trock

To clarify the role of phosphodiesterase type 5 (PDE5) inhibitors in post‐prostatectomy penile rehabilitation (PPPR). To compare nightly and on‐demand use of PDE5 inhibitors after nerve‐sparing minimally invasive radical prostatectomy (RP).


BJUI | 2012

Impact of surgical margin status on prostate-cancer-specific mortality.

Heather J. Chalfin; Michael Dinizo; Bruce J. Trock; Zhaoyong Feng; Alan W. Partin; Patrick C. Walsh; Elizabeth B. Humphreys; Misop Han

Study Type – Diagnostic (exploratory cohort)

Collaboration


Dive into the Zhaoyong Feng's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Bruce J. Trock

Johns Hopkins University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Alan W. Partin

Johns Hopkins University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Jonathan I. Epstein

Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Misop Han

Johns Hopkins University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Heather J. Chalfin

Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Patricia Landis

Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

H. Ballentine Carter

Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge