www.selleckchem.com/products/Tubacin.html 021 chi-squared) but not with lymphatic infiltration 8/16 versus 22/77 (P = 0.08 chi-squared).There was a trend of increasing biochemical failure with increasing Gleason score, comparing Gleason 4, Gleason 5 + 6, Gleason 7, and Gleason 8 + 9, (P = 0.05 chi-squared for trends), with a relative risk of 1.00, 6.00, 8.70, and 9.60, respectively (Table 3).Table 3Biochemical failure and association with clinical parameters.3.2. Association of CPC Status and Clinicopathological Parameters with Biochemical FailureIncorporating the detection of CPCs with the pathological parameters showed different results. 25/38 (65.8%) men CPC positive experienced biochemical failure in comparison with 5/56 (8.9%) of men CPC negative (P = 0.0001 chi-squared).3.2.1.

CPC and Margin Status (Table 4(a)) Table 4(a) Association of CPC status and margin status with biochemical failure. (+) positive (?) negative, (b) Association of CPC status and capsule status with biochemical failure, (c) Association of CPC status and perineural infiltration with biochemical …Men CPC (+) margin (+) were more likely to experience biochemical failure than men CPC (?) margin (+), 9/15 versus 0/7 (P = 0.022 chi-squared); likewise men CPC (+) margin (?) were more likely to experience biochemical failure than men CPC (?) margin (?), 17/22 versus 4/50 (P = 0.0001 Chi-squared) (Table 6). Comparing CPC (+) margin (+) with CPC (+) margin (?) there was no significant difference (P = 0.16 chi-squared); similarly there was no difference between CPC (?) margin (+) and CPC (?) margin (?) (P = 1.00 Fisher two-tailed).

Table 6Uncensored Kaplan-Meier of men without biochemical failure comparing CPC (+) versus CPC from time of blood sampling.3.2.2. CPC and Extracapsular Extension (Table 4(b)) Men CPC (+) capsule (+) were more likely to experience biochemical failure than men CPC (?) capsule (+), 13/33 versus 1/16 (P = 0.0008 Fisher two-tailed); likewise men CPC (+) capsule (?) were more likely to experience biochemical failure than men CPC (?) capsule (?) (P = 0.0001, Fisher two-tailed). Comparing CPC (+) capsule (+) with CPC (+) margin (?) there was no significant difference (P = 0.47); equally there was no significant difference between CPC (?) capsule (+) with CPC (?) Cilengitide capsule (?) (P = 1.00 Fisher two-tailed).3.2.3. CPC and Perineural (PN) Infiltration (Table 4(c)) Men CPC (+) PN (+) were more likely to experience biochemical failure compared with CPC (?) PN (+) 20/25 versus 5/30 (P = 0.

0001 chi-squared), similarly for men CPC (+) PN (?) versus CPC (?) PN (?), 5/11 versus 0/26 (P = 0.001, Fisher two-tailed). Comparing men CPC (+) PN (+) versus CPC (+) PN (?) there was no significant difference (P = 0.056 Fisher two-tailed). Similarly for CPC (?) PN (+) versus CPC (?) PN (?) there was no significant difference (P = 0.055, Fisher two-tailed).3.2.4.