Complete embedding and close step-sectioning of radical prostatectomy specimens both increase detection of extraprostatic extension, and correlate with increased disease-free survival by stage of prostate cancer patients

Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases

Volumn 5, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 212-218

  Desai, A ^a   Wu, H ^a   Sun, L ^a,b   Sesterhenn, I A ^c   Mostofi, F K ^c   McLeod, D ^a,b,d   Amling, C ^e   Kusuda, L ^f   Lance, R ^g   Herring, J ^h   Foley, J ⁱ   Baldwin, D ^j   Bishoff, J T ^k   Soderdahl, D ^l   Moul, J W ^a,b,d  

^a Center for Prostate Disease Research (CPDR)   (United States)

^b UNIFORMED SERVICES UNIVERSITY OF THE HEALTH SCIENCES   (United States)

^c ARMED FORCES INSTITUTE OF PATHOLOGY   (United States)

^d Walter Army Medical Center   (United States)

^e NAVAL MEDICAL CENTER SAN DIEGO   (United States)

^f Portsmouth Naval Medical Center   (United States)

^g MADIGAN ARMY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^h WALTER REED ARMY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

ⁱ Brooke Army Medical Center   (United States)

^j Malcolm Grow Medical Center   (United States)

^k WILFORD HALL MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^l EISENHOWER ARMY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

Close step sectioning; Pathology; Prostatectomy; Prostatic neoplasms; Tissue sampling; Whole mount

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER INVASION; CANCER RECURRENCE; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURVIVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; FOLLOW UP; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; KAPLAN MEIER METHOD; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; SEMINAL VESICLE; TISSUE SECTION;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; DISEASE-FREE SURVIVAL; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM STAGING; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; TISSUE EMBEDDING;

EID: 0036390993     PISSN: 13657852     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/sj.pcan.4500600     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Greenlee RT et al. Cancer statistics, 2001. CA Cancer J Clin 2001; 51: 15-36.
2. Blute ML et al. Pathological classification of prostate carcinoma: The impact of margin status. Cancer 1998; 82: 902.
3. Epstein JI, Pizov G, Walsh PC. Correlation of pathologically findings with progression after a radical retropubic prostatectomy. Cancer 1993; 71: 3582.
4. McNeal JE. Cancer volume and site of origin of adenocarcinoma in the prostate: relationship to local and distant spread. Hum Path 1992; 23: 258.
5. Renshaw AA, Chang H, D'Amico AV. Estimation of tumor volume in radical prostatectomy specimens in routine clinical practice. Am J Clin Pathol 1997; 107: 704.
6. Chen ME et al. Prostate cancer detection: relationship to prostate size. Urology 1999; 53: 764.
7. Renshaw AA. Correlation of gross morphological features with histologic featufes in radical prostatectomy specimens. Am J Clin Pathol 1998; 110: 38.
8. True LD. Surgical pathology examination of the prostate gland: practice survey of clinical pathologists. Am J Clin Pathol 1994; 102: 572.
9. Hall GS, Kramer CE, Epstein JI. Evaluation of radical prostatectomy specimens: a comparative analysis of sampling methods. Am J Surg Pathol 1992; 16: 315.
10. Cohen MB, Soloway MS, Murphy WM. Sampling of radical prostatectomy specimens: how much is adequate? Am J Clin Pathol 1994; 101: 250.
11. Epstein JI. Evaluation of radical prostatectomy capsular margins of resection: The significance of capsular margins designated as negative, closely approaching and positive. Am J Surg Pathol 1990; 12: 626.
12. Donohue RE, Miller GJ. Adenocarcinoma of the prostate: biopsy to whole mount, Denver VA experience. Urol Clin North Am 1991; 18: 449.
13. Hollenbeck BK et al. Whole mounted radical prostatectomy specimens do not increase detection of adverse pathological features. J Urol 2000; 164: 1583.
14. Grossfeld GD et al. Does the completeness of prostate sampling predict outcome for patients undergoing radical prostatectomy? Data from the CaPSURE database. Urology 2000; 56: 430.
15. Humphrey PA. Tissue sampling in the era of cost restraints. Am J Clin Pathol 1994; 101: 247.
16. Byar DP, Mostofi FK. Carcinoma of the prostate: prognostic evaluation of certain pathological features in 208 radical prostatectomies examined by step-section technique. Cancer 1972; 30: 5.
17. Epstein JI. The evaluation of radical prostatectomy specimens: therapeutic and prognostic implications. Pathol Annu 1991; 26: 159.
18. Sakr WA et al. Evaluation of radical prostatectomy specimens: a practical approach for establishing tumor pathological stage. Mod Pathol 1993; 6: 68A.
19. Schmid HP, McNeal JE. An abbreviated standard procedure for accurate tumor volume estimation in prostate cancer. Am J Surg Pathol 1992; 16: 184.
20. Moul JW et al. Racial differences in tumor volume and prostate specific antigen among radical prostatectomy patients. J Urol. 1999; 162: 394.
21. Mettlin CJ et al. The National Cancer Database report on increased use of brachytherapy for the treatment of patients with prostate carcinoma in the US. Cancer 1999; 86: 1877.
22. Blute ML et al. Pathologic classification of prostate carcinoma: The impact of margin status. Cancer 1997; 82: 902.