A streamlined three-dimensional volume estimation method accurately classifies prostate tumors by volume

American Journal of Surgical Pathology

Volumn 27, Issue 10, 2003, Pages 1291-1301

  Chen, Michael E ^a   Johnston, Dennis ^b   Reyes, Adriana O ^b   Soto, Cindy P ^b   Babaian, R Joseph ^b   Troncoso, Patricia ^b  

^a KAISER PERMANENTE MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Computerized planimetry; Prostate carcinoma; Radical prostatectomy; Tumor volume

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ANALYTIC METHOD; ARTICLE; COMPUTER ANALYSIS; COMPUTERIZED PLANIMETRY; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; HUMAN TISSUE; IMAGE ANALYSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PATHOLOGICAL ANATOMY; PREDICTION; PROSTATE TUMOR; PROSTATECTOMY; RANDOMIZATION; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; THICKNESS; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TUMOR CLASSIFICATION; TUMOR VOLUME; VALIDATION PROCESS;

BODY WEIGHTS AND MEASURES; HUMANS; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; MALE; PATIENT SELECTION; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROSTATE; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RANDOM ALLOCATION; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 0141571308     PISSN: 01475185     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00000478-200310000-00001     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Babaian RJ, Troncoso P, Steelhammer LC, et al. Tumor volume and prostate specific antigen: implications for early detection and defining a window of curability. J Urol. 1995;154:1808-1812.
2. Carvalhal GF, Humphrey PA, Thorson P, et al. Visual estimate of the percentage of carcinoma is an independent predictor of prostate carcinoma reoccurrence after radical prostatectomy. Cancer. 2000;89:1308-1314.
3. Chen ME, Johnston DA, Tang K, et al. Detailed mapping of prostate carcinoma foci: biopsy strategy implications. Cancer 2000;89:1800-1809.
4. Cohen MB, Soloway MS, Murphy WM. Sampling of radical prostatectomy specimens: how much is adequate? Am J Clin Pathol. 1994;101:250-252.
5. Epstein JI, Carmichael M, Partin AW, et al. Is tumor volume an independent predictor of progression following radical prostatectomy? A multivariate analysis of 185 clinical stage B adenocarcinomas of the prostate with 5 years of followup. J Urol. 1993;149:1478-1481.
6. Graefen M, Hammerer P, Haese A, et al. Volume of high grade cancer is the strongest predictor for progression after radical prostatectomy (RP) in organ confined (pT2) prostate cancer (Pca). J Urol. 2000;163(suppl):288.
7. Hall GS, Kramer CE, Epstein JI. Evaluation of radical prostatectomy specimens: a comparative analysis of sampling methods. Am J Surg Pathol. 1992;16:315-324.
8. Humphrey PA, Vollmer RT. Intraglandular tumor extent and prognosis in prostatic carcinoma: application of a grid method to prostatectomy specimens. Hum Pathol. 1990;21:799-804.
9. Humphrey PA, Vollmer RT. Percentage carcinoma as a measure of prostatic tumor size in radical prostatectomy tissues. Mod Pathol. 1997;10:326-333.
10. Lau WK, Blute ML, Bostwick DG, et al. Prognostic factors for survival of patients with pathological Gleason score 7 prostate cancer: differences in outcome between primary Gleason grades 3 and 4. J Urol. 2001;166:1692-1697.
11. Lerner SE, Seay TM, Blute ML, et al. Prostate specific antigen detected prostate caneer (clinical stage T1c): an interim analysis. J Urol. 1996;155:821-826.
12. M.D. Anderson Cancer Center Bioengineering win95 Archive. [M. D. Anderson Department of Biomathematics website] Available at: htt://www.odin.mdacc.tmc.edu/bioeng/windows95.html.2001. Accessed Dee. 28, 2000.
13. Noguchi M, Stamey TA, McNeal JE, et al. Assessment of morphometric measurements of prostate carcinoma volume. Cancer. 2000;89:1056-1064.
14. Ohori M, Abbas F, Wheeler TM, et al. Pathological features and prognostic significance of prostate cancer in the apical section determined by whole mount histology. J Urol. 1999;161:500-504.
15. Rashid M, Wojno KJ, Mareovieh R, et al. Maximum tumor dimension provides a clinically useful and independently significant measure for predicting PSA-free survival following radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 1999;161(suppl):241.
16. Renshaw AA, Chang H, D'Amico AV. Estimation of tumor volume in radical prostatectomy specimens in routine clinical practice. Am J Clin Pathol. 1997;107:704-708.
17. Renshaw AA, Richie JP, Loughlin KR, et al. The greatest dimension of prostate carcinoma is a simple, inexpensive predictor of prostate specific antigen failure in radical prostatectomy specimens. Cancer. 1998;83:748-752.
18. Renshaw AA, Richie JP, Loughlin KR, et al. Maximum diameter of prostatic carcinoma is a simple, inexpensive, and independent predictor of prostate-specific antigen failure in radical prostatectomy specimens: validation in a cohort of 434 patients. Am J Clin Pathol. 1999;111:641-644.
19. Schmid HP, McNeal JE. An abbreviated standard procedure for accurate tumor volume estimation in prostate cancer. Am J Surg Pathol. 1992;16:184-191.
20. Schned AR, Wheeler KJ, Hodorowski CA, et al. Tissue-shrinkage correction factor in the calculation of prostate cancer volume. A J Pathol. 1996;20:1501-1506.
21. Stamey TA, Freiha FS, McNeal JE, et al. Localized prostate cancer: relationship of tumor volume to clinical significance for treatment of prostate cancer. Cancer. 1993;71:933-938.
22. Stamey TA, McNeal JE, Yemoto CM, et al. Biological determinants of cancer progression in men with prostate cancer. JAMA. 1999;281:1395-1400.
23. Troncoso P, Babaian RJ, Ro JY, et al. Prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and invasive prostatic adenocarcinoma in cystoprostatectomy specimens. Urology. 1989;34:52-56.