Conventional assessment of needle biopsy specimens is more useful than digital image analysis of proliferation and DNA ploidy in prediction of positive surgical margins at radical prostatectomy

Urology

Volumn 68, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 94-98

  Sengupta, Shomik ^a   Cheville, John C ^a   Lohse, Christine M ^a   Zincke, Horst ^a   Myers, Robert P ^a   Riehle, Darren L ^a   Pankratz, V Shane ^a   Blute, Michael L ^a   Sebo, Thomas J ^a  

^a MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

KI 67 ANTIGEN; PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER HORMONE THERAPY; CELL PROLIFERATION; CLINICAL FEATURE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIGITAL IMAGING; DIPLOIDY; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTIVARIATE LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; NEEDLE BIOPSY; PREDICTION; PREOPERATIVE PERIOD; PREOPERATIVE TREATMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATE CANCER; PROTEIN BLOOD LEVEL; RADICAL RETROPUBIC PROSTATECTOMY; RECTUM BIOPSY; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY; TUMOR BIOPSY; UNIVARIATE ANALYSIS;

ADULT; AGED; BIOPSY, NEEDLE; CELL PROLIFERATION; CYTODIAGNOSIS; DNA, NEOPLASM; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; KI-67 ANTIGEN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PLOIDIES; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATE; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS;

EID: 33745862391     PISSN: 00904295     EISSN: 15279995     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2006.01.068     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Zincke H., Oesterling J.E., Blute M.L., et al. Long-term (15 years) results after radical prostatectomy for clinically localized (stage T2c or lower) prostate cancer. J Urol 152 (1994) 1850-1857
2. Epstein J.I. Incidence and significance of positive margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. Urol Clin North Am 23 (1996) 651-663
3. Eastham J.A., Kattan M.W., Riedel E., et al. Variations among individual surgeons in the rate of positive surgical margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol 170 (2003) 2292-2295
4. Grossfeld G.D., Chang J.J., Broering J.M., et al. Impact of positive surgical margins on prostate cancer recurrence and the use of secondary cancer treatment. data from the CaPSURE database. J Urol 163 (2000) 1171-1177
5. Hull G.W., Rabbani F., Abbas F., et al. Cancer control with radical prostatectomy alone in 1,000 consecutive patients. J Urol 167 (2002) 528-534
6. Blute M.L., Bostwick D.G., Bergstralh E.J., et al. Anatomic site-specific positive margins in organ-confined prostate cancer and its impact on outcome after radical prostatectomy. Urology 50 (1997) 733-739
7. Kausik S.J., Blute M.L., Sebo T.J., et al. Prognostic significance of positive surgical margins in patients with extraprostatic carcinoma after radical prostatectomy. Cancer 95 (2002) 1215-1219
8. Ohori M., Wheeler T.M., Kattan M.W., et al. Prognostic significance of positive surgical margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol 154 (1995) 1818-1824
9. D'Amico A.V., Whittington R., Malkowicz S.B., et al. The combination of preoperative prostate specific antigen and postoperative pathological findings to predict prostate specific antigen outcome in clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 160 (1998) 2096-2101
10. Ward J.F., Zincke H., Bergstralh E.J., et al. The impact of surgical approach (nerve bundle preservation versus wide local excision) on surgical margins and biochemical recurrence following radical prostatectomy. J Urol 172 (2004) 1328-1332
11. Tigrani V.S., Bhargava V., Shinohara K., et al. Number of positive systematic sextant biopsies predicts surgical margin status at radical prostatectomy. Urology 54 (1999) 689-693
12. Cheng L., Slezak J., Bergstralh E.J., et al. Preoperative prediction of surgical margin status in patients with prostate cancer treated by radical prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol 18 (2000) 2862-2868
13. Huland H., Hammerer P., Henke R.P., et al. Preoperative prediction of tumor heterogeneity and recurrence after radical prostatectomy for localized prostatic carcinoma with digital rectal, examination prostate specific antigen and the results of 6 systematic biopsies. J Urol 155 (1996) 1344-1347
14. Rabbani F., Bastar A., and Fair W.R. Site specific predictors of positive margins at radical prostatectomy. an argument for risk based modification of technique. J Urol 160 (1998) 1727-1733
15. Ravery V., Chastang C., Toublanc M., et al. Percentage of cancer on biopsy cores accurately predicts extracapsular extension and biochemical relapse after radical prostatectomy for T1-T2 prostate cancer. Eur Urol 37 (2000) 449-455
16. Sebo T.J., Cheville J.C., Riehle D.L., et al. Predicting prostate carcinoma volume and stage at radical prostatectomy by assessing needle biopsy specimens for percent surface area and cores positive for carcinoma, perineural invasion, Gleason score, DNA ploidy and proliferation, and preoperative serum prostate specific antigen. a report of 454 cases. Cancer 91 (2001) 2196-2204
17. DiMarco D.S., Blute M.L., Zincke H., et al. Multivariate models to predict clinically important outcomes at prostatectomy for patients with organ-confined disease and needle biopsy Gleason scores of 6 or less. Urol Oncol 21 (2003) 439-446
18. Sebo T.J., Bock B.J., Cheville J.C., et al. The percent of cores positive for cancer in prostate needle biopsy specimens is strongly predictive of tumor stage and volume at radical prostatectomy. J Urol 163 (2000) 174-178
19. Rachet B., Siemiatycki J., Abrahamowicz M., et al. A flexible modeling approach to estimating the component effects of smoking behavior on lung cancer. J Clin Epidemiol 57 (2004) 1076-1085
20. Ung J.O., Richie J.P., Chen M.H., et al. Evolution of the presentation and pathologic and biochemical outcomes after radical prostatectomy for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer diagnosed during the PSA era. Urology 60 (2002) 458-463
21. Sebo T.J., Cheville J.C., Riehle D.L., et al. Perineural invasion and MIB-1 positivity in addition to Gleason score are significant preoperative predictors of progression after radical retropubic prostatectomy for prostate cancer. Am J Surg Pathol 26 (2002) 431-439
22. Montgomery B.T., Nativ O., Blute M.L., et al. Stage B prostate adenocarcinoma. flow cytometric nuclear DNA ploidy analysis. Arch Surg 125 (1990) 327-331
23. Blute M.L., Bergstralh E.J., Iocca A., et al. Use of Gleason score, prostate specific antigen, seminal vesicle and margin status to predict biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 165 (2001) 119-125