8q gain is an independent predictor of poor survival in diagnostic needle biopsies from prostate cancer suspects

Clinical Cancer Research

Volumn 12, Issue 13, 2006, Pages 3961-3970

  Ribeiro, Franclim R ^a,d   Jerónimo, Carmen ^a,b   Henrique, Rui ^a   Fonseca, Daniel ^a   Oliveira, Jorge ^a   Lothe, Ragnhild A ^d,e   Teixeira, Manuel R ^a,c  

^a PORTUGUESE ONCOLOGY INSTITUTE   (Portugal)

^b UNIVERSIDADE FERNANDO PESSOA   (Portugal)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PORTO   (Portugal)

^d OSLO UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Norway)

^e UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PARAFFIN;

ADULT; AGED; ANDROGEN DEPRIVATION THERAPY; ARTICLE; CANCER GRADING; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER SURVIVAL; CELL HETEROGENEITY; CHROMOSOME 8Q; COMPARATIVE GENOMIC HYBRIDIZATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; FLUORESCENCE IN SITU HYBRIDIZATION; FOLLOW UP; GENE AMPLIFICATION; GENE LOSS; GENE NUMBER; GENETIC MARKER; GLEASON SCORE; HISTOLOGY; HORMONAL THERAPY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NEEDLE BIOPSY; PREDICTOR VARIABLE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BIOPSY, NEEDLE; CHROMOSOMES, HUMAN, PAIR 8; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; IN SITU HYBRIDIZATION, FLUORESCENCE; KAPLAN-MEIERS ESTIMATE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM STAGING; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; SURVIVAL RATE;

EID: 33746055324     PISSN: 10780432     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-1977     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Terris MK, McNeal JE, Stamey TA. Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer by transrectal ultrasound-guided systematic biopsies. J Urol 1992;148:829-32.
2. Stamey TA. Making the most out of six systematic sextant biopsies. Urology 1995;45:2-12.
3. King CR, Long JP. Prostate biopsy grading errors: a sampling problem? Int J Cancer 2000;90:326-30.
4. Mills SE, Fowler JE, Jr. Gleason histologic grading of prostatic carcinoma. Correlations between biopsy and prostatectomy specimens. Cancer 1986;57:346-9.
5. Bostwick DG. Gleason grading of prostatic needle biopsies. Correlation with grade in 316 matched prostatectomies. Am J Surg Pathol 1994;18:796-803.
6. Peller PA, Young DC, Marmaduke DP, Marsh WL, Badalament RA. Sextant prostate biopsies. A histopathologic correlation with radical prostatectomy specimens. Cancer 1995;75:530-8.
7. Steinberg DM, Sauvageot J, Piantadosi S, Epstein JI. Correlation of prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy Gleason grade in academic and community settings. Am J Surg Pathol 1997;21:566-76.
8. King CR. Patterns of prostate cancer biopsy grading: trends and clinical implications. Int J Cancer 2000;90:305-11.
9. Koksal IT, Ozcan F, Kadioglu TC, Esen T, Kilicaslan I, Tunc M. Discrepancy between Gleason scores of biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens. Eur Urol 2000;37:670-4.
10. Noguchi M, Stamey TA, McNeal JE, Yemoto CM. Relationship between systematic biopsies and histological features of 222 radical prostatectomy specimens: lack of prediction of tumor significance for men with nonpalpable prostate cancer. J Urol 2001;166:104-9.
11. Smith EB, Frierson HF, Jr., Mills SE, Boyd JC, Theodorescu D. Gleason scores of prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens over the past 10 years: is there evidence for systematic upgrading? Cancer 2002;94:2282-7.
12. Sved PD, Gomez P, Manoharan M, Kim SS, Soloway MS. Limitations of biopsy Gleason grade: implications for counseling patients with biopsy Gleason score 6 prostate cancer. J Urol 2004;172:98-102.
13. Fu W, Bubendorf L, Willi N, et al. Genetic changes in clinically organ-confined prostate cancer by comparative genomic hybridization. Urology 2000;56:880-5.
14. Alers JC, Krijtenburg PJ, Vis AN, et al. Molecular cytogenetic analysis of prostatic adenocarcinomas from screening studies: early cancers may contain aggressive genetic features. Am J Pathol 2001;158:399-406.
15. o prostate cancer studied by comparative genomic hybridization. BJU Int 2002;89:310-6.
16. Chu LW, Troncoso P, Johnston DA, Liang JC. Genetic markers useful for distinguishing between organ-confined and locally advanced prostate cancer. Genes Chromosomes Cancer 2003;36:303-12.
17. Visakorpi T, Kallioniemi AH, Syvänen AC, et al. Genetic changes in primary and recurrent prostate cancer by comparative genomic hybridization. Cancer Res 1995;55:342-7.
18. Cher ML, Bova GS, Moore DH, et al. Genetic alterations in untreated metastases and androgen-independent prostate cancer detected by comparative genomic hybridization and allelotyping. Cancer Res 1996;56:3091-102.
19. Nupponen NN, Kakkola L, Koivisto P, Visakorpi T. Genetic alterations in hormone-refractory recurrent prostate carcinomas. Am J Pathol 1998:153:141-8.
20. Alers JC, Rochat J, Krijtenburg PJ, et al. Identification of genetic markers for prostatic cancer progression. Lab Invest 2000;80:931-42.
21. Ross JS, Sheehan CE, Ambros RA, et al. Needle biopsy DNA ploidy status predicts grade shifting in prostate cancer. Am J Surg Pathol 1999;23:296-301.
22. Sebo TJ, Cheville JC, Riehle DL, 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 2001;91:2196-204.
23. Takahashi S, Qian J, Brown JA, et al. Potential markers of prostate cancer aggressiveness detected by fluorescence in situ hybridization in needle biopsies. Cancer Res 1994;54:3574-9.
24. Henke RP, Krüger E, Ayhan N, Hübner D, Hammerer P. Frequency and distribution of numerical chromosomal aberrations in prostatic cancer. Hum Pathol 1994;25:476-84.
25. Henke RP, Hammerer P, Graefen M, et al. Interphase cytogenetic study of preoperative core biopsies for the prediction of early serum prostate specific antigen recurrence after radical prostatectomy of clinically localized prostate carcinoma. Cancer 1998;83:977-88.
26. Al Maghrabi J, Vorobyova L, Toi A, Chapman W, Zielenska M, Squire JA. Identification of numerical chromosomal changes detected by interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization in high-grade prostate intraepithelial neoplasia as a predictor of carcinoma. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2002;126:165-9.
27. Matsuyama H, Pan Y, Skoog L, et al. Deletion mapping of chromosome 8p in prostate cancer by fluorescence in situ hybridization. Oncogene 1994;9:3071 -6.
28. Bastacky S, Cieply K, Sherer C, Dhir R, Epstein JI. Use of interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization in prostate needle biopsy specimens with isolated high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia as a predictor of prostate adenocarcinoma on follow-up biopsy. Hum Pathol 2004;35:281-9.
29. Jeronimo C, Usadel H, Henrique R, et al. Quantitation of GSTP1 methylation in non-neoplastic prostatic tissue and organ-confined prostate adenocarcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001;93:1747-52.
30. Harden SV, Sanderson H, Goodman SN, et al. Quantitative GSTP1 methylation and the detection of prostate adenocarcinoma in sextant biopsies. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95:1634-7.
31. kip1 expression correlates with tumor grade in prostate cancer. Analysis in radical prostatectomy specimens and needle biopsies. Virchows Arch 2004;444:509-17.
32. Zhou M, Tokumaru Y, Sidransky D, Epstein JI. Quantitative GSTP1 methylation levels correlate with Gleason grade and tumor volume in prostate needle biopsies. J Urol 2004;171:2195-8.
33. Teixeira MR, Ribeiro FR, Eknaes M, et al. Genomic analysis of prostate carcinoma specimens obtained via ultrasound-guided needle biopsy may be of use in preoperative decision-making. Cancer 2004;101:1786-93.
34. Gleason DF, Mellinger GT. Prediction of prognosis for prostatic adenocarcinoma by combined histological grading and clinical staging. J Urol 1974;111:58-64.
35. Kallioniemi OP, Kallioniemi A, Piper J, et al. Optimizing comparative genomic hybridization for analysis of DNA sequence copy number changes in solid tumors. Genes Chromosomes Cancer 1994;10:231-43.
36. Ribeiro FR, Diep CB, Jeronimo C, et al. Statistical dissection of genetic pathways involved in prostate carcinogenesis. Genes Chromosomes Cancer 2006;45:154-63.
37. Kirchhoff M, Gerdes T, Rose H, Maahr J, Ottesen AM, Lundsteen C. Detection of chromosomal gains and losses in comparative genomic hybridization analysis based on standard reference intervals. Cytometry 1998;31:163-73.
38. ISCN 1995. An international system for human cytogenetic nomenclature. Basel: S. Karger: 1995.
39. Dysvik B, Jonassen I. J-Express: exploring gene expression data using Java. Bioinformatics 2001;17:369-70.
40. Steineck G, Helgesen F, Adolfsson J, et al. Quality of life after radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting. N Engl J Med 2002;347:790-6.
41. Sato K, Qian J, Slezak JM, et al. Clinical significance of alterations of chromosome 8 in high-grade, advanced, nonmetastatic prostate carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999;91:1574-80.
42. Steiner T, Junker K, Burkhardt F, Braunsdorf A, Janitzky V, Schubert J. Gain in chromosome 8q correlates with early progression in hormonal treated prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2002;41:167-71.
43. Van Dekken H, Alers JC, Damen IA, et al. Genetic evaluation of localized prostate cancer in a cohort of forty patients: gain of distal 8q discriminates between progressors and nonprogressors. Lab Invest 2003;83:789-96.
44. Humphrey PA. Gleason grading and prognostic factors in carcinoma of the prostate. Mod Pathol 2004;16:292-306.
45. DeMarzo AM, Nelson WG, Isaacs WB, Epstein JI. Pathological and molecular aspects of prostate cancer. Lancet 2003;361:955-64.