Impact of pathology review of stage and margin status of radical prostatectomy specimens (EORTC trial 22911)

Virchows Archiv

Volumn 449, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 428-434

  Van Der Kwast, Theodorus H ^a,k   Collette, Laurence ^b   Van Poppel, Hein ^c   Van Cangh, Paul ^d   Vekemans, Kris ^e   DaPozzo, Luigi ^f   Bosset, Jean François ^g   Kurth, Karl H ^h   Schröder, Fritz H ⁱ   Bolla, Michel ^j  

^a MOUNT SINAI HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^b Cancer Data Centre   (Belgium)

^c UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^d CLINIQUES UNIVERSITAIRES SAINT LUC   (Belgium)

^e VIRGA JESSE HOSPITAL   (Belgium)

^f SAN RAFFAELE HOSPITAL   (Italy)

^g UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL JEAN MINJOZ   (France)

^h ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

ⁱ ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^j GRENOBLE UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (France)

^k UNIVERSITY HEALTH NETWORK   (Canada)

more..

Author keywords

Interobserver variation; Margin status; Prostatectomy; Quality assurance; Stage

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; BIOCHEMISTRY; CANCER GRADING; CANCER GROWTH; CANCER INVASION; CANCER RECURRENCE; CANCER STAGING; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTICENTER STUDY; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATHOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; PROGRESSION FREE SURVIVAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; QUALITY CONTROL; REVIEW; SEMINAL VESICLE; SURVIVAL; UNIVARIATE ANALYSIS;

ADENOCARCINOMA; AGED; DISEASE-FREE SURVIVAL; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; NEOPLASM STAGING; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATHOLOGY, SURGICAL; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE;

EID: 33748998493     PISSN: 09456317     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00428-006-0254-x     Document Type: Review

References (17)

1. Ackerman DA, Barry JM, Wicklund RA, Olson N, Lowe BA (1993) Analysis of risk factors associated with prostate cancer extension to surgical margin and pelvic node metastasis at radical prostatectomy. J Urol 150:1845-1850
2. Blute ML, Bostwick DG, Bergstralh EJ, Slezak JM, Martin SK, Amling CL, Zincke H (1997) Anatomic site-specific positive margins in organ-confined prostate cancer and its impact on outcome after radical prostatectomy. Urology 50:733-739
3. Bolla M, van Poppel H, Collette L, van Cangh P, Vekemans K, Da Pozzo L, de Reijke TM, Verbaeys A, Bosset JF, van Velthoven R, Marechal JM, Scalliet P, Haustermans K, Pierart M, European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (2005) Postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy: a randomised controlled trial (EORTC trial 22911). Lancet 366:572-578
4. Cohen J (1960) A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas 20:37-46
5. Cooperberg MR, Lubeck DP, Mehta SS, Carroll PR, CaPSURE (2003) Time trends in clinical risk stratification for prostate cancer: implications for outcomes (data from CaPSURE). J Urol 170:S21-S25
6. Cox DR (1959) The analysis of exponentially distributed lifetimes with two types of failure. J R Stat Soc B 21:411-421
7. Ekici S, Ayhan A, Erkan I, Bakkaloǧlu M, Ozen H (2003) The role of the pathologist in the evaluation of radical prostatectomy specimens. Scand J Urol Nephrol 37:387-391
8. Epstein JI, Sauvageot J (1997) Do close but negative margins in radical prostatectomy specimens increase the risk of postoperative progression? J Urol 157:241-243
9. Epstein JI, Amin M, Boccon-Gibod L, Egevad L, Humphrey PA, Mikuz G, Newling D, Nilsson S, Sakr W, Srigley JR, Wheeler TM, Montironi R (2005) Prognostic factors and reporting of prostate carcinoma in radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy specimens. Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl 216:34-63
10. Gallee MP, Ten Kate FJ, Mulder PG, Blom JH, van der Heul RO (1990) Histological grading of prostatic carcinoma in prostatectomy specimens. Comparison of prognostic accuracy of five grading systems. Br J Urol 65:368-375
11. Glaessgen A, Hamberg H, Pihl CG, Sundelin B, Nilsson B, Egevad L (2002) Interobserver reproducibility of percent Gleason grade 4/5 in total prostatectomy specimens. J Urol 168:2006-2010
12. Kaplan EL, Meier P (1958) Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc 53:457-481
13. Khan MA, Partin AW (2005) Surgical margin status after radical retropubic prostatectomy. BJU Int 95: 281-284
14. Montironi R, van der Kwast T, Boccon-Gibod L, Bono AV, Boccon-Gibod L (2003) Handling and pathology reporting of radical prostatectomy specimens. Eur Urol 44: 626-636
15. Palisaar RJ, Graefen M, Karakiewicz PI, Hammerer PG, Huland E, Haese A, Fernandez S, Erbersdobler A, Henke RP, Huland H (2002) Assessment of clinical and pathologic characteristics predisposing to disease recurrence following radical prostatectomy in men with pathologically organ-confined prostate cancer. Eur Urol 41:155-1561
16. Stamey TA, McNeal JE, Freiha FS, Redwine E (1988) Morphometric and clinical studies on 68 consecutive radical prostatectomies. J Urol 139:1235-1241
17. Van der Kwast TH, Ciatto S, Martikainen PM, Hoedemaeker R, Laurila M, Pihl CG, Hugosson J, Neetens I, Nelen V, Di Lollo S, Roobol MJ, Maatanen L, Santonja C, Moss S, Schroder FH (2006) Detection rates of high-grade prostate cancer during subsequent screening visits. Results of the European randomized screening study for prostate cancer. Int J Cancer 118:2538-2542