Pathological Upgrading and Up Staging With Immediate Repeat Biopsy in Patients Eligible for Active Surveillance

Journal of Urology

Volumn 180, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 1964-1968

  Berglund, Ryan K ^a   Masterson, Timothy A ^a   Vora, Kinjal C ^a   Eggener, Scott E ^a   Eastham, James A ^a   Guillonneau, Bertrand D ^a  

^a MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

biopsy; neoplasm staging; prostate; prostatic neoplasms

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY; CANCER RISK; CANCER STAGING; CONTROLLED STUDY; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL RECORD REVIEW; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BIOPSY, NEEDLE; BRACHYTHERAPY; COHORT STUDIES; DIGITAL RECTAL EXAMINATION; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MONITORING, PHYSIOLOGIC; NEOPLASM STAGING; OBSERVATION; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK ASSESSMENT; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 53249155905     PISSN: 00225347     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.07.051     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Jemal A., Siegel R., Ward E., Murray T., Xu J., and Thun M.J. Cancer statistics, 2007. CA Cancer J Clin 57 (2007) 43
2. Litwin M.S., Hays R.D., Fink A., Ganz P.A., Leake B., Leach G.E., et al. Quality-of-life outcomes in men treated for localized prostate cancer. JAMA 273 (1995) 129
3. Hu J.C., Elkin E.P., Pasta D.J., Lubeck D.P., Kattan M.W., Carroll P.R., et al. Predicting quality of life after radical prostatectomy: results from CaPSURE. J Urol 171 (2004) 703
4. Klotz L. Active surveillance for favorable risk prostate cancer: Rationale, risks, and results. Urol Oncol 25 (2007) 505
5. Carter H.B., Walsh P.C., Landis P., and Epstein J.I. Expectant management of nonpalpable prostate cancer with curative intent: preliminary results. J Urol 167 (2002) 1231
6. Patel M.I., DeConcini D.T., Lopez-Corona E., Ohori M., Wheeler T., and Scardino P.T. An analysis of men with clinically localized prostate cancer who deferred definitive therapy. J Urol 171 (2004) 1520
7. Bill-Axelson A., Holmberg L., Ruutu M., Haggman M., Andersson S.O., Bratell S., et al. Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 352 (2005) 1977
8. Adolfsson J., Ronstrom L., Lowhagen T., Carstensen J., and Hedlund P.O. Deferred treatment of clinically localized low grade prostate cancer: the experience from a prospective series at the Karolinska Hospital. J Urol 152 (1994) 1757
9. Chodak G.W., Thisted R.A., Gerber G.S., Johansson J.E., Adolfsson J., Jones G.W., et al. Results of conservative management of clinically localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 330 (1994) 242
10. Albertsen P.C., Hanley J.A., and Fine J. 20-Year outcomes following conservative management of clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 293 (2005) 2095
11. Johansson J.E., Holmberg L., Johansson S., Bergstrom R., and Adami H.O. Fifteen-year survival in prostate cancer. A prospective, population-based study in Sweden. JAMA 277 (1997) 467
12. Epstein J.I., Walsh P.C., Carmichael M., and Brendler C.B. Pathologic and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostate cancer. JAMA 271 (1994) 368
13. Kattan M.W., Eastham J.A., Wheeler T.M., Maru N., Scardino P.T., Erbersdobler A., et al. Counseling men with prostate cancer: a nomogram for predicting the presence of small, moderately differentiated, confined tumors. J Urol 170 (2003) 1792
14. Roemeling S., Roobol M.J., Kattan M.W., van derKwast T.H., Steyerberg E.W., and Schroder F.H. Nomogram use for the prediction of indolent prostate cancer: impact on screen-detected populations. Cancer 110 (2007) 2218
15. Sebo T.J., Bock B.J., Cheville J.C., Lohse C., Wollan P., and Zincke H. 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
16. Gao X., Mohideen N., Flanigan R.C., Waters W.B., Wojcik E.M., and Leman C.R. The extent of biopsy involvement as an independent predictor of extraprostatic extension and surgical margin status in low risk prostate cancer: implications for treatment selection. J Urol 164 (2000) 1982
17. Grossfeld G.D., Latini D.M., Lubeck D.P., Broering J.M., Li Y.P., Mehta S.S., et al. Predicting disease recurrence in intermediate and high-risk patients undergoing radical prostatectomy using percent positive biopsies: results from CaPSURE. Urology 59 (2002) 560
18. Epstein J.I., Walsh P.C., and Carter H.B. Dedifferentiation of prostate cancer grade with time in men followed expectantly for stage T1c disease. J Urol 166 (2001) 1688
19. Choo R., Danjoux C., Morton G., Szumacher E., Sugar L., Gardner S., et al. How much does Gleason grade of follow-up biopsy differ from that of initial biopsy in untreated, Gleason score 4-7, clinically localized prostate cancer?. Prostate 67 (2007) 1614
20. Soloway M.S., Soloway C.T., Williams S., Ayyathurai R., Kava B., and Manoharan M. Active surveillance; a reasonable management alternative for patients with prostate cancer: the Miami experience. BJU Int 101 (2008) 165