False-negative prostate needle biopsies: Frequency, histopathologic features, and follow-up

American Journal of Surgical Pathology

Volumn 34, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 35-43

  Wolters, Tineke ^a   Van Der Kwast, Theodorus H ^b   Vissers, Cornelis J ^a   Bangma, Chris H ^a   Roobol, Monique ^a   Schröder, Fritz H ^a   Van Leenders, Geert J L H ^a  

^a ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY HEALTH NETWORK   (Canada)

Author keywords

False negative diagnosis; Prostate biopsy; Prostate cancer; Screening

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADENOCARCINOMA; AGED; ARTICLE; BLOOD; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; HUMAN; LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEEDLE BIOPSY; PATHOLOGY; PROSTATE TUMOR;

ADENOCARCINOMA; AGED; BIOPSY, NEEDLE; DIAGNOSTIC ERRORS; FALSE NEGATIVE REACTIONS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS;

EID: 73949141958     PISSN: 01475185     EISSN: 15320979     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/PAS.0b013e3181c3ece9     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Allan RW, Sanderson H, Epstein JI. Correlation of minute (0.5 MM or less) focus of prostate adenocarcinoma on needle biopsy with radical prostatectomy specimen: role of prostate specific antigen density. J Urol. 2003;170:370-372.
2. Chan TY, Epstein JI. Patient and urologist driven second opinion of prostate needle biopsies. J urol. 2005;174:1390-1394.
3. DiGiuseppe JA, Sauvageot J, Epstein JI. Increasing incidence of minimal residual cancer in radical prostatectomy specimens. Am J Surg Pathol. 1997;21:174-178.
4. Draisma G, Boer R, Otto SJ, et al. Lead times and overdetection due to prostate-specific antigen screening: estimates from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer. JNCI. 2003;95:868-878.
5. Epstein JI. Diagnosis and reporting of limited adenocarcinoma of the prostate on needle biopsy. Mod Pathol. 2004;17:307-315.
6. Epstein JI, Herawi M. Prostate needle biopsies containing prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia or atypical foci suspicious for carcinoma: implications for patient care. J Urol. 2006;175:820-834.
7. Iczkowski KA, MacLennan GT, Bostwick DG. Atypical small acinar proliferation suspicious for malignancy in prostate needle biopsies: clinical significance in 33 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 1997;21: 1489-1495.
8. Iczkowski KA, Chen HM, Yang XJ, et al. Prostate cancer diagnosed after initial biopsy with atypical small acinar proliferation suspicious for malignancy is similar to cancer found on initial biopsy. Urology. 2002;60:851-854.
9. Kronz JD, Westra WH, Epstein JI. Mandatory second opinion surgical pathology at a large referral hospital. Cancer. 1999;86: 2426-2435.
10. Kronz JD, Milord R, Wilentz R, et al. Lesions missed on prostate biopsies in cases sent in for consultation. Prostate. 2003;54:310-314.
11. Levi AW, Epstein JI. Pseudohyperplastic prostatic adenocarcinoma on needle biopsy and simple prostatectomy. Am J Surg Pathol. 2000; 24:1039-1046.
12. Nelson RS, Epstein JI. Prostatic carcinoma with abundant xanthomatous cytoplasm. Foamy gland carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 1996;20:419-426.
13. Renshaw AA, Santis WF, Richie JP. Clinicopathological lesions of prostatic adenocarcinoma in men with atypical prostate needle biopsies. J Urol. 1998;159:2018-2021.
14. Roobol MJ, Kirkels WJ, Schroder FH. Features and preliminary results of the Dutch centre of the ERSPC (Rotterdam, the Netherlands). BJU Int. 2003;92(suppl 2):48-54.
15. Schroder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, et al. Screening and prostate cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:1320-1328.
16. Thorson P, Vollmer RT, Arcangeli C, et al. Minimal carcinoma in prostate needle biopsy specimens: diagnostic features and radical prostatectomy follow-up. Mod Pathol. 1998;11:543-551.
17. Van der Kwast THH, Lopes C, Martikainen PM, et al. Report of the pathology committee: false-positive and false-negative diagnoses of prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2003;92(suppl 2):62-65.
18. Van der Kwast THH, Lopes C, Santonja C, et al. Guidelines for processing and reporting of prostatic needle biopsies. J Clin Pathol. 2003;56:336-340.
19. Vis AN, Hoedemaeker RF, Roobol M, et al. The predictive value for prostate cancer of lesions that raise suspicion of concomitant carcinoma: an evaluation from a randomized, population-based study of screening for prostate cancer. Cancer. 2001;92:524-534.
20. Wolters T, Roobol MJ, Schroder FH, et al. ERSPC Rotterdam section. Can non-malignant biopsy features identify men at increased risk of biopsy-detectable prostate cancer at re-screening after 4 years? BJU Int. 2008;101:283-288.