Differences in histopathological and biochemical outcomes in patients with low Gleason score prostate cancer

BJU International

Volumn 105, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 818-823

  Isbarn, Hendrik ^a,b   Karakiewicz, Pierre I ^b   Ahyai, Sascha A ^a   Chun, Felix K H ^a   Jeldres, Claudio ^b   Haese, Alexander ^a   Heinzer, Hans ^a   Zacharias, Mario ^a   Heuer, Roman ^a   Eichelberg, Christian ^b   Steuber, Thomas ^a   Budäus, Lars ^a   Köllermann, Jens ^a   Salomon, Georg ^a   Schlomm, Thorsten ^a   Perrotte, Paul ^c   Fisch, Margit ^a   Huland, Hartwig ^a   Graefen, Markus ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER HAMBURG EPPENDORF   (Germany)

^b CENTRE HOSPITALIER DE L UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

Biochemical recurrence; Gleason score; Indolent; Prostate cancer; Radical prostatectomy

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CANCER RECURRENCE; CANCER RISK; CANCER SURVIVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; GLEASON SCORE; HIGH RISK POPULATION; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATHOGENESIS; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; SURVIVAL RATE;

ADULT; AGED; BIOPSY, NEEDLE; EPIDEMIOLOGIC METHODS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM RECURRENCE, LOCAL; NEOPLASM STAGING; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATE; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS;

EID: 77649241814     PISSN: 14644096     EISSN: 1464410X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08841.x     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Brawley OW. Prostate carcinoma incidence and patient mortality: the effects of screening and early detection. Cancer 1997 80 : 1857 1863
2. Albertsen PC, Hanley JA, Gleason DF et al. Competing risk analysis of men aged 55-74 years at diagnosis managed conservatively for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 1998 280 : 975 980
3. D'Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB et al. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 1998 280 : 969 974 (Pubitemid 28445094)
4. Nam RK, Toi A, Klotz LH et al. Assessing individual risk for prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2007 25 : 3582 3588
5. Epstein JI, Chan DW, Sokoll LJ et al. Nonpalpable stage T1c prostate cancer: prediction of insignificant disease using free/total prostate specific antigen levels and needle biopsy findings. J Urol 1998 160 : 2407 2411
6. Briganti A, Chun FK, Hutterer GC et al. Systematic assessment of the ability of the number and percentage of positive biopsy cores to predict pathologic stage and biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2007 52 : 733 743
7. Briganti A, Chun FK, Salonia A et al. Validation of a nomogram predicting the probability of lymph node invasion based on the extent of pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. BJU Int 2006 98 : 788 793 (Pubitemid 44368026)
8. Haese A, Epstein JI, Huland H et al. Validation of a biopsy-based pathologic algorithm for predicting lymph node metastases in patients with clinically localized prostate carcinoma. Cancer 2002 95 : 1016 1021
9. Conrad S, Graefen M, Pichlmeier U et al. Systematic sextant biopsies improve preoperative prediction of pelvic lymph node metastases in patients with clinically localized prostatic carcinoma. J Urol 1998 159 : 2023 2029
10. McNeal JE, Redwine EA, Freiha FS et al. Zonal distribution of prostatic adenocarcinoma. Correlation with histologic pattern and direction of spread. Am J Surg Pathol 1988 12 : 897 906
11. Gleason DF, Mellinger GT. Prediction of prognosis for prostatic adenocarcinoma by combined histological grading and clinical staging. J Urol 1974 111 : 58 64
12. Heidenreich A, Aus G, Bolla M et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2008 53 : 68 80
13. Steyerberg EW, Roobol MJ, Kattan MW et al. Prediction of indolent prostate cancer: validation and updating of a prognostic nomogram. J Urol 2007 177 : 107 112
14. Stephenson AJ, Scardino PT, Eastham JA et al. Preoperative nomogram predicting the 10-year probability of prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006 98 : 715 717
15. Borirakchanyavat S, Bhargava V, Shinohara K et al. Systematic sextant biopsies in the prediction of extracapsular extension at radical prostatectomy. Urology 1997 50 : 373 378
16. Grossfeld GD, Latini DM, Lubeck DP et al. Predicting disease recurrence in intermediate and high-risk patients undergoing radical prostatectomy using percent positive biopsies: results from CaPSURE. Urology 2002 59 : 560 565
17. Chun FK, Haese A, Ahyai SA et al. Critical assessment of tools to predict clinically insignificant prostate cancer at radical prostatectomy in contemporary men. Cancer 2008 113 : 701 709
18. Kattan MW, Eastham JA, Wheeler TM et al. Counseling men with prostate cancer: a nomogram for predicting the presence of small, moderately differentiated, confined tumors. J Urol 2003 170 : 1792 1797
19. van den Bergh RC, Roemeling S, Roobol MJ et al. Gleason score 7 screen-detected prostate cancers initially managed expectantly: outcomes in 50 men. BJU Int 2009 103 : 1472 1477
20. Capitanio U, Karakiewicz PI, Valiquette L et al. Biopsy core number represents one of foremost predictors of clinically significant Gleason sum upgrading in patients with low-risk prostate cancer. Urology 2009 73 : 1087 1091
21. Thompson IM, Goodman PJ, Tangen CM et al. The influence of finasteride on the development of prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2003 349 : 215 224
22. Freedland SJ, Aronson WJ, Csathy GS et al. Comparison of percentage of total prostate needle biopsy tissue with cancer to percentage of cores with cancer for predicting PSA recurrence after radical prostatectomy: results from the SEARCH database. Urology 2003 61 : 742 747