Is a single focus of low-grade prostate cancer diagnosed on saturation biopsy predictive of clinically insignificant cancer?

Urologia Internationalis

Volumn 84, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 440-444

  Pepe, P ^a   Fraggetta, F ^a   Galia, A ^a   Candiano, G ^a   Grasso, G ^a   Aragona, F ^a  

^a CANNIZZARO HOSPITAL   (Italy)

Author keywords

Indolent prostate cancer; Microfocal prostate cancer; Saturation prostate biopsy; Significant prostate cancer

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER GRADING; CANCER INVASION; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DISEASE ACTIVITY; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROTEIN BLOOD LEVEL; RADICAL RETROPUBIC PROSTATECTOMY; SATURATION PROSTATE BIOPSY; BLOOD; CANCER STAGING; DIGITAL RECTAL EXAMINATION; INCIDENCE; ITALY; LYMPH NODE; LYMPH NODE DISSECTION; MIDDLE AGED; NEEDLE BIOPSY; PATHOLOGY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PROSTATE; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RISK ASSESSMENT; TUMOR INVASION;

AGED; BIOPSY, NEEDLE; DIGITAL RECTAL EXAMINATION; HUMANS; INCIDENCE; ITALY; LYMPH NODE EXCISION; LYMPH NODES; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; NEOPLASM STAGING; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROSTATE; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 77953228170     PISSN: 00421138     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1159/000296293     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Epstein J, Walsh P, Carmichael M: Pathological and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of non palpable (stage T1c) prostate cancer. JAMA 1994; 271: 368-374.
2. Epstein JI, Sanderson H, Carter HB, Scharfstein DO: The utility of saturation biopsy to predict insignificant cancer at radical prostatectomy. Urology 2005; 66: 356-360.
3. Boccon-Gibod LM, Barry de Longchamps N, Toublanc M, et al: Prostate saturation biopsy in the reevaluation of microfocal prostate cancer. J Urol 2006; 176: 961-964.
4. Aragona F, Pepe P, Motta M, et al: Incidence of prostate cancer in Sicily: results of a multicenter case-findings protocol. Eur Urol 2005; 47: 569-574.
5. Bostwick DG, Grignon DJ, Hammond ME, et al: Prognostic factors in prostate cancer. College of American Pathologists Consensus Statement 1999. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2000; 124: 995-1000.
6. Postma R, de Vries SH, Roobol MJ, et al: Incidence and follow up of patients with focal prostate carcinoma in 2 screening rounds after an interval of 4 years. Cancer 2005; 103: 708-716.
7. Haider MA, van der Kwast TH, Tanguay J, et al: Combined T2-weighted and diffusionweighted MRI for localization of prostate cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007; 189: 323-328.
8. Greene D, Rogerts E, Wessels E, et al: Some small prostate cancers are nondiploid by nuclear image analysis: correlation of deoxyribonucleic acid ploidy status and pathological features. J Urol 1994; 151: 1301-1303.
9. Clark J, Attard G, Jhavar S, et al: Complex patterns of ETS gene alteration arise during cancer development in the human prostate. Oncogene 2008; 27: 1993-2003.
10. Steyerberg E, Roobol M, Kattan T, et al: Prediction of indolent prostate cancer: validation and updating of a prognostic nomogram. J Urol 2007; 177: 107-112. (Pubitemid 44879468)
11. Bruce RG, Rankin WR, Cibull ML, et al: Single focus of adenocarcinoma in the prostate biopsy specimen is not predictive of the pathologic stage of disease. Urology 1996; 48: 75-79.
12. D'Amico AV, Wu Y, Chen MH, et al: Pathologic findings and prostate specific antigen outcome after radical prostatectomy for patients diagnosed on the basis of a single microscopic focus of prostate carcinoma with a Gleason score = 7. Cancer 2000; 89: 1810-1817.
13. Lee AK, Doytchinova T, Chen M, et al: Can the core length involved with prostate cancer identify clinically insignificant disease in low risk patients diagnosed on the basis of a single positive core? Urol Oncol 2003; 21: 123-127.
14. Allan RW, Sanderson H, Hepstein 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.
15. Anast J, Andriole G, Bismar T, et al: Relating biopsy and clinical variables to radical prostatectomy findings: can insignificant and advanced prostate cancer be predicted in a screening population? Urology 2004; 64: 544-550.
16. Cheng L, Poulos C, Pan C, et al: Preoperative prediction of small volume cancer (less than 0.5 ml) in radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol 2005; 174: 898-902.
17. Guzzo TJ, Vira M, Hwang WT, et al: Impact of multiple biopsy cores on predicting final tumor in prostate cancer detected by a single microscopic focus of cancer on biopsy. Urology 2005; 66: 361-365.
18. Boccon-Gibod LM, Dumenceau O, Toublanc M, et al: Micro-focal prostate cancer: a comparison of biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimen features. Eur Urol 2005; 48: 895-899.
19. Thong AL, Shikanov S, Katz MH, et al: A single microfocus (5% or less) of Gleason 6 prostate cancer at biopsy - can we predict adverse pathological outcomes? J Urol 2008; 180: 2436-2440.
20. Augustin H, Hammerer P, Graefen M, et al: Insignificant prostate cancer in radical prostatectomy specimen: time trends and preoperative prediction. Eur Urol 2003; 43: 455-460.
21. Jeldres C, Suardi N, Walz J: Validation of the contemporary Epstein criteria for insignificant prostate cancer in European men. Eur Urol 2008; 54: 1306-1313.
22. Taverna G, Colombo P, Seveso M, et al: Single small focus of prostate adenocarcinoma ( ^ 1 mm and too small for grading) and clinical significant disease after radical prostatectomy. Arch Ital Urol Androl 2006; 78: 57-60.
23. Harnden P, Naylor B, Shelly MD, et al: The clinical management of patients with a small volume of prostatic cancer on biopsy: what are the risks of progression? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer 2008; 112: 971-981. (Pubitemid 351304580)
24. Van der Kwast TH, Wolters T, Evans A, et al: Single prostatic cancer foci on prostate biopsy. Eur Urol 2008; 7: 549-556.
25. Abouassaly B, Lane BR, Jones JS: Staging saturation biopsy in patients with prostate cancer on active surveillance protocol. Urology 2008; 71: 573-577.
26. Al Otaibi M, Ross P, Fahmy N, et al: Role of repeated biopsy of the prostate in predicting disease progression in patients with prostate cancer on active surveillance. Cancer 2008; 15: 286-292.
27. Pepe P, Aragona F: Saturation prostate needle biopsy and prostate cancer detection at initial and repeat evaluation. Urology 2007; 70: 1131-1135.
28. Delongchamps NB, de la Roza G, Jones R, et al: Saturation biopsies on autopsied prostates for detecting and characterizing prostate cancer. BJU Int 2009; 103: 49-54.
29. Pepe P, Panella P, D'Arrigo L, et al: Should men with serum prostate-specific antigen ! 4 ng/ml and normal digital rectal examination undergo a prostate biopsy? Oncology 2006; 70: 81-89.
30. Suardi N, Capitanio U, Chun FK, et al: Currently used criteria for active surveillance in men with low-risk prostate cancer: an analysis of pathologic features. Cancer 2008; 113: 2068-2072.