Inaccuracies in assignment of clinical stage for localized prostate cancer

Cancer

Volumn 117, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 283-289

  Reese, Adam C ^a   Sadetsky, Natalia ^a   Carroll, Peter R ^a   Cooperberg, Matthew R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

diagnostic errors; digital rectal examination; neoplasm staging; prostatic neoplasms; ultrasonography

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOCHEMISTRY; CANCER LOCALIZATION; CANCER RECURRENCE; CANCER STAGING; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DIGITAL RECTAL EXAMINATION; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; RELIABILITY; RISK ASSESSMENT; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY;

ADENOCARCINOMA; BIOPSY; DIAGNOSTIC ERRORS; DIGITAL RECTAL EXAMINATION; HUMANS; MALE; NEOPLASM STAGING; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; ULTRASONOGRAPHY;

EID: 78650967810     PISSN: 0008543X     EISSN: 10970142     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.25596     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Fleming ID, Phillips JL, Menck HR, Murphy GP, Winchester DP,. The National Cancer Data Base report on recent hospital cancer program progress toward complete American Joint Committee on Cancer/TNM staging. Cancer. 1997; 80: 2305-2310.
2. American Joint Committee on Cancer. What is Cancer Staging? Available at:. Accessed April 20, 2010.
3. Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL, Trotti A, eds. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. 7th ed. New York: Springer; 2010.
4. Partin AW, Yoo J, Carter HB, et al. The use of prostate specific antigen, clinical stage and Gleason score to predict pathological stage in men with localized prostate cancer. J Urol. 1993; 150: 110-114. (Pubitemid 23175983)
5. 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.
6. Shariat SF, Karakiewicz PI, Roehrborn CG, Kattan MW,. An updated catalog of prostate cancer predictive tools. Cancer. 2008; 113: 3075-3099.
7. Reese AC, Cooperberg MR, Carroll PR,. Minimal impact of clinical stage on prostate cancer prognosis among contemporary patients with clinically localized disease. J Urol. 2010; 184: 114-119.
8. Armatys SA, Koch MO, Bihrle R, Gardner TA, Cheng L,. Is it necessary to separate clinical stage T1c from T2 prostate adenocarcinoma? BJU Int. 2005; 96: 777-780.
9. Billis A, Magna LA, Watanabe IC, Costa MV, Telles GH, Ferreira U,. Are prostate carcinoma clinical stages T1c and T2 similar ? Int Braz J Urol. 2006; 32: 165-171.
10. Cooperberg MR, Pasta DJ, Elkin EP, et al. The University of California, San Francisco Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment score: a straightforward and reliable preoperative predictor of disease recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2005; 173: 1938-1942.
11. Campbell T, Blasko J, Crawford ED, et al. Clinical staging of prostate cancer: reproducibility and clarification of issues. Int J Cancer. 2001; 96: 198-209.
12. Sexton T, Rodrigues G, Brecevic E, et al. Controversies in prostate cancer staging implementation at a tertiary cancer center. Can J Urol. 2006; 13: 3327-3334.
13. Cooperberg MR, Broering JM, Litwin MS, et al. The contemporary management of prostate cancer in the United States: lessons from the cancer of the prostate strategic urologic research endeavor (CapSURE), a national disease registry. J Urol. 2004; 171: 1393-1401.
14. Lubeck DP, Litwin MS, Henning JM, et al. The CaPSURE database: a methodology for clinical practice and research in prostate cancer. CaPSURE Research Panel. Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor. Urology. 1996; 48: 773-777.
15. Cookson MS, Aus G, Burnett AL, et al. Variation in the definition of biochemical recurrence in patients treated for localized prostate cancer: the American Urological Association Prostate Guidelines for Localized Prostate Cancer Update Panel report and recommendations for a standard in the reporting of surgical outcomes. J Urol. 2007; 177: 540-545.
16. Eisenberg ML, Cowan JE, Davies BJ, Carroll PR, Shinohara K,. The importance of tumor palpability and transrectal ultrasonographic appearance in the contemporary clinical staging of prostate cancer [published online ahead of print April 10, 2009.] Urol Oncol.
17. Ward JF, Slezak JM, Blute ML, Bergstralh EJ, Zincke H,. Radical prostatectomy for clinically advanced (cT3) prostate cancer since the advent of prostate-specific antigen testing: 15-year outcome. BJU Int. 2005; 95: 751-756.
18. Cooperberg MR, Lubeck DP, Mehta SS, Carroll PR,. Time trends in clinical risk stratification for prostate cancer: implications for outcomes (data from CaPSURE). J Urol. 2003; 170: S21-S25; discussion S26-S27.
19. Gosselaar C, Kranse R, Roobol MJ, Roemeling S, Schroder FH,. The interobserver variability of digital rectal examination in a large randomized trial for the screening of prostate cancer. Prostate. 2008; 68: 985-993.
20. Coelho RF, Chauhan S, Orvieto MA, Palmer KJ, Rocco B, Patel VR,. Predictive factors for positive surgical margins and their locations after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy [published online ahead of print February 15, 2009.] Eur Urol.
21. Walsh P, Partin A,. Anatomic radical retropubic prostatectomy. In:, Wein A, Kavoussi L, Novick A, Partin A, Peters C, eds. Campbell-Walsh Urology. 9th ed. Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier; 2007: 2956-2978.