International society of urological pathology consensus conference on handling and staging of radical prostatectomy specimens

Advances in Anatomic Pathology

Volumn 18, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 301-305

  Egevad, Lars ^a   Srigley, John R ^b   Delahunt, Brett ^c   Amin, Mahul ^d   Berney, Daniel M ^d   Billis, Athanase ^d   Cheng, Liang ^d   Epstein, Jonathan ^d   Evans, Andrew ^d   Grignon, David ^d   Humphrey, Peter ^d   Magi Galluzzi, Cristina ^d   Montironi, Rodolfo ^d   Samaratunga, Hemamali ^d   Tan, Puay Hoon ^d   True, Lawrence ^d   Van Der Kwast, Theo ^d   Wheeler, Thomas ^d  

^a KAROLINSKA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^b MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF OTAGO   (New Zealand)

^d NONE

Author keywords

adenocarcinoma; prognosis; prostate; radical prostatectomy; stage

Indexed keywords

CANCER INVASION; CANCER STAGING; CONSENSUS; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; REVIEW; SEMINAL VESICLE; STANDARDIZATION; TISSUE PREPARATION; TISSUE SECTION; TUMOR VOLUME;

HUMANS; MALE; NEOPLASM STAGING; PATHOLOGY, SURGICAL; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; SPECIMEN HANDLING;

EID: 79959231109     PISSN: 10724109     EISSN: 15334031     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/PAP.0b013e3182211ce0     Document Type: Review

References (28)

1. Gonzalez JR, Laudano MA, McCann TR, et al. A review of high-risk prostate cancer and the role of neo-adjuvant and adjuvant therapies. World J Urol. 2008;26:475-480.
2. Egevad L, Srigley JR and Delahunt B. International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on handling and staging of radical prostatectomy specimens: rationale and organization. Mod Pathol. 2011;24:1-5.
3. Samaratunga H, Montironi R, True L, et al. International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on handling and staging of radical prostatectomy specimens: working group 1: specimen handling. Mod Pathol. 2011;24:6-15.
4. van der Kwast TH, Amin MB, Billis A, et al. International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on handling and staging of radical prostatectomy specimens: working group 2: T2 substaging and prostate cancer volume. Mod Pathol. 2011;24:16-25.
5. Magi-Galluzzi C, Evans AJ, Delahunt B, et al. International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on handling and staging of radical prostatectomy specimens: working group 3: extraprostatic extension, lymphovascular invasion and locally advanced disease. Mod Pathol. 2011;24:26-38.
6. Berney DM, Wheeler TM, Grignon DJ, et al. International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on handling and staging of radical prostatectomy specimens: working group 4: seminal vesicles and lymph nodes. Mod Pathol. 2011;24:39-47.
7. Tan PH, Cheng L, Srigley JR, et al. International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on handling and staging of radical prostatectomy specimens: working group 5: surgical margins. Mod Pathol. 2011;24:48-57.
8. Epstein JI, Allsbrook WC Jr, Amin MB, et al. The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2005;29:1228-1242.
9. Epstein JI, Amin MB, Reuter VR, et al. The World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology consensus classification of urothelial (transitional cell) neoplasms of the urinary bladder: Bladder Consensus Conference Committee. Am J Surg Pathol. 1998;22:1435-1448.
10. Epstein JI, Amin M, Boccon-Gibod L, et al. Prognostic factors and reporting of prostate carcinoma in radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy specimens. Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl. 2005;216:34-63.
11. Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC, et al. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. Chicago: Springer; 2010.
12. Kikuchi E, Scardino PT, Wheeler TM, et al. Is tumor volume an independent prognostic factor in clinically localized prostate cancer? J Urol. 2004;172:508-511.
13. Humphrey PA, Walther PJ, Currin SM, et al. Histologic grade, DNA ploidy, and intraglandular tumor extent as indicators of tumor progression of clinical stage B prostatic carcinoma: a direct comparison. Am J Surg Pathol. 1991;15:1165-1170.
14. Epstein JI, Pizov G, Walsh PC. Correlation of pathologic findings with progression after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Cancer. 1993;71:3582-3593. (Pubitemid 23152669)
15. Wheeler TM, Dillioglugil O, Kattan MW, et al. Clinical and pathological significance of the level and extent of capsular invasion in clinical stage T1-2 prostate cancer. Hum Pathol. 1998;29:856-862. (Pubitemid 28375994)
16. Sung MT, Lin H, Koch MO, et al. Radial distance of extraprostatic extension measured by ocular micrometer is an independent predictor of prostate-specific antigen recurrence: a new proposal for the substaging of pT3a prostate cancer. Am J Surg Pathol. 2007;31:311-318. (Pubitemid 46175034)
17. Herman CM, Wilcox GE, Kattan MW, et al. Lymphovascular invasion as a predictor of disease progression in prostate cancer. Am J Surg Pathol. 2000;24:859-863. (Pubitemid 30366274)
18. May M, Kaufmann O, Hammermann F, et al. Prognostic impact of lymphovascular invasion in radical prostatectomy specimens. BJU Int. 2007;99:539-544. (Pubitemid 46238825)
19. Ohori M, Scardino PT, Lapin SL, et al. The mechanisms and prognostic significance of seminal vesicle involvement by prostate cancer. Am J Surg Pathol. 1993;17:1252-1261. (Pubitemid 23344629)
20. Epstein JI, Partin AW, Potter SR, et al. Adenocarcinoma of the prostate invading the seminal vesicle: prognostic stratification based on pathologic parameters. Urology. 2000;56:283-288. (Pubitemid 30495584)
21. Cheng L, Bergstralh EJ, Cheville JC, et al. Cancer volume of lymph node metastasis predicts progression in prostate cancer. Am J Surg Pathol. 1998;22:1491-1500. (Pubitemid 28550644)
22. Cheng L, Pisansky TM, Ramnani DM, et al. Extranodal extension in lymph node-positive prostate cancer. Mod Pathol. 2000;13:113-118. (Pubitemid 30109096)
23. Boormans JL, Wildhagen MF, Bangma CH, et al. Histopathological characteristics of lymph node metastases predict cancerspecific survival in node-positive prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2008;102:1589-1593.
24. Vis AN, Schroder FH, van der Kwast TH. The actual value of the surgical margin status as a predictor of disease progression in men with early prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2006;50:258-265. (Pubitemid 44038060)
25. Watson RB, Civantos F, Soloway MS. Positive surgical margins with radical prostatectomy: detailed pathological analysis and prognosis. Urology. 1996;48:80-90. (Pubitemid 26255964)
26. Weldon VE, Tavel FR, Neuwirth H, et al. Patterns of positive specimen margins and detectable prostate specific antigen after radical perineal prostatectomy. J Urol. 1995;153:1565-1569.
27. Srigley JR, Humphrey PA, Amin MB, et al. Protocol for the examination of specimens from patients with carcinoma of the prostate gland. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2009;133:1568-1576.
28. Kench J, Clouston D, Delahunt B, et al. Prostate Cancer (Radical Prostatectomy) Structured Reporting Protocol. 1st ed. Sydney: Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia; 2010. IBSN 978-1-74187-462-4.