Nuclear morphometry, nucleomics and prostate cancer progression

Asian Journal of Andrology

Volumn 14, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 375-384

  Veltri, Robert W ^a   Christudass, Christhunesa S ^b   Isharwal, Sumit ^c  

^a Fisher Biomarker and Biorepository Laboratory   (United States)

^b JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

active surveillance; cancer metastasis; cancer progression; digital image analysis; molecular biomarkers; morphological biomarkers; nuclear morphometry; nuclear proteins and nuclear structure; prostate cancer

Indexed keywords

REACTIVE OXYGEN METABOLITE;

ANGIOGENESIS; CANCER GROWTH; CANCER INVASION; CHROMATIN STRUCTURE; DOUBLE STRANDED DNA BREAK; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; INFECTION; INFLAMMATION; MALE; METASTASIS; PROSTATE CANCER; REVIEW; TUMOR MICROENVIRONMENT;

CELL NUCLEUS; DISEASE PROGRESSION; EPIGENESIS, GENETIC; GENE EXPRESSION REGULATION, NEOPLASTIC; HETEROCHROMATIN; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; IMMUNOLOGIC SURVEILLANCE; MALE; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATE; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; TUMOR MARKERS, BIOLOGICAL; WATCHFUL WAITING;

EID: 84860857812     PISSN: 1008682X     EISSN: 17457262     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/aja.2011.148     Document Type: Review

References (102)

1. Jemal A, Siegel R, Xu J, Ward E. Cancer statistics, 2010. CA. CA Cancer J Clin 2010; 60: 277-300.
2. Etzioni R, Penson DF, Legler JM, di Tommaso D, Boer R et al. Overdiagnosis due to prostate-specific antigen screening: Lessons from U.S. prostate cancer incidence trends. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002; 94: 981-990. (Pubitemid 34814727)
3. Draisma G, Boer R, Otto SJ, van Der Cruijsen IW, Damhuis RA et al. Lead times and overdetection due to prostate-specific antigen screening: Estimates from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003; 95: 868-878. (Pubitemid 36833878)
4. Albertsen PC. Treatment of localized prostate cancer: when is active surveillance appropriate? Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2010; 7: 394-400.
5. Bastian PJ, Carter BH, Bjartell A, Seitz M, Stanislaus P et al. Insignificant prostate cancer and active surveillance: From definition to clinical implications. Eur Urol 2009; 55: 1321-1330.
6. Albertsen PC, Hanley JA, Fine J. 20-year outcomes following conservative management of clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 2005; 293: 2095-2101. (Pubitemid 40617061)
7. Han M, Partin AW, Zahurak M, Piantadosi S, Epstein JI et al. Biochemical (prostate specific antigen) recurrence probability following radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer. TJ Urol 2003; 169: 517-523. (Pubitemid 36132976)
8. Freedland SJ, Humphreys EB, Mangold LA, Eisenberger M, Dorey FJ et al. Risk of prostate cancer-specific mortality following biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. JAMA 2005; 294: 433-439. (Pubitemid 41124175)
9. Zink D, Fischer AH, Nickerson JA. Nuclear structure in cancer cells. Nat Rev 2004; 4: 677-687. (Pubitemid 39215066)
10. Bartova E, Krejci J, Harnicarova A, Galiova G, Kozubek S. Histone modifications and nuclear architecture: A review. J Histochem Cytochem 2008; 56: 711-721. (Pubitemid 351991084)
11. Bonisch C, Nieratschker SM, Orfanos NK, Hake SB. Chromatin proteomics and epigenetic regulatory circuits. Expert Rev Proteomics 2008; 5: 105-119. (Pubitemid 351287745)
12. Goncalves Dos Santos Silva A, Sarkar R, Harizanova J, Guffei A, Mowat M et al. Centromeres in cell division, evolution, nuclear organization and disease. J Cell Biochem 2008; 104: 2040-2058.
13. Rynearson AL, Sussman CR. Nuclear structure, organization, and oncogenesis. J Gastrointest Cancer 2011; 42: 112-117.
14. Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. Hallmarks of cancer: The next generation. Cell 2011; 144: 646-674.
15. Xu Y, Price BD. Chromatin dynamics and the repair of DNA double strand breaks. Cell Cycle 2011; 10: 261-267.
16. Stratton MR, Campbell PJ, Futreal PA. The cancer genome. Nature 2009; 458: 719-724.
17. Dundr M, Misteli T. Biogenesis of nuclear bodies. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 2010; 2: A000711.
18. Shevtsov SP, Dundr M. Nucleation of nuclear bodies by RNA. Nat Cell Biol 2011; 13: 167-173.
19. Nelson WG, de Marzo AM, Isaacs WB. Prostate cancer.NEngl J Med 2003; 349: 366-381. (Pubitemid 36886244)
20. DeMarzo AM, Nelson WG, Isaacs WB, Epstein JI. Pathological and molecular aspects of prostate cancer. Lancet 2003; 361: 955-964. (Pubitemid 36332115)
21. Nelson WG, DeWeese TL, DeMarzo AM. The diet, prostate inflammation, and the development of prostate cancer. Cancer Metastasis Rev 2002; 21: 3-16. (Pubitemid 35205190)
22. Platz EA, de Marzo AM. Epidemiology of inflammation and prostate cancer. J Urol 2004; 171: S36-40. (Pubitemid 38090420)
23. Schetter AJ, Heegaard NH, Harris CC. Inflammation and cancer: Interweaving microRNA, free radical, cytokine and p53 pathways. Carcinogenesis 2010; 31: 37-49.
24. Dang CV, Le A, Gao P. MYC-induced cancer cell energy metabolism and therapeutic opportunities. Clin Cancer Res 2009; 15: 6479-6483.
25. Dang CV. Rethinking the Warburg effect with Myc micromanaging glutamine metabolism. Cancer Res 2010; 70: 859-862.
26. Spratlin JL, Serkova NJ, Eckhardt SG. Clinical applications of metabolomics in oncology: A review. Clin Cancer Res 2009; 15: 431-440.
27. Rutkowski MJ, Sughrue ME, Kane AJ, Mills SA, Parsa AT. Cancer and the complement cascade. Mol Cancer Res 2010; 8: 1453-1465.
28. Rajarubendra N, Lawrentschuk N, Bolton DM, Klotz L, Davis ID. Prostate cancer immunology-An update for Urologists. BJU Int 2011; 107: 1046-1051.
29. Sprenger CC, Plymate SR, Reed MJ. Aging-related alterations in the extracellular matrix modulate the microenvironment and influence tumor progression. Int J Cancer 2010; 127: 2739-2748.
30. Langley RR, Fidler IJ. The seed and soil hypothesis revisited-The role of tumor-stroma interactions in metastasis to different organs. Int J Cancer 2011; 128: 2527-2535.
31. Sirri V, Urcuqui-Inchima S, Roussel P, Hernandez-Verdun D. Nucleolus: The fascinating nuclear body. Histochem Cell Biol 2008; 129: 13-31. (Pubitemid 50005910)
32. Skvortsov S, Schafer G, Stasyk T, Fuchsberger C, Bonn GK et al. Proteomics profiling of microdissected low- and high-grade prostate tumors identifies Lamin A as a discriminatory biomarker. J Proteome Res 2011; 10: 259-268.
33. Getzenberg RH, Pienta KJ, Huang EY, Coffey DS. Identification of nuclear matrix proteins in the cancer and normal rat prostate. Cancer Res 1991; 51: 6514-6520.
34. Elcock LS, Bridger JM. Exploring the effects of a dysfunctional nuclear matrix. Biochem Soc Trans 2008; 36: 1378-1383.
35. He S, Dunn KL, Espino PS, Drobic B, Li L et al. Chromatin organization and nuclear microenvironments in cancer cells. J Cell Biochem 2008; 104: 2004-2015.
36. Pezo RC, Singer RH. Nuclear microenvironment in cancer diagnosis and treatment. J Cell Biochem 2008; 104: 1953-1963.
37. Gerlitz G. HMGNs, DNA repair and cancer. Biochi Biophys Acta 2010; 1799: 80-85.
38. Bianco-Miotto T, Chiam K, Buchanan G, Jindal S, Day TK et al. Global levels of specific histone modifications and an epigenetic gene signature predict prostate cancer progression and development. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2010; 19: 2611-2622.
39. Xu J, Zheng SL, Isaacs SD, Wiley KE, Wiklund F et al. Inherited genetic variant predisposes to aggressive but not indolent prostate cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2010; 107: 2136-2140.
40. Virchow R. Cellular Pathology as Based upon Physiological and Pathological Histology. Philadelphia, PA: J B Lippincott; 1863.
41. Beale L. Examination of sputum from a case of cancer of the pharynx and the adjacent parts. Arch Med Lond 1860; 2: 44.
42. Gill JE, Jotz MM. Further observations on the chemistry of pararosaniline-Feulgen staining. Histochemistry 1976; 46: 147-160.
43. Schulte E, Wittekind D. Standardization of the Feulgen-Schiff technique. Staining characteristics of pure fuchsin dyes; a cytophotometric investigation. Histochemistry 1989; 91: 321-331. (Pubitemid 19122878)
44. Diamond DA, Berry SJ, Umbricht C, Jewett HJ, Coffey DS. Computerized image analysis of nuclear shape as a prognostic factor for prostatic cancer. Prostate 1982; 3: 321-332. (Pubitemid 12062284)
45. Benson MC, McDougal DC, Coffey DS. The application of perpendicular and forward light scatter to assess nuclear and cellular morphology. Cytometry 1984; 5: 515-522. (Pubitemid 15206528)
46. Benson MC, McDougal DC, Coffey DS. The use of multiparameter flow cytometry to assess tumor cell heterogeneity and grade prostate cancer. Prostate 1984; 5: 27-45. (Pubitemid 14158535)
47. Epstein JI, Berry SJ, Eggleston JC. Nuclear roundness factor. A predictor of progression in untreated Stage A2 prostate cancer. Cancer 1984; 54: 1666-1671. (Pubitemid 14006231)
48. Mohler JL, Partin AW, Epstein JI, Lohr WD, Coffey DS. Nuclear roundness factor measurement for assessment of prognosis of patients with prostatic carcinoma. II. Standardization of methodology for histologic sections. J Urol 1988; 139: 1085-1090.
49. Mohler JL, Partin AW, Lohr WD, Coffey DS. Nuclear roundness factor measurement for assessment of prognosis of patients with prostatic carcinoma. I. Testing of a digitization system. J Urol 1988; 139: 1080-1084.
50. Partin AW, Walsh AC, Pitcock RV, Mohler JL, Epstein JI et al. A comparison of nuclear morphometry and Gleason grade as a predictor of prognosis in stage A2 prostate cancer: A critical analysis. J Urol 1989; 142: 1254-1258. (Pubitemid 19277958)
51. Veltri RW, Isharwal S, Miller C, Epstein JE, Partin AW. Nuclear roundness variance predicts prostate cancer progression, metastasis and death: A prospective evaluation with up to 25 years of follow-up after radical prostatectomy. Prostate 2010; 70: 1333-1339.
52. Partin AW, Steinberg GD, Pitcock RV, Wu L, Piantadosi S et al. Use of nuclear morphometry, gleason histologic scoring, clinical stage, and age to predict diseasefree survival among patients with prostate cancer. Cancer 1992; 70: 161-168.
53. Gleason DF. Classification of prostatic carcinomas. Cancer Chemother Rep 1966; 50: 125-128.
54. Gleason DF. Histologic grading of prostate cancer: A perspective. Hum Pathol 1992; 23: 273-279.
55. Epstein JI. An update of the Gleason grading system. J Urol 2010; 183: 433-440.
56. Kuroiwa K, Shiraishi T, Ogawa O, Usami M, Hirao Y et al. Discrepancy between local and central pathological review of radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol 2010; 183: 952-957.
57. Schroeder FH, Hop WC, Blom JH, Mostofi FK. Grading of prostatic cancer: III. Multivariate analysis of prognostic parameters. Prostate 1985; 7: 13-20. (Pubitemid 15017757)
58. Diamond J, Anderson NH, Bartels PH, Montironi R, Hamilton PW. The use of morphological characteristics and texture analysis in the identification of tissue composition in prostatic neoplasia. Hum Pathol 2004; 35: 1121-1131. (Pubitemid 39165345)
59. Montironi R, Cheng L, Lopez-Beltran A, Mazzucchelli R, Scarpelli M et al. Decision support systems for morphology-based diagnosis and prognosis of prostate neoplasms: A methodological approach. Cancer 2009; 115: 3068-3077.
60. Madabhushi A, Agner S, Basavanhally A, Doyle S, Lee G. Computer-Aided prognosis: Predicting patient and disease outcome via quantitative fusion of multi-scale, multimodal data. Comput Med Imaging Graph 2011; 35: 506-514.
61. Zhang B, Li H, Riggins RB, Zhan M, Xuan J et al. Differential dependency network analysis to identify condition-specific topological changes in biological networks. Bioinformatics 2009; 25: 526-532.
62. Bacus JW, Grace LJ. Optical microscope system for standardized cell measurements and analyses. Appl Opt 1987; 26: 3280-3293.
63. Bacus JW, Boone CW, Bacus JV, Follen M, Kelloff GJ et al. Image morphometric nuclear grading of intraepithelial neoplastic lesions with applications to cancer chemoprevention trials. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1999; 8: 1087-1094. (Pubitemid 30004906)
64. Veltri RW, Partin AW, Epstein JE, Marley GM, Miller CM et al. Quantitative nuclear morphometry, Markovian texture descriptors, and DNA content captured on a CAS-200 Image analysis system, combined with PCNA and HER-2/neu immunohistochemistry for prediction of prostate cancer progression. J Cell Biochem 1994; 19: 249-258. (Pubitemid 24306476)
65. Veltri RW, Marlow C, Khan MA, Miller MC, Epstein JI et al. Significant variations in nuclear structure occur between and within Gleason grading patterns 3, 4, and 5 determined by digital image analysis. Prostate 2007; 67: 1202-1210. (Pubitemid 47221887)
66. Venkataraman G, Rycyna K, Rabanser A, Heinze G, Baesens BM et al. Morphometric signature differences in nuclei of Gleason pattern 4 areas in Gleason 7 prostate cancer with differing primary grades on needle biopsy. J Urol 2009; 181: 88-93.
67. Isharwal S, Miller MC, Epstein JI, Mangold LA, Humphreys E et al. Prognostic value of Her-2/neu and DNA index for progression, metastasis and prostate cancer-specific death in men with long-Term follow-up after radical prostatectomy. Int J Cancer 2008; 123: 2636-2643.
68. Isharwal S, Makarov DV, Carter HB, Epstein JI, Partin AW et al. DNA content in the diagnostic biopsy for benign-Adjacent and cancer-Tissue areas predicts the need for treatment in men with T1c prostate cancer undergoing surveillance in an expectant management programme. BJU Int 2010; 105: 329-333.
69. Isharwal S, Miller MC, Epstein JI, Mangold LA, Humphreys E et al. DNA Ploidy as surrogate for biopsy Gleason score for preoperative organ versus nonorgan-confined prostate cancer prediction. Urology 2009; 73: 1092-1097.
70. Veltri RW, Partin AW, Miller CM. Quantitative Nuclear Grade (QNG): The clinical applications of the quantitative measurement of nuclear structure using image analysis. In: Kelloff GJ, Hawk ET, Sigman CC, editors. Cancer chemoprevention. Totowa, NJ: Humana Press; 2005. pp 97-108.
71. Cordon-Cardo C, Kotsianti A, Verbel DA, Teverovskiy M, Capodieci P et al. Improved prediction of prostate cancer recurrence through systems pathology. J Clin Invest 2007; 117: 1876-1883. (Pubitemid 47036321)
72. Badalament RA, Miller MC, Peller PA, Young DC, Bahn DK et al. An algorithm for predicting nonorgan confined prostate cancer using the results obtained from sextant core biopsies with prostate specific antigen level. J Urol 1996; 156: 1375-1380. (Pubitemid 26307613)
73. Venkataraman G, Heinze G, Holmes EW, Ananthanarayanan V, Bostwick DG et al. Identification of patients with low-risk for aneuploidy: Comparative discriminatory models using linear and machine-learning classifiers in prostate cancer. Prostate 2007; 67: 1524-1536. (Pubitemid 47536151)
74. Carmichael MJ, Veltri RW, Partin AW, Miller MC, Walsh PC et al. Deoxyribonucleic acid ploidy analysis as a predictor of recurrence following radical prostatectomy for stage T2 disease. J Urol 1995; 153: 1015-1019.
75. PotterSR, Miller MC, Mangold LA, Jones KA, Epstein JI et al. Genetically engineered neural networks for predicting prostate cancer progression after radical prostatectomy. Urology 1999; 54: 791-795. (Pubitemid 29505574)
76. Reckwitz T, Potter SR, Snow PB, Zhang Z, Veltri RW et al. Artificial neural networks in urology: Update 2000. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 1999; 2: 222-226. (Pubitemid 30252198)
77. Chun FK, Karakiewicz PI, Briganti A, Walz J, Kattan MW et al. A critical appraisal of logistic regression-based nomograms, artificial neural networks, classification and regression-Tree models, look-up tables and risk-group stratification models for prostate cancer. BJU Int 2007; 99: 794-800. (Pubitemid 46439569)
78. Shariat SF, Karakiewicz PI, Margulis V, Kattan MW. Inventory of prostate cancer predictive tools. Curr Opin Urol 2008; 18: 279-296. (Pubitemid 351489379)
79. Karakiewicz PI, Hutterer GC. Predictive models and prostate cancer. Nat Clin Pract 2008; 5: 82-92. (Pubitemid 351248097)
80. Gurcan MN, Boucheron L, Can A, Madabhushi A, Rajpoot N et al. Histopathological image analysis: A review. IEEE Rev Biomed Eng 2009; 2: 147-171.
81. Kayser K, Kayser G, Metze K. The concept of structural entropy in tissue-based diagnosis. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 2007; 29: 296-308. (Pubitemid 47608502)
82. Ali S, Madabhushi A. Active Contour for Overlap Resolution using Watershed BASED initialization (ACOReW): Applications to histopathology. In: Proceedings of the 8th IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging: From Nano to Macro; 30 March-2 April 2011; Chicago, IL, USA. IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2011; pp614-7.
83. Lee CH, Huang PW. Classification for pathological prostate images based on fractal analysis. In: Proceedings of the 2008 Congress on Image and Signal Processing; 27-30 May; Sanya, China. IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, Vol. 3, pp113-37.
84. Partin AW, Yoo J, Carter HB, Pearson JD, Chan DW 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)
85. Partin AW, Kattan MW, Subong EN, Walsh PC, Wojno KJ et al. Combination of prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage, and Gleason score to predict pathological stage of localized prostate cancer. A multi-institutional update. JAMA 1997; 277: 1445-1451. (Pubitemid 27208886)
86. Partin AW, Mangold LA, Lamm DM, Walsh PC, Epstein JI et al. Contemporary update of prostate cancer staging nomograms (Partin Tables) for the new millennium. Urology 2001; 58: 843-848. (Pubitemid 34017254)
87. Makarov DV, Trock BJ, Humphreys EB, Mangold LA, Walsh PC et al. Updated nomogram to predict pathologic stage of prostate cancer given prostate-specific antigen level, clinical stage, and biopsy Gleason score (Partin tables) based on cases from 2000 to 2005. Urology 2007; 69: 1095-1101. (Pubitemid 46891611)
88. Huang Y, Isharwal S, Haese A, Chun FK, Makarov DV et al. Prediction of patientspecific risk and percentile cohort risk of pathological stage outcome using continuous prostate-specific antigen measurement, clinical stage and biopsy Gleason score. BJU Int 2011; 107: 1562-1569.
89. Veltri RW, Miller MC, Mangold LA, O'Dowd GJ, Epstein JI et al. Prediction of pathological stage in patients with clinical stage T1c prostate cancer: The new challenge. J Urol 2002; 168: 100-104. (Pubitemid 34640791)
90. Isharwal S, Miller C, Marlow C, Makarov DV, Partin AW et al. p300 (Histone Acetyltransferase) biomarker predicts prostate cancer biochemical recurrence and correlates with changes in epithelia nuclear size and shape. Prostate 2008; 68: 1097-1104. (Pubitemid 351875181)
91. Debes JD, Sebo TJ, Heemers HV, Kipp BR, Haugen DL et al. p300 modulates nuclear morphology in prostate cancer. Cancer Res 2005; 65: 708-712. (Pubitemid 40216426)
92. Khan MA, Walsh PC, Miller MC, Bales WD, Epstein JI et al. Quantitative alterations in nuclear structure predict prostate carcinoma distant metastasis and death in men with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Cancer 2003; 98: 2583-2591. (Pubitemid 37509521)
93. Veltri RW, Khan MA, Miller MC, Epstein JI, Mangold LA et al. Ability to predict metastasis based on pathology findings and alterations in nuclear structure of normal-Appearing and cancer peripheral zone epithelium in the prostate. Clin Cancer Res 2004; 10: 3465-3473. (Pubitemid 38685454)
94. Veltri RW, Miller MC, Partin AW, Coffey DS, Epstein JI. Ability to predict biochemical progression using Gleason score and a computer-generated quantitative nuclear grade derived from cancer cell nuclei. Urology 1996; 48: 685-691. (Pubitemid 26398685)
95. Isharwal S, Miller MC, Epstein JI, Mangold LA, Humphreys E et al. DNA ploidy as surrogate for biopsy Gleason score for preoperative organ versus nonorgan-confined prostate cancer prediction. Urology 2009; 73: 1092-1097.
96. Draisma G, Etzioni R, Tsodikov A, Mariotto A, Wever E et al. Lead time and overdiagnosis in prostate-specific antigen screening: Importance of methods and context. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009; 101: 374-383.
97. Epstein JI, Walsh PC, Carmichael M, Brendler CB. Pathologic and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostate cancer. JAMA 1994; 271: 368-374. (Pubitemid 24037911)
98. Makarov DV, Marlow C, Epstein JI, Miller MC, Landis P et al. Using nuclear morphometry to predict the need for treatment among men with low grade, low stage prostate cancer enrolled in a program of expectant management with curative intent. Prostate 2008; 68: 183-189. (Pubitemid 351186230)
99. Isharwal S, Makarov DV, Sokoll LJ, Landis P, Marlow C et al. ProPSA and diagnostic biopsy tissueDNAcontent combination improves accuracy to predict need for prostate cancer treatment among men enrolled in an active surveillance program. Urology 2011; 77: 763.e1-6.
100. Pepe MS, Feng Z, Janes H, Bossuyt PM, Potter JD. Pivotal evaluation of the accuracy of a biomarker used for classification or prediction: Standards for study design. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008; 100: 1432-1438.
101. Veltri RW, Miller MC, Isharwal S, Marlow C, Makarov DV et al. Prediction of prostatespecific antigen recurrence in men with long-Term follow-up post-prostatectomy using quantitative nuclear morphometry. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2008; 17: 102-110. (Pubitemid 351196279)
102. Madabhushi A, Doyle S, Lee G, Basavanhally A, Monaco J, Masters S et al. Integrated diagnostics: A conceptual framework with examples. Clin Chem Lab Med 2010; 48: 989-998.