Variation in reporting of cancer extent and benign histology in prostate biopsies among European pathologists

Virchows Archiv

Volumn 464, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 583-587

  Berney, D M ^a,j   Algaba, F ^b   Camparo, P ^c   Comperat E ^d   Griffiths, D ^e   Kristiansen, G ^f   Lopez Beltran, A ^g   Montironi, R ^h   Varma, M ^e   Egevad, L ⁱ  

^a QUEEN MARY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b FUNDACIÓ PUIGVERT   (Spain)

^c Centre de Pathologie Amiens Picardie   (France)

^d PITIÉ SALPÊTRIÈRE HOSPITAL   (France)

^e UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL OF WALES   (United Kingdom)

^f UNIVERSITY OF BONN   (Germany)

^g Universidad de Cordoba   (Spain)

^h UNIVERSITÀ POLITECNICA DELLE MARCHE   (Italy)

ⁱ KAROLINSKA INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

^j QUEEN MARY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

more..

Author keywords

Biopsy; Cancer length; Extent; Gleason; Grading; Pathology; Prostate cancer; Reporting; Survey

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUSTRIA; BELGIUM; CANCER SIZE; CHRONIC INFLAMMATION; CROATIA; DENMARK; DISEASE SEVERITY; FINLAND; FRANCE; GERMANY; HEALTH CARE SURVEY; HUMAN; HUNGARY; IRELAND; ITALY; NEEDLE BIOPSY; NETHERLANDS; NORWAY; ONLINE MONITORING; PATHOLOGIST; PERINEURAL INVASION; POLAND; PORTUGAL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATE HYPERTROPHY; PROSTATITIS; ROMANIA; SLOVENIA; SPAIN; SWEDEN; SWITZERLAND; UNITED KINGDOM;

BIOPSY; BIOPSY, NEEDLE; DATA COLLECTION; EUROPE; HUMANS; MALE; PATHOLOGY, CLINICAL; PHYSICIAN'S PRACTICE PATTERNS; PHYSICIANS; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS;

EID: 84902343091     PISSN: 09456317     EISSN: 14322307     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00428-014-1554-1     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Ayres BE et al (2012) The role of transperineal template prostate biopsies in restaging men with prostate cancer managed by active surveillance. BJU Int 109(8):1170-1176
2. Bittner N et al (2013) Incidence and pathological features of prostate cancer detected on transperineal template guided mapping biopsy after negative transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy. J Urol 190(2):509-514
3. Fine SW, Reuter VE (2012) Anatomy of the prostate revisited: implications for prostate biopsy and zonal origins of prostate cancer. Histopathology 60(1):142-152
4. Gleason DF, Melliger GT (1974) Prediction of prognosis for prostatic adenocarcinoma by combined histological grading and clinical staging. J Urol 11:7
5. Epstein JI et al (2005) The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 29(9):1228-1242 (Pubitemid 41232997)
6. Berney DM et al (2013) The reasons behind variation in Gleason grading of prostatic biopsies: areas of agreement and misconception among 266 European pathologists. Histopathology 37(10):1518-1531
7. Harnden P et al (2008) Does the extent of carcinoma in prostatic biopsies predict prostate-specific antigen recurrence? A systematic review. Eur Urol 54(4):728-739
8. Harnden P et al (2007) The prognostic significance of perineural invasion in prostatic cancer biopsies: a systematic review. Cancer 109(1):13-24 (Pubitemid 46120190)
9. Montironi R et al (2011) Role of histopathology and molecular markers in the active surveillance of prostate cancer. Acta Oncol 50(Suppl 1):56-60
10. Tosoian JJ et al (2011) Active surveillance program for prostate cancer: an update of the Johns Hopkins experience. J Clin Oncol 29(16):2185-2190
11. Beard CJ et al (2004) Perineural invasion is associated with increased relapse after external beam radiotherapy for men with low-risk prostate cancer and may be a marker for occult, high-grade cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 58(1):19-24 (Pubitemid 38010332)
12. D'Amico AV et al (2001) Perineural invasion as a predictor of biochemical outcome following radical prostatectomy for select men with clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 165(1):126-129
13. Eggener SE et al (2009) A multi-institutional evaluation of active surveillance for low risk prostate cancer. J Urol 181(4):1635-1641, discussion 1641
14. Wills ML et al (1998) Ability of sextant biopsies to predict radical prostatectomy stage. Urology 51(5):759-764 (Pubitemid 28261927)
15. Huland H et al (1996) Preoperative prediction of tumor heterogeneity and recurrence after radical prostatectomy for localized prostatic carcinoma with digital rectal, examination prostate specific antigen and the results of 6 systematic biopsies. J Urol 155(4):1344-1347
16. Lotan Yet al (2004) The percent of biopsy cores positive for cancer is a predictor of advanced pathological stage and poor clinical outcomes in patients treated with radical prostatectomy. J Urol 171(6 Pt 1):2209-2214
17. Rajab R et al (2010) Measurements of cancer extent in a conservatively treated prostate cancer biopsy cohort. Virchows Arch 457(5):547-553
18. Bostwick DG et al (1996) Prediction of capsular perforation and seminal vesicle invasion in prostate cancer. J Urol 155(4):1361-1367 (Pubitemid 26081240)
19. Ravery V et al (2000) Percentage of cancer on biopsy cores accurately predicts extracapsular extension and biochemical relapse after radical prostatectomy for T1-T2 prostate cancer. Eur Urol 37(4):449-455 (Pubitemid 30157807)
20. Brimo F et al (2008) Prognostic value of various morphometric measurements of tumour extent in prostate needle core tissue. Histopathology 53(2):177-183 (Pubitemid 352032774)
21. Van der Kwast T et al (2013) Guidelines on processing and reporting of prostate biopsies: the 2013 update of the pathology committee of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC). Virchows Arch 463(3):367-377
22. Al-Hussain T, Carter HB, Epstein JI (2011) Significance of prostate adenocarcinoma perineural invasion on biopsy in patients who are otherwise candidates for active surveillance. J Urol 186(2):470-473
23. Ding W et al (2012) Twelve-month prostate-specific antigen values and perineural invasion as strong independent prognostic variables of long-term biochemical outcome after prostate seed brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 84(4):962-967
24. Elharram M et al (2012) Perineural invasion on prostate biopsy does not predict adverse pathological outcome. Can J Urol 19(6):6567-6572
25. Sung MT, Eble JN, Cheng L (2006) Invasion of fat justifies assignment of stage pT3a in prostatic adenocarcinoma. Pathology 38(4):309-311 (Pubitemid 44266627)
26. Joshi A, Shah V, Varma M (2009) Intraprostatic fat in a prostatic needle biopsy: a case report and review of the literature. Histopathology 54(7):912-913
27. Yli-Hemminki TH et al (2013) Histological inflammation and risk of subsequent prostate cancer among men with initially elevated serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentration in the Finnish prostate cancer screening trial. BJU Int 112(6):735-741
28. Rowe EW et al (2006) Incidental acute prostatic inflammation is associated with a lower percentage of free prostate-specific antigen than other benign conditions of the prostate: a prospective screening study. BJU Int 97(5):1039-1042
29. Berger RE et al (1997) Bacteria in the prostate tissue of men with idiopathic prostatic inflammation. J Urol 157(3):863-865 (Pubitemid 27066268)
30. Sfanos K, DeMarzo A (2012) Prostate cancer and inflammation: the evidence. Histopathology 60(1):199-215
31. Karakiewicz PI et al (2007) Chronic inflammation is negatively associated with prostate cancer and high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia on needle biopsy. Int J Clin Pract 61(3):425-430
32. Zhao C, Venigalla S, Miyamoto H (2012) Chronic inflammation on initial benign prostate biopsy is a negative predictor of subsequent cancer detection. Pathol Int 62(11):774-776