Stratification of patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer

BJU International

Volumn 115, Issue 6, 2015, Pages 907-912

  Jung, Jin Woo ^a   Lee, Jung Keun ^a   Hong, Sung Kyu ^a   Byun, Seok Soo ^a   Lee, Sang Eun ^a  

^a Seoul National University Bundang Hospital   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Gleason grade; intermediate risk; prostate; prostatectomy; prostatic neoplasms; risk stratification

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BIOCHEMICAL RECURRENCE FREE SURVIVAL; CANCER SURVIVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; EXTRACAPSULAR EXTENSION OF TUMOR; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; INTERMEDIATE RISK PATIENT; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; METASTASIS; PATIENT CODING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; RISK MANAGEMENT; SEMINAL VESICLE DISEASE; SURVIVAL RATE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; CANCER GRADING; CLASSIFICATION; KAPLAN MEIER METHOD; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RISK;

AGED; HUMANS; KAPLAN-MEIER ESTIMATE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM GRADING; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK;

EID: 84930031093     PISSN: 14644096     EISSN: 1464410X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/bju.12703     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. D'Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, et al. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 1998; 280: 969-74
2. ®). Prostate cancer v4. 2013. Available at: http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician-gls/pdf/prostate.pdf. Accessed 6 May 2013.
3. Grossfeld GD, Latini DM, Lubeck DP, et al. Predicting disease recurrence in intermediate and high-risk patients undergoing radical prostatectomy using percent positive biopsies: results from CaPSURE. Urology 2002; 59: 560-5
4. Pierorazio PM, Ross AE, Han M, et al. Evolution of the clinical presentation of men undergoing radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer. BJU Int 2012; 109: 988-93
5. Bul M, van den Bergh RC, Zhu X, et al. Outcomes of initially expectantly managed patients with low or intermediate risk screen-detected localized prostate cancer. BJU Int 2012; 110: 1672-7
6. Godtman RA, Holmberg E, Khatami A, Stranne J, Hugosson J,. Outcome following active surveillance of men with screen-detected prostate cancer. Results from the Göteborg randomised population-based prostate cancer screening trial. Eur Urol 2013; 63: 101-7
7. Cooperberg MR, Cowan JE, Hilton JF, et al. Outcomes of active surveillance for men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2011; 29: 228-34
8. Klotz L, Zhang L, Lam A, Nam R, Mamedov A, Loblaw A,. Clinical results of long-term follow-up of a large, active surveillance cohort with localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010; 28: 126-31
9. Mellinger GT, Gleason D, Bailar J 3rd,. The histology and prognosis of prostate cancer. J Urol 1967; 97: 331-7
10. Kang DE, Fitzsimons NJ, Presti JC Jr, et al. Risk stratification of men with Gleason score 7 to 10 tumors by primary and secondary Gleason score: results from the SEARCH database. Urology 2007; 70: 277-82
11. Tilki D, Schlenker B, John M, et al. Clinical and pathologic predictors of Gleason sum upgrading in patients after radical prostatectomy: results from a single institution series. Urol Oncol 2011; 29: 508-14
12. Fanning DM, Kay E, Fan Y, et al. Prostate cancer grading: the effect of stratification of needle biopsy Gleason score 4 + 3 as high or intermediate grade. BJU Int 2010; 105: 631-5
13. Amin A, Partin A, Epstein JI,. Gleason score 7 prostate cancer on needle biopsy: relation of primary pattern 3 or 4 to pathological stage and progression after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2011; 186: 1286-90
14. Pierorazio PM, Walsh PC, Partin AW, Epstein JI,. Prognostic Gleason grade grouping: data based on the modified Gleason scoring sytem. BJU Int 2013; 111: 753-60
15. Reese AC, Pierorazio PM, Han M, Partin AW,. Contemporary evaluation of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network prostate cancer risk classification system. Urology 2012; 80: 1075-9
16. Zumsteg ZS, Spratt DE, Pei I, et al. A new risk classification system for therapeutic decision making with intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients undergoing dose-escalated external-bean radiation therapy. Eur Urol 2013; 64: 895-902
17. 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: 1228-42
18. Gallina A, Chun FK, Suardi N, et al. Comparison of stage migration patterns between Europe and the USA: an analysis of 11 350 men treated with radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. BJU Int 2008; 101: 1513-18
19. Shao YH, Demissie K, Shih W, et al. Contemporary risk profile of prostate cancer in the United States. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009; 101: 1280-83
20. Abern MR, Aronson WJ, Terris MK, et al. Delayed radical prostatectomy for intermediate-risk prostate cancer is associated with biochemical recurrence: possible implications for active surveillance from the SEARCH database. Prostate 2013; 73: 409-17
21. El Hajj A, Ploussard G, de la Taille A, et al. Patient selection and pathological outcomes using currently available active surveillance criteria. BJU Int 2013; 112: 471-7
22. Park BH, Jeon HG, Choo SH, et al. Role of multiparametric 3.0 tesla magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer patients eligible for active surveillance. BJU Int 2013; 113: 864-70.
23. Thompson J, Lawrentschuk N, Frydenberg M, Thompson L, Stricker P, USANZ. The role of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis and management of prostate cancer. BJU Int 2013; 112 (Suppl. 2): 6-20
24. Sun M, Sammon JD, Becker A, et al. Radical prostatectomy vs radiotherapy vs observation among older patients with clinically localized prostate cancer: a comparative effectiveness evaluation. BJU Int 2013; 113: 200-8.