PURPOSE: A recent report demonstrated that the deletion of chromosome 8p22 could predict disease progression in stage III (capsular penetrating) prostate cancer. We studied if the status of chromosomal deletions of 8p22 could reflect pathological stage as well as patient prognosis, thereby serving as a diagnostic tool to optimize the treatment strategy in prostate cancer. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: A total of 97 patients (41 Japanese and 56 Swedish) were studied by the fluorescence in situ hybridization technique. Seventy-seven patients (23 pT2, 18 pT3, and 36 pN+ tumors) underwent surgery (radical prostatectomy or lymph node dissection). The specimens were prepared by touch biopsy. From another 20 cases, fine-needle aspiration biopsies were obtained. RESULTS: 8p22 deletions were detected in 47 (61%) and 11 (55%) specimens of 77 touch biopsies and 20 fine-needle aspiration biopsies, respectively. No significant difference was found in the frequency of 8p22 deletion between different preparations of specimens, as well as between different races (Japanese versus Swedish). The frequency of 8p22 deletion was statistically higher in patients with pT3 or more than in those with pT2 (P < 0.01). Disease progression was evaluated in 57 patients. The Cox proportional hazards model revealed 8p22 deletion to be the strongest parameter to predict disease progression (hazards ratio = 5.75; P = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Studies on chromosomal deletions of 8p22 by fluorescence in situ hybridization technique may serve as a genetic marker to optimize the treatment strategy in patients with prostate cancer to the optimal treatment.
PURPOSE: A recent report demonstrated that the deletion of chromosome 8p22 could predict disease progression in stage III (capsular penetrating) prostate cancer. We studied if the status of chromosomal deletions of 8p22 could reflect pathological stage as well as patient prognosis, thereby serving as a diagnostic tool to optimize the treatment strategy in prostate cancer. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: A total of 97 patients (41 Japanese and 56 Swedish) were studied by the fluorescence in situ hybridization technique. Seventy-seven patients (23 pT2, 18 pT3, and 36 pN+ tumors) underwent surgery (radical prostatectomy or lymph node dissection). The specimens were prepared by touch biopsy. From another 20 cases, fine-needle aspiration biopsies were obtained. RESULTS: 8p22 deletions were detected in 47 (61%) and 11 (55%) specimens of 77 touch biopsies and 20 fine-needle aspiration biopsies, respectively. No significant difference was found in the frequency of 8p22 deletion between different preparations of specimens, as well as between different races (Japanese versus Swedish). The frequency of 8p22 deletion was statistically higher in patients with pT3 or more than in those with pT2 (P < 0.01). Disease progression was evaluated in 57 patients. The Cox proportional hazards model revealed 8p22 deletion to be the strongest parameter to predict disease progression (hazards ratio = 5.75; P = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Studies on chromosomal deletions of 8p22 by fluorescence in situ hybridization technique may serve as a genetic marker to optimize the treatment strategy in patients with prostate cancer to the optimal treatment.
Authors: Jae-Hak Park; Judy E Walls; Jose J Galvez; Minjung Kim; Cory Abate-Shen; Michael M Shen; Robert D Cardiff Journal: Am J Pathol Date: 2002-08 Impact factor: 4.307
Authors: Wen Xue; Alexander Krasnitz; Robert Lucito; Raffaella Sordella; Linda Vanaelst; Carlos Cordon-Cardo; Stephan Singer; Florian Kuehnel; Michael Wigler; Scott Powers; Lars Zender; Scott W Lowe Journal: Genes Dev Date: 2008-06-01 Impact factor: 11.361
Authors: Farzana Jasmine; Ronald Rahaman; Charlotte Dodsworth; Shantanu Roy; Rupash Paul; Maruf Raza; Rachelle Paul-Brutus; Mohammed Kamal; Habibul Ahsan; Muhammad G Kibriya Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-02-20 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: R Thuret; K Chantrel-Groussard; A-R Azzouzi; J-M Villette; S Guimard; P Teillac; P Berthon; A Houlgatte; A Latil; O Cussenot Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2005-01-31 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Jun Wang; Holly R Thomas; Yu Chen; Stefanie M Percival; Stephanie C Waldrep; Ryne C Ramaker; Robert G Thompson; Sara J Cooper; Zechen Chong; John M Parant Journal: PLoS Genet Date: 2022-08-22 Impact factor: 6.020