Literature DB >> 18085616

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.

Danil V Makarov1, Cameron Marlow, Jonathan I Epstein, M Craig Miller, Patricia Landis, Alan W Partin, H Ballentine Carter, Robert W Veltri.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We assessed the use of quantitative clinical and pathologic information to predict which patients would eventually require treatment for prostate cancer (CaP) in an expectant management (EM) cohort. EXPERIMENTAL
DESIGN: We identified 75 men having prostate cancer with favorable initial biopsy characteristics; 30 developed an unfavorable biopsy (Gleason grade >6, >2 cores with cancer, >50% of a core with cancer, or a palpable nodule) requiring treatment and 45 maintained favorable biopsies throughout a median follow-up of 2.7 years. Demographic, clinical data and quantitative tissue histomorphometry determined by digital image analysis were analyzed.
RESULTS: Logistic regression (LR) modeling generated a quantitative nuclear grade (QNG) signature based on the enrollment biopsy for differentiation of Favorable and Unfavorable groups using a variable LR selection criteria of P(z)<0.05. The QNG signature utilized 12 nuclear morphometric descriptors (NMDs) and had an area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (ROC-AUC) of 87% with a sensitivity of 82%, specificity of 70% and accuracy of 75%. A multivariable LR model combining QNG signature with clinical and pathological variables yielded an AUC-ROC of 88% and a sensitivity of 81%, specificity of 78% and accuracy of 79%. A LR model using prostate volume, PSA density, and number of pre-diagnosis biopsies resulted in an AUC-ROC of 68% and a sensitivity of 85%, specificity of 37% and accuracy of 56%.
CONCLUSIONS: QNG using EM prostate biopsies improves the predictive accuracy of LR models based on traditional clinicopathologic variables in determining which patients will ultimately develop an unfavorable biopsy. Our QNG-based model must be rigorously, prospectively validated prior to use in the clinical arena.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18085616      PMCID: PMC3354531          DOI: 10.1002/pros.20679

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prostate        ISSN: 0270-4137            Impact factor:   4.104


  44 in total

1.  Prostate-specific antigen and other serum markers: current concepts from the World Health Organization Second International Consultation on Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  M K Brawer; M C Benson; D G Bostwick; B Djavan; H Lilja; A Semjonow; S Su; Z Zhou
Journal:  Semin Urol Oncol       Date:  1999-11

Review 2.  Expectant treatment with curative intent in the prostate-specific antigen era: triggers for definitive therapy.

Authors:  Christopher A Warlick; Mohamad E Allaf; H Ballentine Carter
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2006 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.498

3.  Inadequacies of the current American Joint Committee on cancer staging system for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Sarah H Taylor; Kelly W Merriman; Philippe E Spiess; Louis Pisters
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2006-02-01       Impact factor: 6.860

4.  Analysis of repeated biopsy results within 1 year after a noncancer diagnosis.

Authors:  G J O'dowd; M C Miller; R Orozco; R W Veltri
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 2.649

5.  Delayed versus immediate surgical intervention and prostate cancer outcome.

Authors:  Christopher Warlick; Bruce J Trock; Patricia Landis; Jonathan I Epstein; H Ballentine Carter
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2006-03-01       Impact factor: 13.506

6.  Natural history of progression after PSA elevation following radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  C R Pound; A W Partin; M A Eisenberger; D W Chan; J D Pearson; P C Walsh
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1999-05-05       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Genetically engineered neural networks for predicting prostate cancer progression after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  S R Potter; M C Miller; L A Mangold; K A Jones; J I Epstein; R W Veltri; A W Partin
Journal:  Urology       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 2.649

8.  p300 modulates nuclear morphology in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Jose D Debes; Thomas J Sebo; Hannelore V Heemers; Benjamin R Kipp; De Anna L Haugen; Christine M Lohse; Donald J Tindall
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2005-02-01       Impact factor: 12.701

9.  Global histone modification patterns predict risk of prostate cancer recurrence.

Authors:  David B Seligson; Steve Horvath; Tao Shi; Hong Yu; Sheila Tze; Michael Grunstein; Siavash K Kurdistani
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2005-06-30       Impact factor: 49.962

10.  Cancer statistics, 2006.

Authors:  Ahmedin Jemal; Rebecca Siegel; Elizabeth Ward; Taylor Murray; Jiaquan Xu; Carol Smigal; Michael J Thun
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2006 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 508.702

View more
  9 in total

Review 1.  Nuclear morphometry, nucleomics and prostate cancer progression.

Authors:  Robert W Veltri; Christhunesa S Christudass; Sumit Isharwal
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2012-04-16       Impact factor: 3.285

2.  JPEG2000 for automated quantification of immunohistochemically stained cell nuclei: a comparative study with standard JPEG format.

Authors:  Marylène Lejeune; Carlos López; Ramón Bosch; Anna Korzyńska; Maria-Teresa Salvadó; Marcial García-Rojo; Urszula Neuman; Łukasz Witkowski; Jordi Baucells; Joaquín Jaén
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2010-11-18       Impact factor: 4.064

3.  Best of the 2007 AUA Annual Meeting: Highlights from the 2007 Annual Meeting of the American Urological Association, May 19-24, 2007, Anaheim, CA.

Authors:  Michael K Brawer; Danil V Makarov; Alan W Partin; Claus G Roehrborn; J Curtis Nickel; Michael B Chancellor; Dean G Assimos; Ellen Shapiro; Jacob Rajfer
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2007

4.  Roundness variation in JPEG images affects the automated process of nuclear immunohistochemical quantification: correction with a linear regression model.

Authors:  Carlos López; Joaquín Jaén Martinez; Marylène Lejeune; Patricia Escrivà; Maria T Salvadó; Lluis E Pons; Tomás Alvaro; Jordi Baucells; Marcial García-Rojo; Xavier Cugat; Ramón Bosch
Journal:  Histochem Cell Biol       Date:  2009-08-04       Impact factor: 4.304

5.  PBOV1 as a potential biomarker for more advanced prostate cancer based on protein and digital histomorphometric analysis.

Authors:  Neil M Carleton; Guangjing Zhu; Mikhail Gorbounov; M Craig Miller; Kenneth J Pienta; Linda M S Resar; Robert W Veltri
Journal:  Prostate       Date:  2018-03-09       Impact factor: 4.104

6.  Pro-prostate-specific antigen measurements in serum and tissue are associated with treatment necessity among men enrolled in expectant management for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Danil V Makarov; Sumit Isharwal; Lori J Sokoll; Patricia Landis; Cameron Marlow; Jonathan I Epstein; Alan W Partin; H Ballentine Carter; Robert W Veltri
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2009-11-24       Impact factor: 12.531

7.  Cribriform morphology predicts upstaging after radical prostatectomy in patients with Gleason score 3 + 4 = 7 prostate cancer at transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided needle biopsy.

Authors:  Daniel T Keefe; Nicola Schieda; Soufiane El Hallani; Rodney H Breau; Chris Morash; Susan J Robertson; Kien T Mai; Eric C Belanger; Trevor A Flood
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2015-07-31       Impact factor: 4.064

8.  Valproic acid causes dose- and time-dependent changes in nuclear structure in prostate cancer cells in vitro and in vivo.

Authors:  Madeleine S Q Kortenhorst; Sumit Isharwal; Paul J van Diest; Wasim H Chowdhury; Cameron Marlow; Michael A Carducci; Ronald Rodriguez; Robert W Veltri
Journal:  Mol Cancer Ther       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 6.261

9.  DNA Ploidy as surrogate for biopsy gleason score for preoperative organ versus nonorgan-confined prostate cancer prediction.

Authors:  Sumit Isharwal; M Craig Miller; Jonathan I Epstein; Leslie A Mangold; Elizabeth Humphreys; Alan W Partin; Robert W Veltri
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2009-02-03       Impact factor: 2.649

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.