Literature DB >> 20499312

PSA-detected prostate cancer and the potential for dedifferentiation--estimating the proportion capable of progression.

Nora Pashayan1, Paul Pharoah, David E Neal, Freddie Hamdy, Jenny Donovan, Richard M Martin, David Greenberg, Stephen W Duffy.   

Abstract

The aims were to determine whether prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-detected prostate cancers progress to higher Gleason score during the preclinical screen-detectable phase, and, if so, to estimate the proportion of tumours with progressive potential. We developed two multi-state Markov chain models to represent the natural history of two tumour populations, one with (Model I) and the other without (Model II) the potential for progression. For each, we derived the transition rates between the states and used these estimates to calculate the expected prevalence of preclinical low and intermediate-to-high Gleason score prostate cancers, using data from the Prostate Testing for Cancer and Treatment (ProtecT) study on 2,310 prostate cancers detected by PSA testing in 71,511 men 50-69 years. We compared the expected prevalence for each tumour population to that of the observed based on ProtecT and the European Randomised Study on Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC)-Rotterdam Centre's first round screening data, the latter allowing independent assessment of the two models. The overall expected proportion of low Gleason score tumours was 0.56 under Model I and 0.81 under Model II, whereas the observed proportion based on either ProtecT or ERSPC-Rotterdam was 0.69. Using the observed prevalence from ERSPC-Rotterdam, we estimated that 22, 33 and 66% of the tumours in men aged 55-59, 60-64 and 65-69 years, respectively, had the potential for progression in the preclinical phase. PSA-detected prostate cancers are a mixture of progressive and non-progressive tumours with respect to Gleason score. The former may potentially benefit from screening. Identifying cancers with the potential for progression is important to target screening.
Copyright © 2010 UICC.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 20499312     DOI: 10.1002/ijc.25471

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cancer        ISSN: 0020-7136            Impact factor:   7.396


  5 in total

1.  Modeling grade progression in an active surveillance study.

Authors:  Lurdes Y T Inoue; Bruce J Trock; Alan W Partin; Herbert B Carter; Ruth Etzioni
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2013-10-09       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Gleason grade progression is uncommon.

Authors:  Kathryn L Penney; Meir J Stampfer; Jaquelyn L Jahn; Jennifer A Sinnott; Richard Flavin; Jennifer R Rider; Stephen Finn; Edward Giovannucci; Howard D Sesso; Massimo Loda; Lorelei A Mucci; Michelangelo Fiorentino
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2013-08-15       Impact factor: 12.701

3.  Polygenic hazard score to guide screening for aggressive prostate cancer: development and validation in large scale cohorts.

Authors:  Tyler M Seibert; Chun Chieh Fan; Yunpeng Wang; Verena Zuber; Roshan Karunamuni; J Kellogg Parsons; Rosalind A Eeles; Douglas F Easton; ZSofia Kote-Jarai; Ali Amin Al Olama; Sara Benlloch Garcia; Kenneth Muir; Henrik Grönberg; Fredrik Wiklund; Markus Aly; Johanna Schleutker; Csilla Sipeky; Teuvo Lj Tammela; Børge G Nordestgaard; Sune F Nielsen; Maren Weischer; Rasmus Bisbjerg; M Andreas Røder; Peter Iversen; Tim J Key; Ruth C Travis; David E Neal; Jenny L Donovan; Freddie C Hamdy; Paul Pharoah; Nora Pashayan; Kay-Tee Khaw; Christiane Maier; Walther Vogel; Manuel Luedeke; Kathleen Herkommer; Adam S Kibel; Cezary Cybulski; Dominika Wokolorczyk; Wojciech Kluzniak; Lisa Cannon-Albright; Hermann Brenner; Katarina Cuk; Kai-Uwe Saum; Jong Y Park; Thomas A Sellers; Chavdar Slavov; Radka Kaneva; Vanio Mitev; Jyotsna Batra; Judith A Clements; Amanda Spurdle; Manuel R Teixeira; Paula Paulo; Sofia Maia; Hardev Pandha; Agnieszka Michael; Andrzej Kierzek; David S Karow; Ian G Mills; Ole A Andreassen; Anders M Dale
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2018-01-10

4.  Clinicopathological and Prognostic Factors in 106 Prostate Cancer Patients Aged ≤55 Years: A Single-Center Study in China.

Authors:  Yan Xu; Xueling Yang; Tongguo Si; Haipeng Yu; Weihao Zhang; Yong Li; Zhi Guo
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2016-10-23

5.  A note on the catch-up time method for estimating lead or sojourn time in prostate cancer screening.

Authors:  Gerrit Draisma; Joost van Rosmalen
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2013-01-31       Impact factor: 2.373

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.