Literature DB >> 21074212

A critical analysis of the tumor volume threshold for clinically insignificant prostate cancer using a data set of a randomized screening trial.

Tineke Wolters1, Monique J Roobol, Pim J van Leeuwen, Roderick C N van den Bergh, Robert F Hoedemaeker, Geert J L H van Leenders, Fritz H Schröder, Theodorus H van der Kwast.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The identification of clinically insignificant prostate cancer could help avoid overtreatment. Current criteria for insignificant prostate cancer use a tumor volume threshold of less than 0.5 ml for the index tumor. In this study we reassess this tumor volume threshold for clinically insignificant prostate cancer using an independent data set.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The rate of insignificant prostate cancer was calculated by modeling lifetime risk estimates of prostate cancer diagnosis in screened and nonscreened participants in a randomized prostate cancer screening trial. Using lifetime risk estimates 50.8% of screen detected prostate cancer was calculated to be clinically insignificant and the 49.2% largest tumor volume of 325 prostatectomy specimens was used to determine the threshold tumor volume for insignificant prostate cancer. Because stage and grade represent the strongest determinants of cancer aggressiveness, we also calculated the tumor volume threshold for insignificant cancer after the selection of patients with organ confined prostate cancer without Gleason pattern 4/5. The analyses were performed for total tumor volume and for index tumor volume.
RESULTS: The minimum threshold tumor volume of the index tumor and total tumor was 0.55 and 0.70 ml, respectively. After accounting for tumor stage and grade we obtained a threshold volume for the index tumor and total tumor of 1.3 and 2.5 ml, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: We confirmed the original value of the index tumor volume threshold of 0.5 ml for insignificant prostate cancer, and we demonstrated that clinically insignificant prostate cancer may include index Gleason score 6, pT2 tumors with volumes up to at least 1.3 ml. These results suggest a reconsideration of current methods and nomograms used for pretreatment risk assessment.
Copyright © 2011 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21074212     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2010.08.082

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  78 in total

Review 1.  Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: an update.

Authors:  Nathan Lawrentschuk; Laurence Klotz
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2011-04-26       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 2.  [Prostate cancer].

Authors:  J Noldus
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 0.639

3.  Can nomograms improve our ability to select candidates for active surveillance for prostate cancer?

Authors:  V Iremashvili; M Manoharan; D J Parekh; S Punnen
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2016-07-19       Impact factor: 5.554

4.  [Active surveillance of low risk prostate cancer].

Authors:  K Lellig; B Beyer; M Graefen; D Zaak; C Stief
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 0.639

5.  [Multiparametric MRI and MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy in patients with prior negative prostate biopsy].

Authors:  C Kesch; J P Radtke; F Distler; S Boxler; T Klein; C Hüttenbrink; K Hees; W Roth; M Roethke; H P Schlemmer; M Hohenfellner; B A Hadaschik
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 0.639

6.  Assessment of Prostate Cancer Aggressiveness by Use of the Combination of Quantitative DWI and Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI.

Authors:  Andreas M Hötker; Yousef Mazaheri; Ömer Aras; Junting Zheng; Chaya S Moskowitz; Tatsuo Gondo; Kazuhiro Matsumoto; Hedvig Hricak; Oguz Akin
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2016-02-22       Impact factor: 3.959

7.  Insignificant disease among men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Sung Kyu Hong; Emily Vertosick; Daniel D Sjoberg; Peter T Scardino; James A Eastham
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-09-27       Impact factor: 4.226

8.  Natural history of small index lesions suspicious for prostate cancer on multiparametric MRI: recommendations for interval imaging follow-up.

Authors:  Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Barış Türkbey; Ardeshir R Rastinehad; Annerleim Walton-Diaz; Anthony N Hoang; M Minhaj Siddiqui; Lambros Stamatakis; Hong Truong; Jeffrey W Nix; Srinivas Vourganti; Kinzya B Grant; Maria J Merino; Peter L Choyke; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  Diagn Interv Radiol       Date:  2014 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.630

Review 9.  Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Laurence Klotz
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 3.092

10.  The role of magnetic resonance imaging in delineating clinically significant prostate cancer.

Authors:  Karim Chamie; Geoffrey A Sonn; David S Finley; Nelly Tan; Daniel J A Margolis; Steven S Raman; Shyam Natarajan; Jiaoti Huang; Robert E Reiter
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 2.649

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.