Literature DB >> 22212080

Staging of prostate cancer.

Liang Cheng1, Rodolfo Montironi, David G Bostwick, Antonio Lopez-Beltran, Daniel M Berney.   

Abstract

Prostatic carcinoma (PCa) is a significant cause of cancer morbidity and mortality worldwide. Accurate staging is critical for prognosis assessment and treatment planning for PCa. Despite the large volume of clinical activity and research, the challenge to define the most appropriate and clinically relevant staging system remains. The pathologically complex and uncertain clinical course of prostate cancer further complicates the design of staging classification and a substaging system suitable for individualized care. This review will focus on recent progress and controversial issues related to prostate cancer staging. The 2010 revision of the American Joint Committee on Cancer/Union Internationale Contre le Cancer (AJCC/UICC) tumour, node and metastasis (TNM) system is the most widely used staging system at this time. Despite general acceptance of the system as a whole, there is controversy and uncertainty about its application, particularly for T2 subclassification. The three-tiered T2 classification system for organ-confined prostate cancer is superfluous, considering the biology and anatomy of PCa. A tumour size-based substaging system may be considered in the future TNM subclassification of pT2 cancer. Lymph node status is one of the most important prognostic factors for prostate cancer. Nevertheless, clinical outcomes in patients with positive lymph nodes are variable. Identification of patients at the greatest risk of systemic progression helps in the selection of appropriate therapy. The data suggest that the inherent aggressiveness of metastatic prostate cancer is closely linked to the tumour volume of lymph node metastasis. We recommend that a future TNM staging system should consider subclassification of node-positive cancer on the basis of nodal cancer volume, using the diameter of the largest nodal metastasis and/or the number of positive nodes.
© 2011 Blackwell Publishing Limited.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22212080     DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2559.2011.04025.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Histopathology        ISSN: 0309-0167            Impact factor:   5.087


  39 in total

1.  Histological step sectioning of pelvic lymph nodes increases the number of identified lymph node metastases.

Authors:  Birte Engvad; Mads H Poulsen; Pia W Staun; Steen Walter; Niels Marcussen
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2013-11-21       Impact factor: 4.064

Review 2.  Imaging of distant metastases of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Filippo Pesapane; Marcin Czarniecki; Matteo Basilio Suter; Baris Turkbey; Geert Villeirs
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2018-09-14       Impact factor: 3.064

3.  Co-Expression of Putative Cancer Stem Cell Markers CD44 and CD133 in Prostate Carcinomas.

Authors:  Elham Kalantari; Mojgan Asgari; Seyedehmoozhan Nikpanah; Naghme Salarieh; Mohammad Hossein Asadi Lari; Zahra Madjd
Journal:  Pathol Oncol Res       Date:  2017-01-12       Impact factor: 3.201

4.  Impact of the extent of extraprostatic extension defined by Epstein's method in patients with negative surgical margins and negative lymph node invasion.

Authors:  T Maubon; N Branger; C Bastide; G Lonjon; K-A Harvey-Bryan; P Validire; S Giusiano; D Rossi; X Cathelineau; F Rozet
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2016-07-12       Impact factor: 5.554

Review 5.  Multiparametric MRI in prostate cancer management.

Authors:  Linda M Johnson; Baris Turkbey; William D Figg; Peter L Choyke
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-05-20       Impact factor: 66.675

6.  Alternatively activated macrophages are associated with metastasis and poor prognosis in prostate adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Wenxue Hu; Yunjuan Qian; Feng Yu; Wei Liu; Yanhua Wu; Xiaowu Fang; Wenke Hao
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2015-06-19       Impact factor: 2.967

7.  [TNM-Classification of localized prostate cancer : The clinical T-category does not correspond to the required demands].

Authors:  J Herden; A Heidenreich; L Weißbach
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 0.639

8.  Co-expression of TLR-9 and MMP-13 is associated with the degree of tumour differentiation in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Elham Kalantari; Maryam Abolhasani; Raheleh Roudi; Mohammad M Farajollahi; Seif Farhad; Zahra Madjd; Shaghayegh Askarian-Amiri; Monireh Mohsenzadegan
Journal:  Int J Exp Pathol       Date:  2019-05-14       Impact factor: 1.925

Review 9.  Functional and Targeted Lymph Node Imaging in Prostate Cancer: Current Status and Future Challenges.

Authors:  Harriet C Thoeny; Sebastiano Barbieri; Johannes M Froehlich; Baris Turkbey; Peter L Choyke
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  The Significance of Accurate Determination of Gleason Score for Therapeutic Options and Prognosis of Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Burkhard Helpap; Daniel Ringli; Jens Tonhauser; Immanuel Poser; Jürgen Breul; Heidrun Gevensleben; Hans-Helge Seifert
Journal:  Pathol Oncol Res       Date:  2015-11-12       Impact factor: 3.201

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.