Debasish Sundi1, Oleksandr N Kryvenko2, H Ballentine Carter3, Ashley E Ross4, Jonathan I Epstein5, Edward M Schaeffer5. 1. The Brady Institute of Urology, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland. 2. Department of Pathology, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland. 3. The Brady Institute of Urology, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland; Department of Oncology, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland. 4. The Brady Institute of Urology, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland; Department of Pathology, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland. 5. The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Of men with very low risk prostate cancer at biopsy recent evidence shows that black American men are at greater risk for adverse oncologic outcomes after radical prostatectomy. We studied radical prostatectomy specimens from black and white men at very low risk to determine whether there are systematic pathological differences. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Radical prostatectomy specimens were evaluated in men with National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN) very low risk prostate cancer. At diagnosis all men underwent extended biopsy sampling (10 or more cores) and were treated in the modern Gleason grade era. We analyzed tumor volume, grade and location in 87 black and 89 white men. For each specimen the dominant nodule was defined as the largest tumor with the highest grade. RESULTS: Compared to white men, black men were more likely to have significant prostate cancer (61% vs 29%), Gleason 7 or greater (37% vs 11%, each p <0.001) and a volume of greater than 0.5 cm(3) (45% vs 21%, p = 0.001). Dominant nodules in black men were larger (median 0.28 vs 0.13 cm(3), p = 0.002) and more often anterior (51% vs 29%, p = 0.003). In men who underwent pathological upgrading the dominant nodule was also more frequently anterior in black than in white men (59% vs 0%, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Black men with very low risk prostate cancer at diagnosis have a significantly higher prevalence of anterior cancer foci that are of higher grade and larger volume. Enhanced imaging or anterior zone sampling may detect these significant anterior tumors, improving the outcome in black men considering active surveillance.
PURPOSE: Of men with very low risk prostate cancer at biopsy recent evidence shows that black American men are at greater risk for adverse oncologic outcomes after radical prostatectomy. We studied radical prostatectomy specimens from black and white men at very low risk to determine whether there are systematic pathological differences. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Radical prostatectomy specimens were evaluated in men with National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN) very low risk prostate cancer. At diagnosis all men underwent extended biopsy sampling (10 or more cores) and were treated in the modern Gleason grade era. We analyzed tumor volume, grade and location in 87 black and 89 white men. For each specimen the dominant nodule was defined as the largest tumor with the highest grade. RESULTS: Compared to white men, black men were more likely to have significant prostate cancer (61% vs 29%), Gleason 7 or greater (37% vs 11%, each p <0.001) and a volume of greater than 0.5 cm(3) (45% vs 21%, p = 0.001). Dominant nodules in black men were larger (median 0.28 vs 0.13 cm(3), p = 0.002) and more often anterior (51% vs 29%, p = 0.003). In men who underwent pathological upgrading the dominant nodule was also more frequently anterior in black than in white men (59% vs 0%, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Black men with very low risk prostate cancer at diagnosis have a significantly higher prevalence of anterior cancer foci that are of higher grade and larger volume. Enhanced imaging or anterior zone sampling may detect these significant anterior tumors, improving the outcome in black men considering active surveillance.
Authors: Cristina Magi-Galluzzi; Toyonori Tsusuki; Paul Elson; Kelly Simmerman; Chris LaFargue; Raquel Esgueva; Eric Klein; Mark A Rubin; Ming Zhou Journal: Prostate Date: 2010-09-28 Impact factor: 4.104
Authors: Jeffrey J Tosoian; Bruce J Trock; Patricia Landis; Zhaoyong Feng; Jonathan I Epstein; Alan W Partin; Patrick C Walsh; H Ballentine Carter Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-04-04 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Marc A Dall'Era; Peter C Albertsen; Christopher Bangma; Peter R Carroll; H Ballentine Carter; Matthew R Cooperberg; Stephen J Freedland; Laurence H Klotz; Christopher Parker; Mark S Soloway Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2012-06-07 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: R Tiguert; E L Gheiler; M V Tefilli; M Banerjee; D J Grignon; W Sakr; D P Wood; I J Powell; J E Pontes Journal: Prostate Date: 1998-12-01 Impact factor: 4.104
Authors: Debasish Sundi; Ashley E Ross; Elizabeth B Humphreys; Misop Han; Alan W Partin; H Ballentine Carter; Edward M Schaeffer Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-06-17 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Yun-Sok Ha; Amirali Salmasi; Michael Karellas; Eric A Singer; Jeong Hyun Kim; Misop Han; Alan W Partin; Wun-Jae Kim; Dong Hyeon Lee; Isaac Yi Kim Journal: Urology Date: 2013-03-07 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Michael S Leapman; Stephen J Freedland; William J Aronson; Christopher J Kane; Martha K Terris; Kelly Walker; Christopher L Amling; Peter R Carroll; Matthew R Cooperberg Journal: J Urol Date: 2016-06-25 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Michael Kongnyuy; Abhinav Sidana; Arvin K George; Akhil Muthigi; Amogh Iyer; Michele Fascelli; Meet Kadakia; Thomas P Frye; Richard Ho; Francesca Mertan; M Minhaj Siddiqui; Daniel Su; Maria J Merino; Baris Turkbey; Peter L Choyke; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2016-02-20 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: Amr Mahran; Kirtishri Mishra; Laura Bukavina; Fredrick Schumacher; Anna Quian; Christina Buzzy; Carvell T Nguyen; Vikas Gulani; Lee E Ponsky Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2019-05-02 Impact factor: 2.370
Authors: Baris Turkbey; Anna M Brown; Sandeep Sankineni; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto; Peter L Choyke Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2015-11-23 Impact factor: 508.702