Literature DB >> 23918245

Guidelines on processing and reporting of prostate biopsies: the 2013 update of the pathology committee of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC).

T Van der Kwast1, L Bubendorf, C Mazerolles, M R Raspollini, G J Van Leenders, C-G Pihl, P Kujala.   

Abstract

The histopathological examination of a prostate biopsy is the basis of prostate cancer diagnostics. Prostate cancer grade and extent of cancer in the diagnostic biopsy are important determinants of patient management. Quality of the prostate biopsy and its processing may influence the outcome of the histopathological evaluation. Further, an unambiguous and concise pathology reporting is essential for an appropriate clinical decision process. Since our initial report in 2003, there have been several practice changes, including the increased uptake of follow-up biopsies of patients who are under active surveillance, increasingly taken under guidance of MRI, or who underwent a prostate-sparing therapy. Therefore, we investigated the literature on the current pathology practices and recommendations with regard to prostate biopsy processing and reporting, both at initial diagnosis and in the context of follow-up biopsies in order to update our guidelines on the optimal processing and reporting of prostate biopsies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23918245     DOI: 10.1007/s00428-013-1466-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Virchows Arch        ISSN: 0945-6317            Impact factor:   4.064


  56 in total

1.  Core length in prostate biopsy: size matters.

Authors:  Can Öbek; Tünkut Doğanca; Sinan Erdal; Sarper Erdoğan; Haydar Durak
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-04-11       Impact factor: 7.450

2.  Pathological reporting of colorectal cancer specimens: a retrospective survey in an academic Canadian pathology department.

Authors:  Nancy G Chan; Anil Duggal; Michele M Weir; David K Driman
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 2.089

3.  Prostate needle biopsy quality in reduction by dutasteride of prostate cancer events study: worldwide comparison of improvement with investigator training and centralized laboratory processing.

Authors:  David G Bostwick; Junqi Qian; Krystyna Drewnowska; Stephen Varvel; Kathleen C Bostwick; Michael Marberger; Roger S Rittmaster
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2009-11-25       Impact factor: 2.649

4.  Can molecular markers stratify the diagnostic value of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia?

Authors:  Seife Hailemariam; Jürg Vosbeck; Gieri Cathomas; Inti Zlobec; Gianfranco Mattarelli; Tobias Eichenberger; Tobias Zellweger; Alex Bachmann; Thomas C Gasser; Lukas Bubendorf
Journal:  Hum Pathol       Date:  2011-01-15       Impact factor: 3.466

5.  Diagnostic uncertainty expressed in prostate needle biopsies. A College of American Pathologists Q-probes Study of 15,753 prostate needle biopsies in 332 institutions.

Authors:  D A Novis; R J Zarbo; P A Valenstein
Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 5.534

6.  Needle core length in sextant biopsy influences prostate cancer detection rate.

Authors:  Kenneth A Iczkowski; George Casella; R John Seppala; Galin L Jones; Barbara A Mishler; Junqi Qian; David G Bostwick
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 2.649

7.  False-negative prostate needle biopsies: frequency, histopathologic features, and follow-up.

Authors:  Tineke Wolters; Theodorus H van der Kwast; Cornelis J Vissers; Chris H Bangma; Monique Roobol; Fritz H Schröder; Geert J L H van Leenders
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 6.394

Review 8.  Immunohistochemistry in diagnostic surgical pathology of the prostate.

Authors:  Omar Hameed; Peter A Humphrey
Journal:  Semin Diagn Pathol       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 3.464

9.  Gleason score and lethal prostate cancer: does 3 + 4 = 4 + 3?

Authors:  Jennifer R Stark; Sven Perner; Meir J Stampfer; Jennifer A Sinnott; Stephen Finn; Anna S Eisenstein; Jing Ma; Michelangelo Fiorentino; Tobias Kurth; Massimo Loda; Edward L Giovannucci; Mark A Rubin; Lorelei A Mucci
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-05-11       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Overall and worst gleason scores are equally good predictors of prostate cancer progression.

Authors:  Teemu T Tolonen; Paula M Kujala; Teuvo L J Tammela; Vilppu J Tuominen; Jorma J Isola; Tapio Visakorpi
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2011-10-06       Impact factor: 2.264

View more
  19 in total

1.  Minimum 6 mm core length is strongly predictive for the presence of glandular tissue in transrectal prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Hasan Yilmaz; Seyfettin Ciftci; Murat Ustuner; Ufuk Yavuz; Ali Saribacak; Bahar Muezzinoglu; Ozdal Dillioglugil
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-03-17       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Handling and reporting of transperineal template prostate biopsy in Europe: a web-based survey by the European Network of Uropathology (ENUP).

Authors:  Solene-Florence Kammerer-Jacquet; Eva Compérat; Lars Egevad; Ondra Hes; Jon Oxley; Murali Varma; Glen Kristiansen; Daniel M Berney
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2018-01-11       Impact factor: 4.064

3.  Do longer or shorter cores yield more cancer?

Authors:  Yılmaz Hasan; Dillioğlugil Özdal
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-04-27       Impact factor: 4.226

4.  Are 10-, 10-12-, or > 12-mm prostate biopsy core quality control cutoffs reasonable?

Authors:  Brunno C F Sanches; Ana Luiza Lalli; Wilmar Azal Neto; Athanase Billis; Leonardo Oliveira Reis
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-03-01       Impact factor: 4.226

5.  Longer biopsy cores do not increase prostate cancer detection rate: A large-scale cohort study refuting cut-off values indicated in the literature.

Authors:  Hasan Yılmaz; Ufuk Yavuz; Murat Üstüner; Seyfettin Çiftçi; Hikmet Yaşar; Bahar Müezzinoğlu; Ali Kemal Uslubaş; Özdal Dillioğlugil
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2017-07-31

6.  Gleason underestimation is predicted by prostate biopsy core length.

Authors:  Leonardo O Reis; Brunno C F Sanches; Gustavo Borges de Mendonça; Daniel M Silva; Tiago Aguiar; Ocivaldo P Menezes; Athanase Billis
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-08-02       Impact factor: 4.226

7.  Variation in reporting of cancer extent and benign histology in prostate biopsies among European pathologists.

Authors:  D M Berney; F Algaba; P Camparo; E Compérat; D Griffiths; G Kristiansen; A Lopez-Beltran; R Montironi; M Varma; L Egevad
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2014-03-04       Impact factor: 4.064

8.  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

9.  A randomized trial of early detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (ProScreen): study design and rationale.

Authors:  Anssi Auvinen; Antti Rannikko; Kimmo Taari; Paula Kujala; Tuomas Mirtti; Anu Kenttämies; Irina Rinta-Kiikka; Terho Lehtimäki; Niku Oksala; Kim Pettersson; Teuvo L Tammela
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2017-07-31       Impact factor: 8.082

Review 10.  Optimizing safety and accuracy of prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Tonye A Jones; Jan Phillip Radtke; Boris Hadaschik; Leonard S Marks
Journal:  Curr Opin Urol       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 2.309

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.