Literature DB >> 28753804

Variability in Outcomes for Patients with Intermediate-risk Prostate Cancer (Gleason Score 7, International Society of Urological Pathology Gleason Group 2-3) and Implications for Risk Stratification: A Systematic Review.

Christopher J Kane1, Scott E Eggener2, Alan W Shindel3, Gerald L Andriole4.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: Optimal management for patients with intermediate-risk (IR) prostate cancer (PCa) remains controversial. Clinical metrics provide guidance on appropriate management options.
OBJECTIVE: To report estimates for clinically relevant outcomes in men with IR PCa based on clinical and pathological features. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: PubMed and programs from key 2015 uro-oncology congresses were searched using the terms "intermediate", "Gleason 3 + 4", "Gleason 4 + 3", "active surveillance", "treatment", "adverse pathology", AND "prostate cancer." Articles meeting prespecified criteria were retrieved. Bibliographies were scanned for additional relevant references. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Men with IR PCa have a wide range of predicted clinically relevant outcomes. Within the IR category, estimate ranges for adverse surgical pathology and 5-yr disease progression are 15-64% and 21-91%, respectively. Clinical parameters and predictive nomograms refine these estimates, but do not uniformly differentiate favorable and unfavorable IR PCa. Variations in study design and data quality in source manuscripts mandate caution in interpreting results.
CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes in IR PCa are heterogeneous. Refinements in personalized risk assessment are needed to better select IR PCa patients for surveillance. PATIENT
SUMMARY: Current and future risk stratification tools may provide additional information to identify men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer who may consider active surveillance. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Clinical stage; Downstaging; Gleason 3 + 4; Gleason 4 + 3; Intermediate risk; Prognosis; Prostate cancer; Prostate-specific antigen; Upstaging

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28753804     DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2016.10.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol Focus        ISSN: 2405-4569


  11 in total

1.  Letter to the Editor: "Association between metformin medication, genetic variation and prostate cancer risk"-genotyping and patient categorizations, do they matter?

Authors:  Gerard Marshall Raj; Rama Krishnan
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2020-08-19       Impact factor: 5.554

2.  Overexpression of Nucleolin and Associated Genes in Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Virginie Firlej; Pascale Soyeux; Maya Nourieh; Eric Huet; Fannie Semprez; Yves Allory; Arturo Londono-Vallejo; Alexandre de la Taille; Francis Vacherot; Damien Destouches
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2022-04-19       Impact factor: 6.208

3.  Effect of Clinical Parameters on Risk of Death from Cancer after Radical Prostatectomy in Men with Localized and Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Daimantas Milonas; Tomas Ruzgas; Zilvinas Venclovas; Daniele Jonusaite; Aivaras Jonas Matijosaitis; Darius Trumbeckas; Edmundas Varpiotas; Stasys Auskalnis; Darijus Skaudickas; Ramunas Mickevicius; Kestutis Vaiciunas; Jonas Mickevicius; Mindaugas Jievaltas
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-18       Impact factor: 6.575

4.  Prostate Cancer Risk Stratification via Nondestructive 3D Pathology with Deep Learning-Assisted Gland Analysis.

Authors:  Weisi Xie; Nicholas P Reder; Can Koyuncu; Patrick Leo; Sarah Hawley; Hongyi Huang; Chenyi Mao; Nadia Postupna; Soyoung Kang; Robert Serafin; Gan Gao; Qinghua Han; Kevin W Bishop; Lindsey A Barner; Pingfu Fu; Jonathan L Wright; C Dirk Keene; Joshua C Vaughan; Andrew Janowczyk; Adam K Glaser; Anant Madabhushi; Lawrence D True; Jonathan T C Liu
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2021-12-01       Impact factor: 13.312

Review 5.  Prostate cancer.

Authors:  Richard J Rebello; Christoph Oing; Karen E Knudsen; Stacy Loeb; David C Johnson; Robert E Reiter; Silke Gillessen; Theodorus Van der Kwast; Robert G Bristow
Journal:  Nat Rev Dis Primers       Date:  2021-02-04       Impact factor: 52.329

6.  The utility of magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer diagnosis in the Australian setting.

Authors:  Jia Ying Isaac Tay; Ken Chow; Dominic J Gavin; Evie Mertens; Nicholas Howard; Benjamin Thomas; Philip Dundee; Justin Peters; Paul Simkin; Sevastjan Kranz; Moira Finlay; Stefan Heinze; Brian Kelly; Anthony Costello; Niall Corcoran
Journal:  BJUI Compass       Date:  2021-06-04

7.  MiR-378a inhibits glucose metabolism by suppressing GLUT1 in prostate cancer.

Authors:  A Cannistraci; P Hascoet; A Ali; P Mundra; N W Clarke; V Pavet; R Marais
Journal:  Oncogene       Date:  2022-01-17       Impact factor: 8.756

8.  Up- and downgrading in single intermediate-risk positive biopsy core prostate cancer.

Authors:  Benedikt Hoeh; Rocco Flammia; Lukas Hohenhorst; Gabriele Sorce; Francesco Chierigo; Zhe Tian; Fred Saad; Michele Gallucci; Alberto Briganti; Carlo Terrone; Shahrokh F Shariat; Markus Graefen; Derya Tilki; Luis A Kluth; Philipp Mandel; Felix K H Chun; Pierre I Karakiewicz
Journal:  Prostate Int       Date:  2022-01-26

9.  Long-term and pathological outcomes of low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy: implications for active surveillance.

Authors:  Valentin H Meissner; Mira Woll; Donna P Ankerst; Stefan Schiele; Jürgen E Gschwend; Kathleen Herkommer
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2021-05-10       Impact factor: 4.226

10.  Influence of Biopsy Gleason Score on the Risk of Lymph Node Invasion in Patients With Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy.

Authors:  Mike Wenzel; Felix Preisser; Benedikt Hoeh; Maria N Welte; Clara Humke; Clarissa Wittler; Christoph Würnschimmel; Andreas Becker; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Felix K H Chun; Philipp Mandel; Luis A Kluth
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2021-12-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.