| Literature DB >> 34085792 |
Katherine G Holder1, Bernardo Galvan1, Andrew S Knight1, Freedom Ha1, Reagan Collins1, Preston E Weaver1, Luis Brandi2, Werner T de Riese3.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The negative correlation between BPH-size and incidence of prostate cancer (PCa) is well-documented in the literature, however the exact mechanism is not well-understood. The present study uses histo-anatomical imaging to study prostate volume in correlation to prostate capsule thickness, and glandular epithelial cell density within the peripheral zone (PZ).Entities:
Keywords: Image processing; Prostate; Prostatic hyperplasia
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34085792 PMCID: PMC8246008 DOI: 10.4111/icu.20200605
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Investig Clin Urol ISSN: 2466-0493
Fig. 1Anatomical diagram of the prostate. A transverse section extending from anterior to posterior prostate, through the mid-gland, across the urethra, within the equatorial zone of the prostate, showing the different zones of the prostate—the anterior stroma (AS), transition zone (TZ), and peripheral zone (PZ). Measurements were taken at the 4:00, 6:00, and 8:00 regions, above and below the equatorial zone, as shown in the upper left-hand corner. L, left; R, right.
Fig. 2Example of a small prostate (31 mL) for image processing. Thick lines indicate measurements for average capsule thickness. Normal glands are indicated by “+” symbol. (A) Showing H&E stain at 50× magnification. (B) Glandular pixel visualization of the same prostate specimen after pixel intensity processing, excluding surrounding connective tissue and non-glandular structure in the peripheral zone.
Patient demographics and characteristics
| Variable | n (%) | Mean±SD | Median (IQR) | Minimum | Maximum | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (y) | 63.5±7.68 | 64 (58.25–69.75) | 35 | 75 | ||
| Height (cm) | 176.8±7.47 | 178.05 (172.72–182.88) | 160.02 | 191.01 | ||
| Weight (kg) | 91.77±17.76 | 92.08 (77.86–101.60) | 63.37 | 151.95 | ||
| Charlson Comorbidity Index | 4.55±1.41 | 4 (3–5) | 2 | 9 | ||
| ASA Physical Status Classification System | 2.5±0.54 | 2 (2–3) | 2 | 4 | ||
| PSA (ng/mL) | 10.11±9.94 | 7.3 (5.16–10.82) | 1.4 | 68.39 | ||
| PSA density | 0.27±0.26 | 0.19 (0.11–0.34) | 0.02 | 1.72 | ||
| Gleason Score of final pathology readinga | 6.88±0.46 | 7 (7–7) | 6 | 8 | ||
| Prostate volume (mL) | 55.53±33.27 | 20 (31.25–71.5) | 20 | 160 | ||
| Tumor volume (mL) | 7.12±5.67 | 5.26 (3.05–9.15) | 0.81 | 30 | ||
| Average glandular epithelial cell density | 0.09±0.05 | 0.09 (0.05–0.12) | 0.01 | 0.24 | ||
| Average capsule width (mm) | 6.78±2.82 | 7.30 (4.47–9.26) | 1.42 | 10.88 | ||
| Race | ||||||
| White | 43 (71.7) | |||||
| Black | 7 (11.7) | |||||
| Hispanic | 10 (16.6) | |||||
| Smoker | ||||||
| Non-smoker | 30 (50.0) | |||||
| Prior smoker | 18 (30.0) | |||||
| Current smoker | 12 (20.0) | |||||
| Surgical approach | ||||||
| Open | 22 (36.7) | |||||
| Laparoscopic | 36 (60.0) | |||||
| Robotic | 2 (3.3) | |||||
| Pathologic stage | ||||||
| No cancer found in final prostatectomy specimen | 1 (1.7) | |||||
| pT2 | 44 (73.3) | |||||
| pT3 | 15 (25.0) | |||||
| Pathologic nodal stage | ||||||
| NX | 15 (25.0) | |||||
| N0 | 43 (71.7) | |||||
| N1 | 2 (3.3) | |||||
SD, standard deviation; IQR, interquartile range; ASA, American Society of Anesthesiologists; PSA, prostate specific antigen.
a:Case with no cancer in final specimen was excluded.
Summary of multiple linear regression
| Parameter | B | SEb | p-value | 95% CI lower | 95% CI upper |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Constant) | 68.39 | 18.48 | <0.001 | 31.38 | 105.40 |
| Average capsule width | 2.25 | 1.64 | 0.175 | − 1.03 | 5.53 |
| Average glandular epithelial cell density | − 3.11 | 0.99 | 0.003 | − 5.10 | − 1.12 |
B, unstandardized regression coefficient; SEb, standard error of the coefficient; CI, confidence interval.
Fig. 3Average capsule width and average glandular epithelial cell density plotted against prostate volume with linear predictors and 95% confidence interval.
Fig. 4Example of a large prostate (113 mL), showing atrophy and fibrosis as well as a thick capsule covering the entire H&E image (12 mm) at 50× magnification. This image reveals severe gland atrophy when compared to a smaller prostate as seen in Fig. 2A.