Literature DB >> 6823718

Understaging and undergrading of prostate cancer. Argument for postoperative radiation as adjuvant therapy.

P H Lange, P Narayan.   

Abstract

This report reviews the staging and grading errors that occurred in a consecutive series of 14 patients treated for prostate cancer by radical prostatectomy and of 58 patients treated by both radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy. Almost half of the patients who were in Stages A2, B1, or B2 by clinical criteria were in pathologic Stage C when both capsular perforation and seminal vesicle invasion were used as the criteria for Stage C disease. Seminal vesicle invasion was the more important prognostic factor. Moreover, the pathologic grade of cancer, as determined by needle or transurethral biopsy, was underestimated in 39 per cent of the cases; when the grade was corrected, the patient often was in a worse prognostic group than the one originally assigned. Thus, in this series, more than 40 per cent of the patients were at high risk of persistent or recurrent disease after radical prostatectomy. Radiation was given after operation to 22 such high-risk patients and was well tolerated.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1983        PMID: 6823718     DOI: 10.1016/0090-4295(83)90002-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  6 in total

1.  The significance of modified Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma in biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens.

Authors:  Burkhard Helpap; Lars Egevad
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2006-11-08       Impact factor: 4.064

Review 2.  Is it time to consider a role for MRI before prostate biopsy?

Authors:  Hashim U Ahmed; Alex Kirkham; Manit Arya; Rowland Illing; Alex Freeman; Clare Allen; Mark Emberton
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 66.675

Review 3.  Correlation between Gleason Scores in Needle Biopsy and Corresponding Radical Prostatectomy Specimens: A Twelve-Year Review.

Authors:  Maliheh Khoddami; Yassaman Khademi; Maryam Kazemi Aghdam; Haleh Soltanghoraee
Journal:  Iran J Pathol       Date:  2016

Review 4.  Clinical implications of changing definitions within the Gleason grading system.

Authors:  Tamara L Lotan; Jonathan I Epstein
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2010-02-16       Impact factor: 14.432

5.  Hormone resistant prostatic adenocarcinoma. An evaluation of prognostic factors in pre- and post-treatment specimens.

Authors:  A Berner; J M Nesland; H Waehre; J Silde; S D Fosså
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1993-08       Impact factor: 7.640

6.  Histopathological grading and DNA ploidy as prognostic markers in metastatic prostatic cancer.

Authors:  T Jørgensen; K Yogesan; F Skjørten; A Berner; K J Tveter; H E Danielsen
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 7.640

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.