Literature DB >> 7523719

Radical prostatectomy for impalpable prostate cancer: the Johns Hopkins experience with tumors found on transurethral resection (stages T1A and T1B) and on needle biopsy (stage T1C).

J I Epstein1, P C Walsh, C B Brendler.   

Abstract

We review the pathological findings of impalpable prostate cancer detected by transurethral resection (stages T1a and T1b) and needle biopsy (stage T1c). The short-term (4 years) and long-term (8 to 10 years) natural histories of untreated stage T1a prostate cancer are examined, as are options to follow patients expectantly. The findings on radical prostatectomy for stages T1a and T1b disease are reviewed and compared. Of the 64 cases of stage T1a disease 13 (20%) showed substantial tumor, including 7 with more than 1 cc of tumor, 5 with capsular penetration and 1 with a Gleason grade 4 + 5 = 9 tumor. Based on preoperative pathological parameters, one could not predict which cases had minimal versus substantial tumor. In a study from our institution that undertook complete histological examination of 39 radical prostatectomy specimens of stage T1b carcinoma, we found that all prostates contained residual carcinoma, 26% had capsular penetration and 10% had invasion of the seminal vesicles. When comparing morphometrically determined volumes of carcinoma with similar data from 56 patients with stage T2 carcinoma, stage T1b tumors were much more heterogeneous in grade, location and volume than were stage T2 lesions. Unless all 3 variables (grade, volume and location) were known, the final pathological stage of T1b cancers could not be predicted with confidence. Finally, we examined preoperative clinical and pathological parameters in 157 men with clinical stage T1c disease undergoing radical prostatectomy, and correlated these findings with pathological extent of disease in the surgical specimen in an attempt to identify a subset of patients with potentially biologically insignificant tumor who might be followed conservatively. Of the tumors 16% were insignificant (less than 0.2 cc, organ confined and Gleason grade less than 7), 10% were minimal (0.2 to 0.5 cc, organ confined and Gleason grade less than 7), 37% were moderate (more than 0.5 cc or capsular penetration with Gleason sum less than 7) and 37% were advanced (capsular penetration with Gleason sum 7 or more, or positive margins, positive seminal vesicles or positive lymph nodes). These findings are intermediate between those found in clinical stages T1a and T2 disease. The best model predicting insignificant tumor was a prostate specific antigen (PSA) density of less than 0.1 and no adverse pathological finding on needle biopsy or PSA density of 0.1 to 0.15 with less than 3 mm. low to intermediate grade cancer on only 1 needle biopsy core. The positive predictive value of the model was 95% with a negative predictive value of 66%.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1994        PMID: 7523719     DOI: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)32370-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  17 in total

1.  [Incidental carcinoma of the prostate: can we and should we recommend radical prostatectomy?].

Authors:  R Paul; C Knebel; H van Randenborgh; H Kübler; M Alschibaja; M Günther; R Hartung
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 0.639

2.  Does screening for prostate cancer identify clinically important disease?

Authors:  M R Feneley
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 1.891

3.  A human xenograft model for testing early events of epithelial neoplastic invasion.

Authors:  J McCandless; A Cress; I Rabinovitz; C Payne; G Bowden; J Knox; R Nagle
Journal:  Int J Oncol       Date:  1997-02       Impact factor: 5.650

Review 4.  Stage T1c prostate cancer: defining the appropriate staging evaluation and the role for pelvic lymphadenectomy.

Authors:  M C Beduschi; R Beduschi; J E Oesterling
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 5.  Ultrasound findings are not useful for defining stage T1c prostate cancer.

Authors:  H Sanders; R el-Galley
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 6.  Active surveillance for prostate cancer: current evidence and contemporary state of practice.

Authors:  Jeffrey J Tosoian; H Ballentine Carter; Abbey Lepor; Stacy Loeb
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2016-03-08       Impact factor: 14.432

7.  Prostate-specific antigen density--a reliable parameter for the detection of prostate cancer?

Authors:  W F Thon; F Gadban; M C Truss; M Kuczyk; U Hartmann; U Jonas
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 4.226

8.  Novel diagnostic biomarkers for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Chikezie O Madu; Yi Lu
Journal:  J Cancer       Date:  2010-10-06       Impact factor: 4.207

9.  Yearly prostate specific antigen and digital rectal examination fluctuations in a screened population.

Authors:  Donna Pauler Ankerst; Ryan Miyamoto; Prakash Vijay Nair; Brad H Pollock; Ian M Thompson; Dipen J Parekh
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2009-03-14       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  Diagnosis of relevant prostate cancer using supplementary cores from magnetic resonance imaging-prompted areas following multiple failed biopsies.

Authors:  Daniel N Costa; B Nicolas Bloch; David F Yao; Martin G Sanda; Long Ngo; Elizabeth M Genega; Ivan Pedrosa; William C DeWolf; Neil M Rofsky
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2013-04-18       Impact factor: 2.546

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.