Literature DB >> 7585610

Chromosomal anomalies in prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and carcinoma detected by fluorescence in situ hybridization.

J Qian1, D G Bostwick, S Takahashi, T J Borell, J F Herath, M M Lieber, R B Jenkins.   

Abstract

The pathogenetic relationship between high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN), prostatic carcinoma, and metastases is poorly understood. We used fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) with centromere-specific probes for chromosomes 7, 8, 10, 12, and Y to evaluate numeric chromosomal anomalies in PIN (68 foci), localized prostatic carcinoma (78 foci), and lymph node metastases (8 foci) in 40 whole-mount radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy specimens. Chromosomal anomalies were found in 50, 51, and 100% of the foci of PIN, carcinoma, and metastases, respectively. The mean numbers of abnormal chromosomes per focus were 0.66 in PIN, 1.09 in carcinoma, and 3.75 in metastases. The most frequent anomaly in PIN was a gain of chromosome 8 (32% of foci), followed by gains of chromosomes 10 (13%), 7 (10%), 12 (4%), and Y (4%). The most frequent anomalies in foci of carcinoma were gains of chromosomes 7 and 8 (28% and 30% of foci, respectively), followed by gains of chromosomes 10 (23%), 12 (9%), and Y (9%). There was a positive correlation of the gain of chromosome 8 with the pathological stage and Gleason score (both P < 0.05). Usually, carcinoma foci contained more anomalies than paired PIN foci, but five prostates contained one or more foci of PIN with more anomalies than carcinoma. Among the cases with metastases, usually one or more foci of the primary tumor shared chromosomal anomalies with the matched metastases. Our results indicate that PIN and prostatic carcinoma foci have similar proportions of chromosomal anomalies, but foci of carcinoma usually have more alterations. This observation supports the hypothesis that PIN is often a precursor of carcinoma, although there are some carcinoma foci that have few or no apparent chromosomal alterations, whereas concurrent PIN foci have multiple alterations. A gain of chromosome 8 was the most common numerical alteration and was associated with increasing cancer stage and grade, suggesting that it may play a role in the initiation and progression of prostatic carcinoma. Usually, one or more foci of the primary tumor shared chromosomal anomalies with associated lymph node metastases, suggesting that, often, just a single focus of carcinoma gives rise to metastases.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7585610

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Res        ISSN: 0008-5472            Impact factor:   12.701


  37 in total

Review 1.  Prostate cancer prevention: review of target populations, pathological biomarkers, and chemopreventive agents.

Authors:  R Montironi; R Mazzucchelli; J R Marshall; P H Bartels
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 3.411

2.  Molecular sampling of prostate cancer: a dilemma for predicting disease progression.

Authors:  Andrea Sboner; Francesca Demichelis; Stefano Calza; Yudi Pawitan; Sunita R Setlur; Yujin Hoshida; Sven Perner; Hans-Olov Adami; Katja Fall; Lorelei A Mucci; Philip W Kantoff; Meir Stampfer; Swen-Olof Andersson; Eberhard Varenhorst; Jan-Erik Johansson; Mark B Gerstein; Todd R Golub; Mark A Rubin; Ove Andrén
Journal:  BMC Med Genomics       Date:  2010-03-16       Impact factor: 3.063

3.  Inflammation, focal atrophic lesions, and prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia with respect to risk of lethal prostate cancer.

Authors:  Sabina Davidsson; Michelangelo Fiorentino; Ove Andrén; Fang Fang; Lorelei A Mucci; Eberhard Varenhorst; Katja Fall; Jennifer R Rider
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2011-09-27       Impact factor: 4.254

4.  Aneusomy of chromosome 18 is associated with the development of colorectal carcinoma.

Authors:  A Nanashima; Y Tagawa; T Yasutake; T Sawai; T Tuji; O Sasano; T Nakagoe; H Ayabe
Journal:  J Gastroenterol       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 7.527

5.  Spontaneous but not experimental metastatic activities differentiate primary tumor-derived vs metastasis-derived mouse prostate cancer cell lines.

Authors:  S J Hall; T C Thompson
Journal:  Clin Exp Metastasis       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 5.150

6.  Characterization of TMPRSS2-ERG fusion high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and potential clinical implications.

Authors:  Juan-Miguel Mosquera; Sven Perner; Elizabeth M Genega; Martin Sanda; Matthias D Hofer; Kirsten D Mertz; Pamela L Paris; Jeff Simko; Tarek A Bismar; Gustavo Ayala; Rajal B Shah; Massimo Loda; Mark A Rubin
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2008-06-01       Impact factor: 12.531

7.  Mutation Profiling Indicates High Grade Prostatic Intraepithelial Neoplasia as Distant Precursors of Adjacent Invasive Prostatic Adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Sean J Gerrin; Adam G Sowalsky; Steven P Balk; Huihui Ye
Journal:  Prostate       Date:  2016-06-08       Impact factor: 4.104

Review 8.  Precursor lesions for prostate cancer.

Authors:  M R Feneley; C Busch
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 5.344

9.  TMPRSS2-ERG fusion heterogeneity in multifocal prostate cancer: clinical and biologic implications.

Authors:  Marc Barry; Sven Perner; Francesca Demichelis; Mark A Rubin
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 2.649

10.  Molecular mechanisms involving prostate cancer racial disparity.

Authors:  David Hatcher; Garrett Daniels; Iman Osman; Peng Lee
Journal:  Am J Transl Res       Date:  2009-04-20       Impact factor: 4.060

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.