Literature DB >> 8976257

Chromosomal anomalies in stage D1 prostate adenocarcinoma primary tumors and lymph node metastases detected by fluorescence in situ hybridization.

B M Gburek1, T A Kollmorgen, J Qian, S M D'Souza-Gburek, M M Lieber, R B Jenkins.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We determined if characteristic chromosomal anomalies exist within the primary tumors and lymph node metastases in patients with stage D1 prostate cancer, and compared the patterns of chromosomal alterations between primary tumors and nodal metastases.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis using peri-centromeric probes for chromosomes 6, 7, 8, 17, X and Y was performed on 5 mu. sections from paraffin embedded tissue blocks obtained from 23 consecutive patients who underwent radical prostatectomy and bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy in 1990 for stage D1 prostate cancer.
RESULTS: The dominant focus of primary tumor was compared to matched nodal metastases in 12 cases. Five of 12 primary tumor foci (41.7%) had similar chromosomal gains and the same fluorescence in situ hybridization ploidy result as the corresponding nodal metastases. Chromosomes 7 and X (73.2% of cases) were most frequently gained in the primary tumors, and chromosomes X and Y (81.2% of cases) were most frequently gained in the metastases. No primary tumor or metastasis demonstrated chromosomal loss. Three of 19 primary tumors (15.7%) were diploid, while 16 of 19 (84.3%) were nondiploid. Chromosomal aneusomy was inversely correlated with increasing Gleason summary score.
CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that the dominant primary tumor foci may not give rise to nodal metastases, gains of chromosomes 7, X and Y may be associated with metastatic behavior, and patients with stage D1 disease have a greater rate of aneuploidy than those with lower stage cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 8976257

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


  8 in total

Review 1.  Gonadoblastoma, testicular and prostate cancers, and the TSPY gene.

Authors:  Y F Lau
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 11.025

2.  Focal therapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Danil V Makarov; Alan W Partin
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2008

3.  There is no role for focal therapy in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Peter Black
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 1.862

4.  MRI targeted single fraction HDR Brachytherapy for localized Prostate Carcinoma: a feasibility study of focal radiation therapy (ProFocAL).

Authors:  Frank Fischbach; Peter Hass; Daniel Schindele; Philipp Genseke; Lisa Geisendorf; Christian Stehning; Martin Schostak; Thomas Brunner; Maciej Pech; Katharina Fischbach
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-12-11       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Anatomically versus biologically unifocal prostate cancer: a pathological evaluation in the context of focal therapy.

Authors:  Markos Karavitakis; Hashim U Ahmed; Paul D Abel; Steven Hazell; Mathias H Winkler
Journal:  Ther Adv Urol       Date:  2012-08

Review 6.  Tumor focality in prostate cancer: implications for focal therapy.

Authors:  Markos Karavitakis; Hashim U Ahmed; Paul D Abel; Steven Hazell; Mathias H Winkler
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-11-23       Impact factor: 66.675

7.  Pros and cons of focal therapy for localised prostate cancer.

Authors:  Luigi Mearini; Massimo Porena
Journal:  Prostate Cancer       Date:  2011-05-10

Review 8.  Focal therapy for prostate cancer: rationale and treatment opportunities.

Authors:  V Kasivisvanathan; M Emberton; H U Ahmed
Journal:  Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol)       Date:  2013-06-04       Impact factor: 4.126

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.