M L Wills1, J Sauvageot, A W Partin, R Gurganus, J I Epstein. 1. Department of Pathology and The James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland 21287, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: There are few studies evaluating multiple variables on sextant biopsies with the intent to predict stage in radical prostatectomy specimens. METHODS: We studied 113 sextant biopsies with corresponding totally submitted radical prostatectomy specimens. Variables evaluated on sextant biopsies included total length and percent of cancer; maximum length and percent of cancer on one core; location (apex, mid, base); bilaterality; Gleason grade; number of cores involved; serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level; and serum PSA density (PSAD). Radical prostatectomy stage was classified as organ versus non-organ confined. RESULTS: The following variables individually correlated with radical prostatectomy stage: total cancer measured in millimeters (P <0.0001) or percent (P <0.0005); biopsy Gleason score (P <0.0001); number of involved cores (P <0.0001); maximum cancer on one core measured in millimeters (P = 0.0001); maximum percent of cancer on one core (P = 0.01); bilaterality (P = 0.01); PSA level (P = 0.03), and PSAD (P = 0.001). The most predictive sets of two variables that correlated with stage included high Gleason score (P <0.0001) combined with numbers of cores involved (P = 0.002). When biopsies had Gleason scores of 6 or less, two or fewer positive cores, and serum PSA of 0 to 4 ng/mL, 89% were organ confined. When biopsies had Gleason scores of 6 or less with two unilaterally positive cores, 87% were organ confined. In biopsies with Gleason scores of 7 or more and more than one positive core, only 10% were organ confined. CONCLUSIONS: The most important predictors of stage by sextant needle biopsy evaluation are numbers of cores involved with carcinoma and high Gleason score. Bilaterality and serum PSA values improved prediction in two small subgroups. In 37% of our population we were able to predict with a greater than 87% probability the organ-confined versus non-organ-confined status.
OBJECTIVES: There are few studies evaluating multiple variables on sextant biopsies with the intent to predict stage in radical prostatectomy specimens. METHODS: We studied 113 sextant biopsies with corresponding totally submitted radical prostatectomy specimens. Variables evaluated on sextant biopsies included total length and percent of cancer; maximum length and percent of cancer on one core; location (apex, mid, base); bilaterality; Gleason grade; number of cores involved; serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level; and serum PSA density (PSAD). Radical prostatectomy stage was classified as organ versus non-organ confined. RESULTS: The following variables individually correlated with radical prostatectomy stage: total cancer measured in millimeters (P <0.0001) or percent (P <0.0005); biopsy Gleason score (P <0.0001); number of involved cores (P <0.0001); maximum cancer on one core measured in millimeters (P = 0.0001); maximum percent of cancer on one core (P = 0.01); bilaterality (P = 0.01); PSA level (P = 0.03), and PSAD (P = 0.001). The most predictive sets of two variables that correlated with stage included high Gleason score (P <0.0001) combined with numbers of cores involved (P = 0.002). When biopsies had Gleason scores of 6 or less, two or fewer positive cores, and serum PSA of 0 to 4 ng/mL, 89% were organ confined. When biopsies had Gleason scores of 6 or less with two unilaterally positive cores, 87% were organ confined. In biopsies with Gleason scores of 7 or more and more than one positive core, only 10% were organ confined. CONCLUSIONS: The most important predictors of stage by sextant needle biopsy evaluation are numbers of cores involved with carcinoma and high Gleason score. Bilaterality and serum PSA values improved prediction in two small subgroups. In 37% of our population we were able to predict with a greater than 87% probability the organ-confined versus non-organ-confined status.
Authors: Maisa M Q Quintal; Luciana R Meirelles; Leandro L L Freitas; Luis A Magna; Ubirajara Ferreira; Athanase Billis Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2011-02-22 Impact factor: 2.370
Authors: K R Keshari; H Tsachres; R Iman; L Delos Santos; Z L Tabatabai; K Shinohara; D B Vigneron; J Kurhanewicz Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2011-07 Impact factor: 4.044
Authors: Ramzi Rajab; Gabrielle Fisher; Michael W Kattan; Christopher S Foster; Tim Oliver; Henrik Møller; Victor Reuter; Peter Scardino; Jack Cuzick; Daniel M Berney Journal: Virchows Arch Date: 2010-09-09 Impact factor: 4.064
Authors: D M Berney; F Algaba; P Camparo; E Compérat; D Griffiths; G Kristiansen; A Lopez-Beltran; R Montironi; M Varma; L Egevad Journal: Virchows Arch Date: 2014-03-04 Impact factor: 4.064
Authors: V Y Zhang; A Westphalen; L Delos Santos; Z L Tabatabai; K Shinohara; D B Vigneron; J Kurhanewicz Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2013-08-12 Impact factor: 4.044