We have located links that may give you full text access.
Continuous versus discontinuous tumor involvement: A dilemma in prostate biopsy quantitation.
Prostate 2018 November
BACKGROUND: No consensus has been reached for an optimal method of quantifying discontinuous tumor foci separated by intervening benign tissue on prostate biopsy (PBx). We examined sets of PBx, where cancer involved only one core, and corresponding radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Cases were divided into 3 groups-Group 1 (n = 80): <3 mm in end-to-end tumor measurement (continuous/discontinuous); Group 2 (n = 22): ≥3 mm in tumor length (continuous); and Group 3 (n = 15): ≥3 mm in end-to-end tumor measurement (discontinuous). The rate of Gleason score ≥7 was considerably lower in Group 1 (9%/30% on PBx/RP) than in Group 2 (50% [P < 0.001]/59% [P = 0.015] on PBx/RP) or Group 3 (40% [P = 0.005]/46% [P = 0.237] on PBx/RP). pT2 disease was significantly more often found in Group 1 (88%) than in Group 2 (68%, P = 0.049) or Group 3 (60%, P = 0.018). Surgical margin was significantly more often positive in Group 3 (27%) than in Group 1 (5%, P = 0.020), but not Group 2 (9%, P = 0.198). Moreover, estimated cancer volume (cc, mean ± SD) was significantly smaller in Group 1 (1.89 ± 1.98) than in Group 2 (3.56 ± 2.92, P = 0.026) or Group 3 (3.44 ± 2.02, P = 0.013). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed higher risks of biochemical recurrence after RP in Group 2, compared with Group 1 (P = 0.001) or Group 3 (P = 0.096). In 93 patients with biopsy Gleason score 6 cancer, higher rates of pT2+/3 disease (P = 0.023) and positive margin (P = 0.026), as well as larger cancer volume (P = 0.063), on RP were still seen in Group 3, compared with Group 1, but their differences were not statistically significant between Group 2 and Group 3.
CONCLUSIONS: Linear quantitation including intervening benign tissue on PBx may more precisely predict the actual tumor extent.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Cases were divided into 3 groups-Group 1 (n = 80): <3 mm in end-to-end tumor measurement (continuous/discontinuous); Group 2 (n = 22): ≥3 mm in tumor length (continuous); and Group 3 (n = 15): ≥3 mm in end-to-end tumor measurement (discontinuous). The rate of Gleason score ≥7 was considerably lower in Group 1 (9%/30% on PBx/RP) than in Group 2 (50% [P < 0.001]/59% [P = 0.015] on PBx/RP) or Group 3 (40% [P = 0.005]/46% [P = 0.237] on PBx/RP). pT2 disease was significantly more often found in Group 1 (88%) than in Group 2 (68%, P = 0.049) or Group 3 (60%, P = 0.018). Surgical margin was significantly more often positive in Group 3 (27%) than in Group 1 (5%, P = 0.020), but not Group 2 (9%, P = 0.198). Moreover, estimated cancer volume (cc, mean ± SD) was significantly smaller in Group 1 (1.89 ± 1.98) than in Group 2 (3.56 ± 2.92, P = 0.026) or Group 3 (3.44 ± 2.02, P = 0.013). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed higher risks of biochemical recurrence after RP in Group 2, compared with Group 1 (P = 0.001) or Group 3 (P = 0.096). In 93 patients with biopsy Gleason score 6 cancer, higher rates of pT2+/3 disease (P = 0.023) and positive margin (P = 0.026), as well as larger cancer volume (P = 0.063), on RP were still seen in Group 3, compared with Group 1, but their differences were not statistically significant between Group 2 and Group 3.
CONCLUSIONS: Linear quantitation including intervening benign tissue on PBx may more precisely predict the actual tumor extent.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app