DNA-cytometric grading of prostate cancer Systematic review with descriptive data analysis

Böcking, Alfred; Tils, Maurits; Schramm, Martin; Dietz, Josef; Biesterfeld, Stefan

doi:10.7243/2052-7896-2-7

Cited by 13 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 128 publications

(145 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Evaluating aneuploidy has emerged as a means to predict aggressiveness and the clinical course of (prostate) cancer 32 – 34 . We could show that tumor aneuploidy reflecting genomic instability was strongly associated with a GS ≥ 7 indicating a higher frequency in dedifferentiated prostate cancer tissue with worse prognosis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

SATB1, genomic instability and Gleason grading constitute a novel risk score for prostate cancer

Dumke

Gemoll

Oberländer

et al. 2021

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Current prostate cancer risk classifications rely on clinicopathological parameters resulting in uncertainties for prognostication. To improve individual risk stratification, we examined the predictive value of selected proteins with respect to tumor heterogeneity and genomic instability. We assessed the degree of genomic instability in 50 radical prostatectomy specimens by DNA-Image-Cytometry and evaluated protein expression in related 199 tissue-microarray (TMA) cores. Immunohistochemical data of SATB1, SPIN1, TPM4, VIME and TBB5 were correlated with the degree of genomic instability, established clinical risk factors and overall survival. Genomic instability was associated with a GS ≥ 7 (p = 0.001) and worse overall survival (p = 0.008). A positive SATB1 expression was associated with a GS ≤ 6 (p = 0.040), genomic stability (p = 0.027), and was a predictor for increased overall survival (p = 0.023). High expression of SPIN1 was also associated with longer overall survival (p = 0.048) and lower preoperative PSA-values (p = 0.047). The combination of SATB1 expression, genomic instability, and GS lead to a novel Prostate Cancer Prediction Score (PCP-Score) which outperforms the current D’Amico et al. stratification for predicting overall survival. Low SATB1 expression, genomic instability and GS ≥ 7 were identified as markers for poor prognosis. Their combination overcomes current clinical risk stratification regimes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

SATB1, genomic instability and Gleason grading constitute a novel risk score for prostate cancer

Dumke

Gemoll

Oberländer

et al. 2021

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Specific to our patients, a recent review [ 14 ] cited numerous studies with varying risk factors showing aneuploid tumors had a worse outcome after radical prostatectomy than diploid tumors, although is not confirmed by everyone [ 12 ]. Most of those studies were evaluating patients with the addition of androgen ablation or radiation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Failure of Ploidy and Proliferative Fraction to Predict Long-Term Outcome After Prostatectomy

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundHistorically, ploidy and S phase percentage appeared to be promising predictors for prostate cancer recurrence. Lack of uniformity and consistency hampered their development. We evaluated ploidy and S phase for prostate cancer death in a cohort of patients with long-term follow-up.MethodsWe identified 127 patients that had ploidy and S phase determined at the time of their radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. With 15 years of follow-up, we determined the risk of biochemical failure and risk of death from prostate cancer. We correlated the S phase and ploidy findings with standard pathology findings.ResultsA total of 107 (84%) had diploid and 20 (16%) had non-diploid cancers. The median S phase was 6.6%. There was no correlation of ploidy (P = 0.472) or S phase with preoperative PSA or Gleason score. On univariate analysis, EPE, margin positivity, seminal vesicle involvement, lymph node involvement, high Gleason score and PSA > 10 ng/mL were all predictive of biochemical failure. Ploidy and S phase were not. For prostate cancer death, only Gleason score was predictive.ConclusionsWith long-term follow-up in our cohort, Gleason score was predictive of prostate cancer death. Ploidy and S phase were not predictive for biochemical failure or prostate cancer mortality.

show abstract

“…As these are associated with different grades of DNA-aneuploidy [8], nuclear DNAmeasurements can be used to objectively grade the malignancy of cancers. Tavares and coworkers were the first to publish respective encouraging results for cancers of the prostate 1973 [10]. Since then dozens of publications have proven the prognostic validity of DNA-cytometry for that tumor [11].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This method, called DNA-cytometry is known since 1966 [9]. A large number of studies has been published that prove the prognostic validity of DNA-ploidy measurements in cancers of the prostate, independent of the Gleason-score [10]. Yet, so far prospective studies on untreated patients under active surveillance are missing [11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prediction of Non-Progression in Prostate Cancer Patients under Active Surveillance by DNA-Karyometry

Böcking¹,

Friedrich²,

Börgermann³

et al. 2017

SM J Uro

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The option of Active Surveillance for patients with localized prostate cancer depends on a low Gleason-Score (GS) of 6. Nevertheless about 30%have to face clinical progression within five years.Our hypothesis is that automated measurements of DNA-content of prostate cancer cells yield a DNA-grade of malignancy [1][2][3][4] that is able to predict non-progression of prostate cancers at much higher accuracy than the subjective GS.Nuclear DNA-measurements were performed from cancer tissue in residual biopsy-material of 80 patients from the HAROW-study. Local-and a reference pathologists GSs were available. Follow-up of mean 4,1 years included repeated PSA-values, number and GSs of positive biopsies, clinical stage, and in19cases results from prostatectomies.Reproducibility of GSs was 55% without and 45% with differentiation between 6 and 7a. Progression occurred in 37.5% if upgrade of any inclusion criterion was used as evidence and in 18,8% if only PSA-DT <36 months or upstaging to pT3. Prevalence of DNA-grade 1 was 40%.Sensitivity, specificity and negative predictive value of local pathologists GS, reference pathologists GS and DNA-karyometry were: 0%, 95.0% and 74.0%, 20.0%, 86.7% and 76.5%, 85.0%, 51.0% and 90.6%, if upgrade of any criterion of inclusion was used as evidence of progression and 5.9%, 96.8% and 79.2%, 23.5%, 87.3% and 80.9%, 100%, 50.8% and 100% if only PSA-DT < 36 months and/or upstaging to pT3 were used.Thus, objective automated DNA-karyometry can much more reliably exclude progression of prostate cancers under Active Surveillance within four years as compared with subjective Gleason-scoring.

show abstract

DNA-cytometric grading of prostate cancer Systematic review with descriptive data analysis

Cited by 13 publications

References 128 publications

SATB1, genomic instability and Gleason grading constitute a novel risk score for prostate cancer

SATB1, genomic instability and Gleason grading constitute a novel risk score for prostate cancer

Failure of Ploidy and Proliferative Fraction to Predict Long-Term Outcome After Prostatectomy

Prediction of Non-Progression in Prostate Cancer Patients under Active Surveillance by DNA-Karyometry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About