Effect of complete androgen blockade on pathologic stage and resection margin status of prostate cancer: progress pathology report of the Italian PROSIT study

Bono, Aldo; Pagano, Francesco; Montironi, Rodolfo; Zattoni, Filiberto; Manganelli, Antonio; Selvaggi, Francesco Paolo; Comeri, G.; Fiaccavento, G.; Guazzieri, S.; Selli, Cesare; Lembo, A.; Cosciani-Cunico, S.; Potenzoni, D.; Muto, Giovanni; Diamanti, L.; Santinelli, Alfredo; Mazzucchelli, Roberta; Prayer-Galletti, T.

doi:10.1016/s0090-4295(00)00866-9

Cited by 28 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Only a very small minority of these multifoci were detected in their entirety by MRI, even with the retrospective analyses of findings. We limited the cases to those receiving no, or hormonal therapy for less than 3 months, for the reason that this period is too short for major clinical effects [11][12][13] .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Neoadjuvant hormonal therapy was in fact performed for 25 of the 37 patients before the operation ( table 1 ) all but one receiving maximum androgen blockage (MAB: LH-RH agonist + anti-androgens) for 1-2 months (mean 1.5 months), the single exception being given LH-RH agonist alone. Patients who had received less than 3 months' treatment were considered acceptable for inclusion because of the low likelihood of major clinical effects within this period [11][12][13] .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since there is a likelihood that long-term hormone therapy will reduce tumor size, the present cases were limited to patients receiving such a therapy for less than 3 months, it being generally accepted that 3 months or longer are necessary for hormone effects to become evident [11][12][13] .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Pitfalls with MRI Evaluation of Prostate Cancer Detection

Okamura¹,

Umemoto²,

Yamashita

et al. 2006

Urol Int

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: To assess differences between MRI findings and histopathologically defined prostate cancer localization, we compared clinical results with mapping of radical prostatectomy specimens, and conducted a retrospective MRI cancer localization re-assessment by a urologist-technician after surgery. Methods: We performed MRI for a total of 37 suspected prostate cancer patients. Subsequently, all underwent retropubic radical prostatectomy after prostate biopsy for confirmation of the diagnosis. All the specimens were studied histopathologically with serial sectioning using a whole organ approach. Results: Of the 37 patients, 26 had positive MRI findings. All the surgical specimens contained cancerous lesions, and 23 had multiple foci. Twenty-four of the MRI-positive cases (92.3%) demonstrated coincidence of both MRI and histopathologically defined lesions. In the single focus cases, 78.6% (11/14) demonstrated exact coincidence, but in the multifocal cases there were no cases with exact coincidence of MRI and histopathological findings (0/23). Conclusion: MRI evaluation cannot be considered an effective diagnostic tool in itself for detection of prostate cancers because sensitivity is far from satisfactory, especially in multi-focal cases.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Pitfalls with MRI Evaluation of Prostate Cancer Detection

Okamura¹,

Umemoto²,

Yamashita

et al. 2006

Urol Int

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The theoretical purposes of neoadjuvant treatment are to lower the pathological stage, reduce the likelihood of positive margins, eliminate micrometastases, and ultimately increase patient survival. Most of the recent randomized trials [36][37][38][39][40] demonstrated a significant reduction in margin-positive rates and pathological downstaging with 3 months of neoadjuvant androgen ablation. Unfortunately, these studies failed to show a significant improvement in seminal vesicle invasion or lymph node involvement.…”

Section: Neoadjuvant/adjuvant Hormonal Therapy With Radical Prostatecmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early versus late hormonal therapy for prostate cancer

Miyamoto

Messing

2004

Curr prostate rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The use of luteinising hormone-releasing hormone (LH-RH) analogues, such as goserelin acetate ('Zoladex', AstraZeneca) and leuprorelin acetate ('Prostap', Wyeth), in patients with advanced prostate cancer, is supported by evidence from several randomised clinical trials. [2][3][4] Goserelin acetate has also shown efficacy in the adjuvant setting [5][6][7][8][9] and as neoadjuvant therapy to radical prostatectomy 10,11 and radiotherapy. 12 LH-RH analogues are available in a range of different formulations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does needle size matter? Patient experience of luteinising hormone-releasing hormone analogue injection

Montgomery

Borwell

Higgins

2005

Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To determine whether needle size influences a patient's perception of pain, 50 patients requiring hormonal manipulation for prostate cancer were blindfolded and randomised to receive two goserelin ('Zoladex') or two leuprorelin ('Prostap') injections, using 16-or 23-gauge needles, respectively. Median visual analogue scale pain scores for the first injections of goserelin and leuprorelin were below the level of clinical significance and were not statistically different. Mean administration time for goserelin was significantly shorter than for leuprorelin. In conclusion, there was no statistically significant difference in pain experienced on injection of goserelin and leuprorelin when patients were unaware of needle size.

show abstract

Effect of complete androgen blockade on pathologic stage and resection margin status of prostate cancer: progress pathology report of the Italian PROSIT study

Cited by 28 publications

References 19 publications

Pitfalls with MRI Evaluation of Prostate Cancer Detection

Pitfalls with MRI Evaluation of Prostate Cancer Detection

Early versus late hormonal therapy for prostate cancer

Does needle size matter? Patient experience of luteinising hormone-releasing hormone analogue injection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About