Micro-Focal Prostate Cancer: A Comparison of Biopsy and Radical Prostatectomy Specimen Features

Boccon-Gibod, L; Dumonceau, O.; Toublanc, M.; Ravery, Vincent; Boccon‐Gibod, Liliane

doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2005.04.033

Cited by 80 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Too few articles reported on margin positivity to allow a meaningful analysis, but the frequency of positive margins ranged between 0% and 14% of patients (median, 10% of patients). 11,20,35 …”

Section: Findings In the Radical Prostatectomy Specimenmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thirty-four articles 11,[15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26] addressed the specific question of the correlation between small-volume (''microfocal'') cancer on biopsy and pathologic findings, biochemical or clinical progression, or mortality, and 32 of those articles provided original data. 11,[15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26] Three of those articles were unique: One referred to the number of positive biopsy sites rather than cores, 42 another examined the relation between the number of positive cores on each side (right or left) and the incidence of extraprostatic spread on that side, 48 and the final article took into account both biopsy cancer volume and presenting PSA density in the presentation of results. 46 Those 3 articles were not considered further, because they did not provide data that were comparable with data from the other 29 articles.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…By using a previously suggested definition of microfocal carcinoma 49 (Table 4), 7 articles 11,17,19,20,21,23,38 reported variations in the frequency of extraprostatic disease ranging between 0% and 51.5%. The overall Prior transurethral resection 39,46 Slides unavailable for review 28,39,42 Incomplete data on Clinical stage 37,46 Preoperative PSA value 37,46 Biopsy cancer volume 15,32,41,46 No.…”

Section: Findings In the Radical Prostatectomy Specimenmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The clinical management of patients with a small volume of prostatic cancer on biopsy: What are the risks of progression?

Harnden

Naylor

Shelley

et al. 2008

Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clinically localized prostate cancer is associated with a wide variation in biologic behavior, and men with the less aggressive form of the disease may never develop symptoms. There has been a rise in prostate cancer incidence in countries in which the blood test for prostatic-specific antigen (PSA) is common, and concerns have been expressed that this may be because of the increased detection of indolent disease, subjecting these men to unnecessary treatment and associated side effects. For the current review, the authors conducted a systematic evaluation of the literature regarding the outcomes of men who were diagnosed on the basis of a small volume of cancer in prostatic biopsies. The results indicated that, despite differences in study design and reporting, a significant proportion of patients with microfocal cancer, regardless of how it was defined, had adverse pathologic findings and a significant risk of PSA recurrence after undergoing radical prostatectomy. Biochemical and clinical recurrences also were observed after radiotherapy or watchful waiting. The authors concluded that patients with microfocal carcinoma on biopsy should be advised that their disease is not necessarily ''insignificant'' and should be counseled accordingly. Cancer 2008; 112:971-81.

show abstract

Section: Findings In the Radical Prostatectomy Specimenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Findings In the Radical Prostatectomy Specimenmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The clinical management of patients with a small volume of prostatic cancer on biopsy: What are the risks of progression?

Harnden

Naylor

Shelley

et al. 2008

Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…All the initial search and related articles were reviewed for content and inclusion. We retrieved citations discussing histopathologic correlates of the subsequent RP specimen in patients undergoing surgery for 'insignificant' CaP on biopsy [2][3][4]11,[15][16][17][18][19] (Table 1). Definitions of 'insignificance' on biopsy varied between citations, from disease involving a single core 18 to disease of o0.5 mm total core length of Gleason sum p6.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21] These are the circumstances when decisions are made by physicians and patients with respect to therapy -specifically low risk therapy in many cases. If the construct of 'insignificance' on biopsy is not borne out on subsequent histopathologic examination, then low-risk therapy is less appropriate an option.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Insignificant’ prostate cancer on biopsy: pathologic results from subsequent radical prostatectomy

Johnstone

Rossi

Jani

et al. 2007

Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prediction of Erectile Function Following Treatment for Prostate Cancer

Alemozaffar¹,

Regan²,

Cooperberg³

et al. 2011

JAMA

267

188

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context Sexual function is the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) domain most commonly impaired after prostate cancer treatment; however, validated tools to enable personalized prediction of erectile dysfunction after prostate cancer treatment are lacking. Objective To predict long-term erectile function following prostate cancer treatment based on individual patient and treatment characteristics. Design Pretreatment patient characteristics, sexual HRQOL, and treatment details measured in a longitudinal academic multicenter cohort (Prostate Cancer Outcomes and Satisfaction With Treatment Quality Assessment; enrolled from 2003 through 2006), were used to develop models predicting erectile function 2 years after treatment. A community-based cohort (community-based Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor [CaPSURE]; enrolled 1995 through 2007) externally validated model performance. Patients in US academic and community-based practices whose HRQOL was measured pretreatment (N = 1201) underwent follow-up after prostatectomy, external radiotherapy, or brachytherapy for prostate cancer. Sexual outcomes among men completing 2 years’ follow-up (n = 1027) were used to develop models predicting erectile function that were externally validated among 1913 patients in a community-based cohort. Main Outcome Measures Patient-reported functional erections suitable for intercourse 2 years following prostate cancer treatment. Results Two years after prostate cancer treatment, 368 (37% [95% CI, 34%–40%]) of all patients and 335 (48% [95% CI, 45%–52%]) of those with functional erections prior to treatment reported functional erections; 531 (53% [95% CI, 50%–56%]) of patients without penile prostheses reported use of medications or other devices for erectile dysfunction. Pretreatment sexual HRQOL score, age, serum prostate-specific antigen level, race/ethnicity, body mass index, and intended treatment details were associated with functional erections 2 years after treatment. Multivariable logistic regression models predicting erectile function estimated 2-year function probabilities from as low as 10% or less to as high as 70% or greater depending on the individual’s pretreatment patient characteristics and treatment details. The models performed well in predicting erections in external validation among CaPSURE cohort patients (areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.74–0.80] for prostatectomy; 0.87 [95% CI, 0.80–0.94] for external radiotherapy; and 0.90 [95% CI, 0.85–0.95] for brachytherapy). Conclusion Stratification by pretreatment patient characteristics and treatment details enables prediction of erectile function 2 years after prostatectomy, external radiotherapy, or brachytherapy for prostate cancer.

show abstract

Micro-Focal Prostate Cancer: A Comparison of Biopsy and Radical Prostatectomy Specimen Features

Cited by 80 publications

References 23 publications

The clinical management of patients with a small volume of prostatic cancer on biopsy: What are the risks of progression?

The clinical management of patients with a small volume of prostatic cancer on biopsy: What are the risks of progression?

‘Insignificant’ prostate cancer on biopsy: pathologic results from subsequent radical prostatectomy

Prediction of Erectile Function Following Treatment for Prostate Cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About