The importance of tumor palpability and transrectal ultrasonographic appearance in the contemporary clinical staging of prostate cancer

Cowan, Janet E.; Davies, Ben; Carroll, Peter R.; Shinohara, Katsuto

doi:10.1016/j.urolonc.2009.01.005

Cited by 18 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Using modern TRUS technology, TRUS staging by an expert sonographer can more accurately predict microscopic extraprostatic extension compared with established nomograms when cancer is previously confirmed from a TRUS-visible lesion [13,14]. Increasing numbers of studies reported that prostate cancers detected by modern TRUS-guided targeted biopsies are of higher grade and larger volume and are therefore more likely to be clinically significant [7,9,15,16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Image-based monitoring of targeted biopsy-proven prostate cancer on active surveillance: 11-year experience

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Image-based monitoring of targeted biopsy-proven prostate cancer on active surveillance: 11-year experience

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These reports, however, used different equipment, criteria, and histological methods and were based on the highly selected group of patients who were candidates for radical prostatectomy. Wolf et al and [ 36 ]. This study showed that evidence of ECE by TRUS was associated with pathological stage as well as biochemical failure.…”

Section: Results Of Trus Stagingmentioning

confidence: 64%

Application of Prostate US for Advanced Techniques in Prostate Biopsy and Prostate Cancer Staging

Shinohara

2014

Prostate Ultrasound

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This terminology was introduced in 1996; subsequently, EPE was confirmed to be an adverse prognostic factor for PCa (22). Several variables, including the Partin table, MRI, TRUS and digital rectal examination findings, and prostate cancer antigen 3 score, have been studied to assess the predictive power of EPE; however, sensitivities have ranged from only 50-70% (8,9,(23)(24)(25). Thus, there is an urgent need to explore novel and more effective approaches for predicting EPE for determining an appropriate surgical strategy and also for delineating a favourable postoperative adjuvant therapy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Identifying the presence of EPE is likely to reduce the chance of positive surgical margins; furthermore, it may be helpful for identifying patients who require postoperative adjuvant treatment. Traditionally, it has been difficult to assess patients who are at high risk for EPE based on a single preoperative clinicopathological variable or imaging information due to limited sensitivity (8)(9)(10)(11)(12). Hence, it is of practical significance to develop a new approach for predicting EPE.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

ERG rearrangement as a novel marker for predicting the extra-prostatic extension of clinically localised prostate cancer

Zhang

Pang

et al. 2016

Oncology Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Currently, there are no well-established preoperative clinicopathological parameters for predicting extra-prostatic extension (EPE) in patients with clinically localised prostate cancer (PCa). The transmembrane protease serine 2 (TMPRSS2)-ETS-related gene (ERG) fusion gene is a specific biomarker of PCa and is considered a prognostic predictor. The aim of the present study was to assess the value of this marker for predicting EPE in patients with clinically localised PCa. In total, 306 PCa patients with clinically localised disease, including 220 patients (71.9%) with organ-confined disease and 86 EPE cases (28.1%), were included in the study. Receiver operating characteristic curves and logistic regression were employed to establish the optimal cut-off value and to investigate whether ERG rearrangement was an independent predictor for the EPE of clinically localised PCa. A leave-one-out cross-validation (LOOCV) model was implemented to validate the predictive power of ERG rearrangement. An increase in ERG rearrangements was identified to be associate`d with EPE, and the optimal cut-off for predicting EPE was determined to be 2.25%, with a sensitivity of 70.24% [95% confidence interval (CI), 62.6-78.9%], a specificity of 80. 43% (95% CI,, and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.781 (95% CI,. In the LOOCV model, ERG rearrangement also demonstrated good performance for predicting EPE (sensitivity, 76.923%; specificity, 71.429%; 95% CI for AUC, 0.724-0.958). In addition, a high Gleason score (≥7) and a cT2c classification upon biopsy were independent factors for EPE.

show abstract

The importance of tumor palpability and transrectal ultrasonographic appearance in the contemporary clinical staging of prostate cancer

Cited by 18 publications

References 32 publications

Image-based monitoring of targeted biopsy-proven prostate cancer on active surveillance: 11-year experience

Image-based monitoring of targeted biopsy-proven prostate cancer on active surveillance: 11-year experience

Application of Prostate US for Advanced Techniques in Prostate Biopsy and Prostate Cancer Staging

ERG rearrangement as a novel marker for predicting the extra-prostatic extension of clinically localised prostate cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About