International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Handling and Staging of Radical Prostatectomy Specimens. Working group 2: T2 substaging and prostate cancer volume.

作者: Theo H Van Der Kwast , Mahul B Amin , Athanase Billis , Jonathan I Epstein , David Griffiths

DOI: 10.1038/MODPATHOL.2010.156

关键词:

摘要: The 2009 International Society of Urological Pathology consensus conference in Boston made recommendations regarding the standardization pathology reporting radical prostatectomy specimens. Issues relating to substaging pT2 prostate cancers according TNM 2002/2010 system, tumor size/volume and zonal location were coordinated by working group 2. A survey circulated before demonstrated that 74% 157 participants considered cancer be clinical and/or academic relevance. also revealed a considerable variation frequency pT2b substage cancer, which was likely consequence variable methodologies used distinguish pT2a from tumors. Overview literature indicates current criteria lack relevance majority (65.5%) attendees wished discontinue substaging. Therefore, substages should, at present, optional. Several studies have shown volume is significantly correlated with other clinicopathological features, including Gleason score extraprostatic extension tumor; however, most fail demonstrate this prognostic significance on multivariate analysis. Consensus reached regard some quantitative measure specimen, without prescribing specific methodology. Incorporation anterior dominant/index report accepted participants, but formal definition identifying features remained undecided.

参考文章(62)
Andrew A. Renshaw, Hyunil Chang, Anthony V. D’Amico, Estimation of tumor volume in radical prostatectomy specimens in routine clinical practice. American Journal of Clinical Pathology. ,vol. 107, pp. 704- 708 ,(1997) , 10.1093/AJCP/107.6.704
H Zincke, S E Lerner, M L Blute, Risk factors for progression in patients with prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy. Seminars in Urologic Oncology. ,vol. 14, pp. 12- 21 ,(1996)
Bostwick Dg, Staging prostate cancer - 1997 : Current methods and limitations European Urology. ,vol. 32, pp. 2- 14 ,(1997)
Andrew A. Renshaw, Jerome P. Richie, Kevin R. Loughlin, Michael Jiroutek, Arnold Chung, Anthony V. D’Amico, Maximum Diameter of Prostatic Carcinoma Is a Simple, Inexpensive, and Independent Predictor of Prostate-Specific Antigen Failure in Radical Prostatectomy Specimens: Validation in a Cohort of 434 Patients American Journal of Clinical Pathology. ,vol. 111, pp. 641- 644 ,(1999) , 10.1093/AJCP/111.5.641
John E. McNeal, Howard M. Price, Elise A. Redwine, Fuad S. Freiha, Thomas A. Stamey, Stage A Versus Stage B Adenocarcinoma of the Prostate: Morphological Comparison and Biological Significance The Journal of Urology. ,vol. 139, pp. 61- 65 ,(1988) , 10.1016/S0022-5347(17)42293-2
IORI SAKAI, KEN-ICHI HARADA, TOSHIFUMI KURAHASHI, KAZUKI YAMANAKA, ISAO HARA, HIDEAKI MIYAKE, Analysis of differences in clinicopathological features between prostate cancers located in the transition and peripheral zones International Journal of Urology. ,vol. 13, pp. 368- 372 ,(2006) , 10.1111/J.1442-2042.2006.01307.X
Rebecca A. Marks, Haiqun Lin, Michael O. Koch, Liang Cheng, Positive-block ratio in radical prostatectomy specimens is an independent predictor of prostate-specific antigen recurrence. The American Journal of Surgical Pathology. ,vol. 31, pp. 877- 881 ,(2007) , 10.1097/01.PAS.0000213429.61374.4F