Cargando…

Identification of pathologically insignificant prostate cancer is not accurate in unscreened men

BACKGROUND: Identification of men harbouring insignificant prostate cancer (PC) is important in selecting patients for active surveillance. Tools have been developed in PSA-screened populations to identify such men based on clinical and biopsy parameters. METHODS: Prospectively collected case series...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shaw, G L, Thomas, B C, Dawson, S N, Srivastava, G, Vowler, S L, Gnanapragasam, V J, Shah, N C, Warren, A Y, Neal, D E
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4021526/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24722183
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2014.192
_version_ 1782316252589457408
author Shaw, G L
Thomas, B C
Dawson, S N
Srivastava, G
Vowler, S L
Gnanapragasam, V J
Shah, N C
Warren, A Y
Neal, D E
author_facet Shaw, G L
Thomas, B C
Dawson, S N
Srivastava, G
Vowler, S L
Gnanapragasam, V J
Shah, N C
Warren, A Y
Neal, D E
author_sort Shaw, G L
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Identification of men harbouring insignificant prostate cancer (PC) is important in selecting patients for active surveillance. Tools have been developed in PSA-screened populations to identify such men based on clinical and biopsy parameters. METHODS: Prospectively collected case series of 848 patients was treated with radical prostatectomy between July 2007 and October 2011 at an English tertiary care centre. Tumour volume was assessed by pathological examination. For each tool, receiver operator characteristics were calculated for predicting insignificant disease by three different criteria and the area under each curve compared. Comparison of accuracy in screened and unscreened populations was performed. RESULTS: Of 848 patients, 415 had Gleason 3+3 disease on biopsy. Of these, 32.0% had extra-prostatic extension and 50.2% were upgraded. One had positive lymph nodes. Two hundred and six (24% of cohort) were D'Amico low risk. Of these, 143 had more than two biopsy cores involved. None of the tools evaluated has adequate discriminative power in predicting insignificant tumour burden. Accuracy is low in PSA-screened and -unscreened populations. CONCLUSIONS: In our unscreened population, tools designed to identify insignificant PC are inaccurate. Detection of a wider size range of prostate tumours in the unscreened may contribute to relative inaccuracy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4021526
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Nature Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-40215262015-05-13 Identification of pathologically insignificant prostate cancer is not accurate in unscreened men Shaw, G L Thomas, B C Dawson, S N Srivastava, G Vowler, S L Gnanapragasam, V J Shah, N C Warren, A Y Neal, D E Br J Cancer Clinical Study BACKGROUND: Identification of men harbouring insignificant prostate cancer (PC) is important in selecting patients for active surveillance. Tools have been developed in PSA-screened populations to identify such men based on clinical and biopsy parameters. METHODS: Prospectively collected case series of 848 patients was treated with radical prostatectomy between July 2007 and October 2011 at an English tertiary care centre. Tumour volume was assessed by pathological examination. For each tool, receiver operator characteristics were calculated for predicting insignificant disease by three different criteria and the area under each curve compared. Comparison of accuracy in screened and unscreened populations was performed. RESULTS: Of 848 patients, 415 had Gleason 3+3 disease on biopsy. Of these, 32.0% had extra-prostatic extension and 50.2% were upgraded. One had positive lymph nodes. Two hundred and six (24% of cohort) were D'Amico low risk. Of these, 143 had more than two biopsy cores involved. None of the tools evaluated has adequate discriminative power in predicting insignificant tumour burden. Accuracy is low in PSA-screened and -unscreened populations. CONCLUSIONS: In our unscreened population, tools designed to identify insignificant PC are inaccurate. Detection of a wider size range of prostate tumours in the unscreened may contribute to relative inaccuracy. Nature Publishing Group 2014-05-13 2014-04-10 /pmc/articles/PMC4021526/ /pubmed/24722183 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2014.192 Text en Copyright © 2014 Cancer Research UK http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ From twelve months after its original publication, this work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/
spellingShingle Clinical Study
Shaw, G L
Thomas, B C
Dawson, S N
Srivastava, G
Vowler, S L
Gnanapragasam, V J
Shah, N C
Warren, A Y
Neal, D E
Identification of pathologically insignificant prostate cancer is not accurate in unscreened men
title Identification of pathologically insignificant prostate cancer is not accurate in unscreened men
title_full Identification of pathologically insignificant prostate cancer is not accurate in unscreened men
title_fullStr Identification of pathologically insignificant prostate cancer is not accurate in unscreened men
title_full_unstemmed Identification of pathologically insignificant prostate cancer is not accurate in unscreened men
title_short Identification of pathologically insignificant prostate cancer is not accurate in unscreened men
title_sort identification of pathologically insignificant prostate cancer is not accurate in unscreened men
topic Clinical Study
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4021526/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24722183
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2014.192
work_keys_str_mv AT shawgl identificationofpathologicallyinsignificantprostatecancerisnotaccurateinunscreenedmen
AT thomasbc identificationofpathologicallyinsignificantprostatecancerisnotaccurateinunscreenedmen
AT dawsonsn identificationofpathologicallyinsignificantprostatecancerisnotaccurateinunscreenedmen
AT srivastavag identificationofpathologicallyinsignificantprostatecancerisnotaccurateinunscreenedmen
AT vowlersl identificationofpathologicallyinsignificantprostatecancerisnotaccurateinunscreenedmen
AT gnanapragasamvj identificationofpathologicallyinsignificantprostatecancerisnotaccurateinunscreenedmen
AT shahnc identificationofpathologicallyinsignificantprostatecancerisnotaccurateinunscreenedmen
AT warrenay identificationofpathologicallyinsignificantprostatecancerisnotaccurateinunscreenedmen
AT nealde identificationofpathologicallyinsignificantprostatecancerisnotaccurateinunscreenedmen