Loading…
Clinical significance of single microscopic focus of adenocarcinoma at prostate biopsy
Prostate cancer (PC) is one of the most common cancer and an important reason of cancer specific death. The incidence of patients who diagnosed at low stage increased because of widespread using Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) testing. We evaluated the patients who were diagnosed single microscopic...
Saved in:
Published in: | Prostate international 2015-12, Vol.3 (4), p.132-134 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Prostate cancer (PC) is one of the most common cancer and an important reason of cancer specific death. The incidence of patients who diagnosed at low stage increased because of widespread using Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) testing. We evaluated the patients who were diagnosed single microscopic focus of adenocarcinoma and treated radical prostatectomy at final pathology.
The patients who underwent transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy between January 2004 and January 2012 were enrolled retrospectively. We extracted the patients who were diagnosed single microscopic focus of adenocarcinoma and treated with RP. Single microscopic adenocarcinoma was defined as one single focus measuring 3 mm or less, well differentiated (Gleason ≤6) adenocarcinoma. 37 patients were included at the study. Clinical data; including age, serum PSA levels, PSA density and prior biopsy and prostatectomy specimen results were recorded. In pathological examination; high molecular weight cytokeratin (HMW-CK), p63, and alpha-methylacyl-CoA racemase (AMACR) were used for differential diagnosis.
The patients' ages were between 42 and 77 with a mean age of 64.9 ± 7.57 years. Mean PSA levels and prostate volumes were 8.03 ± 5.21 ng/ml and 54 ± 25.51 cc. T0, T2a, T2c and T3a were reported in 2 patients, 17 patients, 17 patients and 1 patient after pathological evaluation. According to the Gleason grading system; 6 patients were 7 (3 + 4), one patient was 7 (4 + 3), one patient was 5 (3 + 2) and 27 patients were 6 (3 + 3).
Small volume of cancer at prostate biopsy is not necessarily small cancer in radical prostatectomy. The treatment choice may be over or under treatment for some patients, so the patients must be informed when choosing the treatment. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2287-8882 2287-903X |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.prnil.2015.09.003 |