| 1. |
- Schröder, Fritz H, et al.
(författare)
-
Prostate-cancer mortality at 11 years of follow-up.
- 2012
-
Ingår i: The New England journal of medicine. - 1533-4406 .- 0028-4793. ; 366:11, s. 981-90
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Several trials evaluating the effect of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing on prostate-cancer mortality have shown conflicting results. We updated prostate-cancer mortality in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer with 2 additional years of follow-up.
|
|
| 2. |
- Schröder, Fritz H, et al.
(författare)
-
Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study.
- 2009
-
Ingår i: The New England journal of medicine. - 1533-4406 .- 0028-4793. ; 360:13, s. 1320-8
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer was initiated in the early 1990s to evaluate the effect of screening with prostate-specific-antigen (PSA) testing on death rates from prostate cancer.
|
|
| 3. |
- Lopez-Beltran, Antonio, et al.
(författare)
-
International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Current Issues in Bladder Cancer : Working Group 3: Subcategorization of T1 Bladder Cancer
- 2024
-
Ingår i: American Journal of Surgical Pathology. - 0147-5185. ; 48:1, s. 24-31
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Emerging data on T1 bladder cancer subcategorization (aka substaging) suggests a correlation with oncological outcomes. The International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) organized the 2022 consensus conference in Basel, Switzerland to focus on current issues in bladder cancer and tasked working group 3 to make recommendations for T1 subcategorization in transurethral bladder resections. For this purpose, the ISUP developed and circulated a survey to their membership querying approaches to T1 bladder cancer subcategorization. In particular, clinical relevance, pathological reporting, and endorsement of T1 subcategorization in the daily practice of pathology were surveyed. Of the respondents of the premeeting survey, about 40% do not routinely report T1 subcategory. We reviewed literature on bladder T1 subcategorization, and screened selected articles for clinical performance and practicality of T1 subcategorization methods. Published literature offered evidence of the clinical rationale for T1 subcategorization and at the conference consensus (83% of conference attendants) was obtained to report routinely T1 subcategorization of transurethral resections. Semiquantitative T1 subcategorization was favored (37%) over histoanatomic methods (4%). This is in line with literature findings on practicality and prognostic impact, that is, a shift of publications from histoanatomic to semiquantitative methods or by reports incorporating both methodologies is apparent over the last decade. However, 59% of participants had no preference for either methodology. They would add a comment in the report briefly stating applied method, interpretation criteria (including cutoff), and potential limitations. When queried on the terminology of T1 subcategorization, 34% and 20% of participants were in favor of T1 (microinvasive) versus T1 (extensive) or T1 (focal) versus T1 (nonfocal), respectively.
|
|
| 4. |
- Ploussard, Guillaume, et al.
(författare)
-
The Contemporary Concept of Significant Versus Insignificant Prostate Cancer
- 2011
-
Ingår i: European Urology. - : Elsevier BV. - 1873-7560 .- 0302-2838. ; 60:2, s. 291-303
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Context: The notion of insignificant prostate cancer (Ins-PCa) has progressively emerged in the past two decades. The clinical relevance of such a definition was based on the fact that low-grade, small-volume, and organ-confined prostate cancer (PCa) may be indolent and unlikely to progress to biologic significance in the absence of treatment. Objective: To review the definition of Ins-PCa, its incidence, and the clinical impact of Ins-PCa on the contemporary management of PCa. Evidence acquisition: A review of the literature was performed using the Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science databases with no restriction on language up to September 2010. The literature search used the following terms: insignificant, indolent, minute, microfocal, minimal, low volume, low risk, and prostate cancer. Evidence synthesis: The most commonly used criteria to define Ins-PCa are based on the pathologic assessment of the radical prostatectomy specimen: (1) Gleason score <= 6 without Gleason pattern 4 or 5, (2) organ-confined disease, and (3) tumour volume < 0.5 cm(3). Several preoperative criteria and prognostication tools for predicting Ins-PCa have been suggested. Nomograms are best placed to estimate the risk of progression on an individualised basis, but a substantial proportion of men with a high probability of harbouring Ins-PCa are at risk for pathologic understaging and/or undergrading. Thus, there is an ongoing need for identifying novel and more accurate predictors of Ins-PCa to improve the distinction between insignificant versus significant disease and thus to promote the adequate management of PCa patients at low risk for progression. Conclusions: The exciting challenge of obtaining the pretreatment diagnostic tools that can really distinguish insignificant from significant PCa should be one of the main objectives of urologists in the following years to decrease the risk of overtreatment of Ins-PCa. (C) 2011 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B. V. All rights reserved.
|
|
