Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Prostate Biopsy pp 1–11Cite as

Defining the Problem: From Subclinical Disease to Clinically Insignificant Prostate Cancer

  • Chapter

Part of the book series: Current Clinical Urology ((CCU))

Abstract

The widespread use of prostate-specific antigen testing and the increasing rate of prostate needle biopsies with recent refinement of sampling approaches have led to a dramatic increase in the diagnoses of small-volume, early-stage prostate cancer and premalignant lesions (prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia). The Wayne State autopsy study has shown the prevalence of subclinical prostate cancer and prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia to be much higher than previously reported, with a steady increase with advancing age. The findings of this and other studies raise challenges regarding the potential relationship of subclinical cancer to minute cancer foci detected in biopsies. The clinical management of patients diagnosed with such cancers is becoming more controversial because the progression potential of clinically detected small cancer foci is difficult to predict.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Boyle P, Severi G, Giles GG. The epidemiology of prostate cancer. Urol Clin North Am 2003;30(2):209–217.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Delongchamps NB, Singh A, Haas GP. The role of prevalence in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Cancer Control 2006;13(3):158–168.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Quinn M, Babb P. Patterns and trends in prostate cancer incidence, survival, prevalence and mortality. Part I: international comparisons. BJU Int 2002;90(2):162–173.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Nelen V. Epidemiology of prostate cancer. Recent Results Cancer Res 2007; 175:1–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Franks LM. Latent carcinoma of the prostate. J Pathol Bacteriol 1954;68(2):603–616.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Holund B. Latent prostatic cancer in a consecutive autopsy series. Scand J Urol Nephrol 1980;14(1):29–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Sakr WA, et al. The frequency of carcinoma and intraepithelial neoplasia of the prostate in young male patients. J Urol 1993;150(2 Pt 1):379–385.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Breslow N, et al. Latent carcinoma of prostate at autopsy in seven areas. The International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyons, France. Int J Cancer 1977;20(5):680–688.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Guileyardo JM, et al. Prevalence of latent prostate carcinoma in two U.S. populations. J Natl Cancer Inst 1980;65(2):311–316.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Sakr WA, Grignon DJ, Haas GP. Pathology of premalignant lesions and carcinoma of the prostate in African-American men. Semin Urol Oncol 1998; 16(4):214–220.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Sakr WA, et al. Age and racial distribution of prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia. Eur Urol 1996;30(2):138–144.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Sakr WA, et al. Epidemiology of high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia. Pathol Res Pract 1995;191(9):838–841.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Sakr WA, et al. Epidemiology and molecular biology of early prostatic neoplasia. Mol Urol 2000;4(3):109–113; discussion 115.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Konety BR, et al. Comparison of the incidence of latent prostate cancer detected at autopsy before and after the prostate specific antigen era. J Urol 2005;174(5):1785–1788; discussion 1788.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Zigeuner RE, et al. Did the rate of incidental prostate cancer change in the era of PSA testing? A retrospective study of 1127 patients. Urology 2003;62(3):451–455.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Yatani R, et al. Trends in frequency of latent prostate carcinoma in Japan from 1965–1979 to 1982–1986. J Natl Cancer Inst 1988;80(9):683–687.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Winkler MH, et al. Characteristics of incidental prostatic adenocarcinoma in contemporary radical cystoprostatectomy specimens. BJU Int 2007;99(3):554–558.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Graif T, et al. Under diagnosis and over diagnosis of prostate cancer. J Urol 2007;178(1):88–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Pelzer AE, et al. Under diagnosis and over diagnosis of prostate cancer in a screening population with serum PSA 2 to 10 ng/ml. J Urol 2007;178(1):93–97.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Makarov DV, et al. Pathological outcomes and biochemical progression in men with T1c prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy with prostate specific antigen 2.6 to 4.0 vs 4.1 to 6.0 ng/ml. J Urol 2006;176(2):554–558.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Krumholtz JS, et al. Prostate-specific antigen cutoff of 2.6 ng/mL for prostate cancer screening is associated with favorable pathologic tumor features. Urology 2002;60(3):469–473; discussion 473–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Thompson IM, et al. Screening for prostate cancer: opportunities and challenges. Surg Oncol Clin North Am 2005;14(4):747–760.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Bozeman CB, et al. Prostate cancer in patients with an abnormal digital rectal examination and serum prostate-specific antigen less than 4.0 ng/mL. Urology 2005;66(4):803–807.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Gosselaar C, et al. Screening for prostate cancer at low PSA range: the impact of digital rectal examination on tumor incidence and tumor characteristics. Prostate 2007;67(2):154–161.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Thiesler T, et al. Patients with low prostate-specific antigen levels (≤4 ng/ml) would benefit from a twelve-core biopsy protocol for prostate cancer detection. Urol Int 2007;78(4):318–322.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Becopoulos T. Clinically significant and nonsignificant prostate cancer: an ongoing question. Acta Chir Iugosl 2005;52(4):27–29.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Djavan B, Margreiter M. Biopsy standards for detection of prostate cancer. World J Urol 2007;25(1):11–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Miyake H, et al. Increased detection of clinically significant prostate cancer by additional sampling from the anterior lateral horns of the peripheral zone in combination with the standard sextant biopsy. Int J Urol 2004;11(6):402–406.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Presti JC Jr. Prostate biopsy: how many cores are enough? Urol Oncol 2003;21(2):135–140.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Stamatiou K, et al. Impact of additional sampling in the TRUS-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Urol Int 2007;78(4):313–317.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Stewart CS, et al. Prostate cancer diagnosis using a saturation needle biopsy technique after previous negative sextant biopsies. J Urol 2001;166(1):86–91; discussion 91–2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI

    Wael Sakr MD

Authors
  1. Wael Sakr MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Regional Urology, Cleveland Clinic Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, USA

    J. Stephen Jones MD (Chairman, Associate Professor of Surgery (Urology) (Chairman, Associate Professor of Surgery (Urology)

  2. Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine at CWRU, Cleveland, OH, USA

    J. Stephen Jones MD (Chairman, Associate Professor of Surgery (Urology) (Chairman, Associate Professor of Surgery (Urology)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Humana Press, a part of Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Sakr, W. (2008). Defining the Problem: From Subclinical Disease to Clinically Insignificant Prostate Cancer. In: Jones, J.S. (eds) Prostate Biopsy. Current Clinical Urology. Humana Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-60327-078-6_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-60327-078-6_1

  • Publisher Name: Humana Press

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-58829-790-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-60327-078-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation