Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Image analysis and grading of prostate adenocarcinoma

  • Published:
World Journal of Urology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

The multitude of grading systems proposed for prostate adenocarcinoma illustrate the putative value of tumor grading as a predictor of prognosis. However, it also indicates the uncertainty and subjectivity of visual grading, as is confirmed by the results of several studies. Recent computer techniques enable fast image processing of microscoping images. Hence, a quantitative assessment of cellular and nuclear features can be obtained, eliminating subjectivity of visual grading. DNA-analysis and morphometric karyometry can be valuable for predicting prognosis in prostate tumors. For routine use, however, standardized preparatory techniques are mandatory. Up till now image analysis of microscopic images is a useful tool in addition to visual grading. Further standardization, inter- as well as intra-laboratory, is necessary to elaborate its value as a reproducible tool in tumor grading.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Amberson JB, Schreiber K, Wersto R, Koizumi JH, Deitch D, Freed S, Vaughan ED, Koss LG (1987) Prognostic factors in adenocarcinoma of the prostate: A comparative, retrospective study of fine needle aspirates and corresponding tissue biopsy specimens. Acta Cytol 31:682–686

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bain GA, Koch M, Hanson J (1982) Feasibility of grading prostatic carcinoma. Arch Pathol Lab Med 106:265–267

    Google Scholar 

  3. Barzell W, Bean MA, Hilaris BS, Whitmore WF (1977) Prostatic adenocarcinoma: Relationship of grade and local extent to the pattern of metastases. J Urol 118:278–282

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bibbo M, Kim DH, di Loreto C, Dytch HE, Galera-Davidson H, Thompson D, Richards DL, Bartels HG, Bartels PH (1990a) Tissue architectural features for the grading of prostatic carcinoma. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 12:229–236

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bibbo M, Kim DH, Galera-Davidson H, di Loreto C, Dytch HE (1990b) Architectural, morphometric and photometric features and their relationship to the main subjective diagnostic clues in the grading of prostatic cancer. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 12:85–90

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bichel P, Frederiksen P, Thommesen P, Vindelov LL (1977) Flow microfluorometry and transrectal fine-needle biopsy in the classification of human prostatic carcinoma. Cancer 40:1206–1211

    Google Scholar 

  7. Blom JHM, Ten Kate FW, Schröder FH, Heul RO van der (1990) Morphometrical estimated variation in nuclear size. A useful tool in grading prostatic cancer. Urol Res 18:93–99

    Google Scholar 

  8. Böcking A (1983) Zytologische Diagnostik der Prostata. Urologe A 22:134–143

    Google Scholar 

  9. Böcking A, Sinagowitz E (1980) Histologic grading of prostatic carcinoma. Path Res Pract 168:115–125

    Google Scholar 

  10. Böcking A, Kiehn J, Heinzel-Wach M (1982) Combined histologic grading of prostatic carcinoma. Cancer 50:228–294

    Google Scholar 

  11. Böcking A, Auffermann W, Schwarz H, Bammert J, Dörrjer G, Vucicuja S (1984) Cytology of prostatic carcinoma. Quantification and validation of diagnostic criteria. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 6:74–88

    Google Scholar 

  12. Böcking A, Chatelain R, Orthen U, Gien G, von Kalckreuth G, Jocham D, Wohltmann D (1988) DNA-grading of prostatic carcinoma: prognostic validity and reproducibility. Anticancer Res 8:129–136

    Google Scholar 

  13. Brawn PN (1983) The dedifferentiation of prostate carcinoma. Cancer 52:246–251

    Google Scholar 

  14. Brawn PN, Ayala AG, Eschenbach AC von, Hussey DH, Johnson DE (1982) Histologic grading study of prostate adenocarcinoma: The development of a new system and comparison with other methods — a preliminary study. Cancer 49:525–532

    Google Scholar 

  15. Broders AC (1925) The grading of carcinoma. Minn Med 8:726–730

    Google Scholar 

  16. Busch C, Engberg A, Norlén BJ, Stenkvist B (1977) Malignancy grading of epithelial bladder tumors. Scand J Urol Nephrol 11:143–148

    Google Scholar 

  17. Byar DP, Mostofi FK (1972) Carcinoma of the prostate-prognostic evaluation of certain pathologic features in 208 radical prostatectomies. Cancer 30:5–13

    Google Scholar 

  18. Catalona WJ, Stein AJ, Fair WR (1982) Grading errors in prostatic needle biopsies: Relation to the accuracy of tumor grade in predicting pelvic lymph node metastases. J Urol 127:919–921

    Google Scholar 

  19. Clark TD, Askin FB, Bagnell CR (1987) Nuclear roundness factor: a quantitative approach to grading in prostatic carcinoma, reliability of needle biopsy tissue, and the effect of tumor stage on usefulness. Prostate 10:199–206

    Google Scholar 

  20. Diamond DA, Berry DA, Jewett HJ, Eggleston JC, Coffey DS (1982a) A new method to assess metastatic potential of human prostate cancer: relative nuclear roundness. J Urol 128:729–732

    Google Scholar 

  21. Diamond DA, Berry DA, Umbricht SJ, Coffey DS (1982b) Computerized image analysis of nuclear shape as a prognostic factor for prostatic cancer. Prostate 3:321–326

    Google Scholar 

  22. Donohue RE, Mani JH, Whitesel JA, Mohr S, Scanavino D, Augspruger RR, Biber RJ, Fauver FE, Wettlaufer JN, Pfister RR (1982) Pelvic lymph node dissection, guide to patient management in clinically locally confined adenocarcinoma of prostate. Urology 20:559–565

    Google Scholar 

  23. Eichenberger T, Mibatsch MJ, Oberholzer M, Gschwind R, Rutishauser G (1987) Are nuclear shape factors good predictors of the disease course in patients with carcinoma of the prostate. In: Prostate cancer, pt A. Research, Endocrine Treatment, and Histopathology. Liss, New York, p 553

    Google Scholar 

  24. Epstein NA, Fatti LP (1976) Prostatic carcinoma — some morphological features affecting prognosis. Cancer 37:2455–2465

    Google Scholar 

  25. Epstein JI, Berry SJ, Eggleston JC (1984) Nuclear roundness factor: a predictor of progression in untreated stage A2 prostate cancer. Cancer 54:1666–1673

    Google Scholar 

  26. Epstein JI, Christensen WN, Steinberg GD, Carter HB (1990) Comparison of DNA ploidy and nuclear size, shape and chromatin irregularity in tissue sections and smears of prostatic carcinoma. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 12:352–358

    Google Scholar 

  27. Esch W, Latal D (1972) Das Prostatakarzinom als Zufallsbefund bei Prostatektomie. Z Urol 65:389–395

    Google Scholar 

  28. Esposti PL (1971) Cytologic malignancy grading of prostatic carcinoma by transrectal aspiration biopsy. Scand J Urol Nephrol 55:199–209

    Google Scholar 

  29. Foot NC, Humphreys GA, Coats EC (1950) Carcinoma of the prostate: A review of 162 cases with pathological classification. NY State J Med 50:84–88

    Google Scholar 

  30. Forsslund G, Zetterberg A (1990) Ploidy level determinations in high-grade and low-grade malignant variants of prostatic carcinoma. Cancer Res 50:4281–4285

    Google Scholar 

  31. Frederiksen BP, Kjaer T, Thommesen P, Vindelov LL (1977) Flow microfluorometry and transrectal fine-needle biopsy in the classification of human prostatic carcinoma. Cancer 40:1206–1211

    Google Scholar 

  32. Gaeta JF (1981) Glandular profiles and cellular patterns in prostatic cancer grading. Urology [Suppl] 17:33–37

    Google Scholar 

  33. Gallee MPW, ten Kate FJW, Mulder PGH, Blom JHM, van der Heul RO (1990) Histological grading of prostatic carcinoma in prostatectomy specimens. Br J Urol 65:368–375

    Google Scholar 

  34. Garnett JE, Oyasu R, Grayhack JT (1984) The accuracy of diagnostic specimens in predicting tumor grades by Gleason's classification of radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol 131:690–693

    Google Scholar 

  35. Gleason DF (1966) Classification of prostatic carcinomas. Cancer Chemother Rep 50:125–128

    Google Scholar 

  36. Gleason DF, Mellinger GT (1974) The Veterans Administration Cooperative Urological Research group. Prediction of prognosis for prostatic adenocarcinoma by combined histological grading and clinical staging. J Urol 111:58–63

    Google Scholar 

  37. Grayhack JT, Assimos DG (1983) Prognostic significance of tumor grade and stage in the patient with carcinoma of the prostate. Prostate 4:13–31

    Google Scholar 

  38. Harada M, Mostofi FK, Corle DK, Byar DP, Trump BF (1977) Preliminary studies of histologic prognosis in cancer of the prostate. Cancer Treat Rep 61:223–225

    Google Scholar 

  39. Hutchinson M, Schultz DS, Stephenson RA, Wong KL, Harry T, Zahniser DJ (1988) Computerized microscopic analysis of prostatic fine needle aspirates. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 11:107–110

    Google Scholar 

  40. Jones EC, McNeal J, Bruchovsky N, Jong G de (1990) DNA content in prostatic adenocarcinoma. A flow cytometry study of the predictive value of aneuploidy for tumor volume, percentage Gleason grade 4 and 5, and lymph node metastasis. Cancer 66:752–757

    Google Scholar 

  41. Kahler JE (1938) Carcinoma of the prostate gland. Mayo Clin Proc 13:589–592

    Google Scholar 

  42. Kastendieck H (1980) Prostatic carcinoma: aspects of pathology, prognosis and therapy. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 96:131–156

    Google Scholar 

  43. Kate PJW ten, Gallee MPW, Schmitz PIM, Joebsis AC, Heul RO van der, Prins MEF, Blom JHM (1986) Controversy in grading of prostatic carcinoma: interobserver reproducibility of five different grading systems. World J Urol 4:147–152

    Google Scholar 

  44. Kern WH (1978) Well differentiated adenocarcinoma of the prostate. Cancer 41:2046–2054

    Google Scholar 

  45. Koss LG, Woyke S, Olszewski W (1984) The prostate. In: Aspiration biopsy: cytologic interpretation and histologic bases. Igaki-Shoin, New York, pp 223–246

    Google Scholar 

  46. Kramer SA, Spaner J, Brendler CB, Glenn JF, Paulson DF (1980) Experience with Gleason's histopathologic grading in prostatic cancer. J Urol 124:223–225

    Google Scholar 

  47. Lange PH, Narayan P (1983) Understaging and undergrading of prostate cancer. Urology 21:113–118

    Google Scholar 

  48. Layfield LJ, Mukamel E, Hilborne LH, Hannah JB, Glasgow BJ, Ljung BM, deKernion JB (1987) Cytological grading of prostatic aspiration biopsy: a comparison with the gleason grading system. J Urol 138:798–800

    Google Scholar 

  49. Lundberg S, Carstensen J, Rundquist I (1987) DNA flow cytometry and histopathological grading of paraffin-embedded prostate biopsy specimens in a survival study. Cancer Res 47:1973–1977

    Google Scholar 

  50. McNeal JE (1965) Morphogenesis of prostatic carcinoma. Cancer 18:1659–1666

    Google Scholar 

  51. Mills SE, Folwer JE (1986) Gleason histologic grading of prostatic carcinoma. Correlations between biopsy and prostatectomy specimens. Cancer 57:346–349

    Google Scholar 

  52. Mohler JL, Partin AW, Epstein JI, Lohr WD, Coffey DS (1988) Nuclear roundness factor measurement for assessment of prognosis of patients with prostatic carcinoma. II. Standardization of methodology for histologic sections. J Urol 139:1085–1090

    Google Scholar 

  53. Montironi R, Scarpelli M, Sisti S, Braccischi A, Gusella P, Pisani E, Alberti R, Mariuzzi GM (1990) Quantitative analysis of prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia on tissue sections. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 12:366–372

    Google Scholar 

  54. Morenas A de las, Siroky MB, Merriam J, Stilmant MM (1988) Prostatic adenocarcinoma: reproducibility and correlation with clinical stages of four grading systems. Hum Pathol 19:587–595

    Google Scholar 

  55. Mostofi FK (1975) Grading of prostatic carcinoma. Cancer Chemother Rep 59:111–117

    Google Scholar 

  56. Mostofi FK, Sobin LH, Toroni H (1973) Histological typing of prostate tumours. International Histological Classification of Tumours, no 22. WHO, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  57. Muir EG (1934) Carcinoma of the prostate. Lancet 1:667–672

    Google Scholar 

  58. Mukamel E, deKernion JB, Dorey F, Hannah J (1990) Significance of histological prognostic indicators in patients with carcinoma of the prostate. Br J Urol 65:46–50

    Google Scholar 

  59. Murphy GP, Whitmore WF (1979) A report of the workshop on the current status of the histologic grading of prostate cancer. Cancer 44:1490–1494

    Google Scholar 

  60. Myers RP, Nevis RJ, Farcow GM, Utz DC (1982) Nucleolar grading of prostatic adenocarcinoma: light microscopic correlation with disease progression. Prostate 3:423–432

    Google Scholar 

  61. Ooms ECM, Anderson WAD, Alons CL, Boon ME, Veldhuizen RW (1983a) Analysis of the performance of pathologists in the grading of bladder tumours. Hum Pathol 14:140–143

    Google Scholar 

  62. Partin AW, Walsh AC, Pitcock RV, Mohler JL, Epstein JL, Coffey DS (1989) A comparison of nuclear morphometry and Gleason grade as a predictor of prognosis in stage A2 prostate cancer: a critical analysis. J Urol 142:1254–1258

    Google Scholar 

  63. Paulsen DF, Stone AR, Walther PJ, Tucker JA, Cox EB (1986) Radical prostatectomy: anatomical predictors of success or failure. J Urol 136:1041–1044

    Google Scholar 

  64. Petein M, Launoit Y de, Kiss R, Deprez C, Crols K, Pasteels JL, Verhest A, Velthoven R van (1990) Characterization of the morphonuclear features and DNA ploidy of prostatic disease. Prostate 16:199–208

    Google Scholar 

  65. Peters JM, Miles BJ, Kubus JJ, Crissman JD (1990) Prognostic significance of the nuclear DNA content in localized prostatic adenocarcinoma. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 12:359–365

    Google Scholar 

  66. Pool TL, Thompson GJ (1956) Conservative treatment of carcinoma of the prostate. JAMA 160:833–837

    Google Scholar 

  67. Ray GR, Pistemma DA, Castellino RA (1976) Operative staging of apparently localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate: results in fifty unselected patients. Cancer 38:73–83

    Google Scholar 

  68. Ring KS, Karp FS, Olsson CA, O'Toole K, Bixon R, Benson MC (1990) Flow cytometric analysis of localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate: the use of archival DNA analysis in conjunction with pathological grading to predict clinical outcome following radical retropublic prostatectomy. Prostate 17:155–164

    Google Scholar 

  69. Rönström L, Tribukait B, Esposti PL (1981) DNA pattern and cytological findings in fine-needle aspirates of untreated prostatic tumors: a flow-cytofluorometric study. Prostate 2:79–88

    Google Scholar 

  70. Rous SN, Mallouh C (1972) Prostatic carcinoma: the relationship between histologic grade and incidence of early metastases. J Urol 108:905–907

    Google Scholar 

  71. Schröder FH, Belt E (1975) Carcinoma of the prostate: a study of 213 patients with stage C tumor treated by total perineal prostatectomy. J Urol 114:257–260

    Google Scholar 

  72. Schröder FH, Hop WCJ, Blom JHM, Mostofi FK (1985) Grading of prostatic cancer: III. Multivariate analysis of prognostic parameters. Prostate 7:13–20

    Google Scholar 

  73. Schultz DS, Harry T, Wong KL, Stilmant MM, Zahniser DJ, Hutchinson ML (1990) Computer-assisted grading of adenocarcinoma in prostatic aspirates. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 12:91–97

    Google Scholar 

  74. Seppelt U, Sprenger E (1984) Nuclear DNA cytophotometry in prostate carcinoma. Cytometry 5:258–262

    Google Scholar 

  75. Seppelt U, Sprenger E, Hedderich J (1986) Investigation of automated DNA diagnosis and grading of prostatic cancer. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 8:152–157

    Google Scholar 

  76. Serra J (1982) Image analysis and mathematical morphology. Academic Press, London, p 336

    Google Scholar 

  77. Sherman AB, Koss LG, Adams SE (1984) Interobserver and intraobserver differences in the diagnosis of urothelial cells. Comparison with classification by computer. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 6:112–120

    Google Scholar 

  78. Spaander PJ, Ruiter DJ, Hermans J, Voogt HJ de, Brussee JAM, Boon ME (1982) The implications of subjective recognition of malignant cells in aspirations for the grading of prostatic cancer using cell image analysis. Anal Quant Cytol 4:123–126

    Google Scholar 

  79. Sprenger E, Volk L, Michaelis WE (1974) The significance of DNA measurements in the diagnosis of prostate carcinoma. Beitr Pathol 153:370–378

    Google Scholar 

  80. Stenkvist B, Olding-Stenkvist E (1990) Cytological and DNA characteristics of hyperplasia/inflammation and cancer of the prostate. Eur J Cancer 26:261–267

    Google Scholar 

  81. Stöber U, Schmidt U (1980) Zur Klinik des Prostatakarzinoms uber Berücksichtigung zyto- und histomorphologischer Befunde. Urol Int 35:233–239

    Google Scholar 

  82. Tannenbaum M, Tannenbaum S, DeSanctis PN, Olsson CA (1982) Prognostic significance of nucleolar surface area in prostate cancer. Urology 19:546–551

    Google Scholar 

  83. Tavares AS, Costa J, Carvalho A de, Reis M (1966) Tumour ploidy in carcinomas of the bladder and prostate. Br J Cancer 20:438–441

    Google Scholar 

  84. Tribukait B, Esposti PL, Rönström L (1980) Tumor ploidy for characterization of prostatic carcinoma: flow-cytofluorometric DNA studies using aspiration biopsy material. Scand J Urol Nephrol (Suppl) 55:59–65

    Google Scholar 

  85. Tritz D, Wisecarver J, Casey J, Linder J (1989) Image analysis of fine needle aspirates (FNA) of prostatic adenocarcinoma. Lab Invest 60:97A

    Google Scholar 

  86. Utz DC, Farrow GM (1969) Pathologic differentiation and prognosis of prostatic carcinoma. JAMA 209:1701–1705

    Google Scholar 

  87. Voeth C, Droese M, Steuer G (1978) Erfahrungen mit dem zytologischen Grading beim Prostatakarzinom. Urologe A 17:367–370

    Google Scholar 

  88. Zetterberg A, Esposti PL (1976) Cytophotometric DNA analysis of aspirated cells from prostatic carcinoma. Acta Cytol 20:46–57

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, University Hospital, P.O. Box 9101, NC-6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    H. G. van der Poel, J. A. Schalken & F. M. J. Debruyne

Authors
  1. H. G. van der Poel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. A. Schalken
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. F. M. J. Debruyne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

van der Poel, H.G., Schalken, J.A. & Debruyne, F.M.J. Image analysis and grading of prostate adenocarcinoma. World J Urol 9, 86–94 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00184039

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00184039

Keywords

Search

Navigation