Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Incidental versus manifest prostatic carcinoma

  • Published:
International Urology and Nephrology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The problem in managing incidental prostatic carcinoma is whether deferred treatment or active therapy should be preferred. Eighty-six consecutive patients with prostatic carcinoma diagnosed at TUR-P during 1979–83 were studied retrospectively. Seventeen of the patients (20%) had incidental prostatic carcinoma. Incidental carcinomas were significantly more well differentiated histologically than manifest carcinomas. The striking difference between incidental and manifest prostatic carcinomas appeared when the clinical course was considered. Only one patient with incidental carcinoma developed symptoms requiring endocrine therapy, against 31 patients with manifest carcinoma (p<0.01). It is therefore concluded that the distinction between manifest and incidental prostatic carcinoma is justified and that deferred treatment is sufficient in most patients presenting with incidental prostatic carcinoma at TUR-P.

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. Sheldon, C. A., Williams, R. D., Fraley, E. E.: Incidental carcinoma of the prostate: A review of the literature and critical reappraisal of classification.J. Urol., 124, 626 (1980).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Beynon, L. L., Busuttil, A., Newsam, J. E., Chisholm, G. D.: Incidental carcinoma of the prostate: selection for deferred treatment.Br. J. Urol., 55, 733 (1983).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Mogensen, P., Frimodt-Møller, C.: Prevalence of the individual stages of cancer of the prostate at the time of diagnosis.Ugeskr. Laeger., 143, 1644 (1981).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. The Veterans Administration Co-operative Urological Research Group: Treatment and survival of patients with cancer of the prostate.Surg. Gynecol. Obstet., May, 1011 (1967).

  5. Schroeder, F. H., Blom, J. H. M., Hop, W. C. J., Mostofi, F. K.: Grading of prostatic cancer (I): an analysis of the prognostic significance of single characteristics.Prostate, 6, 81 (1985).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Cantrell, B. B., DeKlerk, D. P., Eggleston, J. C., Boitnott, J. K., Walsh, P. C.: Pathological factors that influence prognosis in stage A prostatic cancer: the influence of extent versus grade.J. Urol., 125, 516 (1981).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology H, Gentofte Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Denmark

    P. E. Jørgensen, N. Weis & E. Bruun

Authors
  1. P. E. Jørgensen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. N. Weis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. E. Bruun
    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

Jørgensen, P.E., Weis, N. & Bruun, E. Incidental versus manifest prostatic carcinoma. International Urology and Nephrology 19, 175–178 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02550470

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02550470

Keywords

Search

Navigation