Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer

  • Chapter
Prostate Cancer

Part of the book series: Recent Results in Cancer Research ((RECENTCANCER,volume 175))

Abstract

The contemporary challenge of prostate cancer diagnosis has been changed in the past decade from the endeavor to increase detection to that of detecting only those tumors that are clinically significant. Better interpretation of the role of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and its kinetics as a diagnostic tool, the adoption of extended prostate biopsy schemes, and perhaps implementation of new transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) technologies promote the achievement of this clinical mission. This chapter reviews these issues as well as the change in practice of patient preparation for TRUS-biopsy and analgesia during it, the role of repeat and saturation prostate biopsies, and the interpretation of an incidental prostate cancer finding. p ] Currently, the lifetime risk of a diagnosis of prostate cancer for North American men is 16%, compared to the lifetime risk of death from prostate cancer, which is 3% (Carter 2004). The advent of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening and transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) has significantly impacted the detection of prostate cancer over the last 20 years. The mean age at diagnosis has decreased (Hankey et al. 1999; Stamey et al. 2004) and the most common stage at diagnosis is now localized disease (Newcomer et al. 1997; Stamey et al. 2004). The goal of prostate cancer screening is to detect only those men at risk for death from the disease at an early curable phase. The ambiguous natural history of this most common malignancy in men, being latent with questionable life-threatening potential in a large number of cases on the one hand, with only a relatively small number (though not negligible) of highly malignant cases on the other, propels many doubts about whether this is possible. This was famously phrased more than 20 years ago by Whitmore who asked: “Is cure possible for those in whom it is necessary; and is it necessary for those in whom it is possible?” This is probably even more relevant nowadays. During the past decade two factors influenced significantly the increased detection rate of prostate cancer in general and that of clinically insignificant prostate cancers in particular: the widespread use of serum PSA as a screening tool to a large extent and to a lesser though significant extent the application of extended multiple core biopsy schemes (Master et al. 2005). In fact, 75% of men in the United States aged 50 years and older have been screened with the PSA test (Sirovich et al. 2003). Outside of the screening context, which is dealt with in depth in Chap. 5, clinical suspicion of prostate cancer is raised usually by abnormal digital rectal examination (DRE) and/or by abnormal levels of serum PSA. Final diagnosis is achieved only based on positive prostate biopsies.

Currently, the lifetime risk of a diagnosis of prostate cancer for North American men is 16%, compared to the lifetime risk of death from prostate cancer, which is 3% (Carter 2004). The advent of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening and transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) has significantly impacted the detection of prostate cancer over the last 20 years. The mean age at diagnosis has decreased (Hankey et al. 1999; Stamey et al. 2004) and the most common stage at diagnosis is now localized disease (Newcomer et al. 1997; Stamey et al. 2004). The goal of prostate cancer screening is to detect only those men at risk for death from the disease at an early curable phase. The ambiguous natural history of this most common malignancy in men, being latent with questionable life-threatening potential in a large number of cases on the one hand, with only a relatively small number (though not negligible) of highly malignant cases on the other, propels many doubts about whether this is possible. This was famously phrased more than 20 years ago by Whitmore who asked: “Is cure possible for those in whom it is necessary; and is it necessary for those in whom it is possible?” This is probably even more relevant nowadays. During the past decade two factors influenced significantly the increased detection rate of prostate cancer in general and that of clinically insignificant prostate cancers in particular: the widespread use of serum PSA as a screening tool to a large extent and to a lesser though significant extent the application of extended multiple core biopsy schemes (Master et al. 2005). In fact, 75% of men in the United States aged 50 years and older have been screened with the PSA test (Sirovich et al. 2003). Outside of the screening context, which is dealt with in depth in Chap. 5, clinical suspicion of prostate cancer is raised usually by abnormal digital rectal examination (DRE) and/or by abnormal levels of serum PSA. Final diagnosis is achieved only based on positive prostate biopsies.

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

Access this chapter

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 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
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

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Abdel-Khalek M, Sheir KZ, El-Baz M, Ibrahiem el H (2005) Is transition zone biopsy valuable in benign prostatic hyperplasia patients with serum prostate-specific antigen >10 ng/ml and prior negative peripheral zone biopsy? Scand J Urol Nephrol 39:49–55

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Aus G, Bergdahl S, Frosing R, Lodding P, Pileblad E, Hugosson J (1996) Reference range of prostatespecific antigen after transurethral resection of the prostate. Urology 47:529–531

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Autorino R, De Sio M, Di Lorenzo G, Damiano R, Perdona S, Cindolo L, D’Armiento M (2005) How to decrease pain during transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy: a look at the literature. J Urol 174:2091–2097

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Baillargeon J, Pollock BH, Kristal AR, Bradshaw P, Hernandez J, Basler J, Higgins B, Lynch S, Rozanski T, Troyer D, Thompson I (2005) The association of body mass index and prostate-specific antigen in a population-based study. Cancer 103:1092–1095

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Basillote JB, Armenakas NA, Hochberg DA, Fracchia JA (2003) Influence of prostate volume in the detection of prostate cancer. Urology 61:167–171

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bazinet M, Karakiewicz PI, Aprikian AG, Trudel C, Aronson S, Nachabe M, Peloquin F, Dessureault J, Goyal M, Zheng W, Begin LR, Elhilali MM (1996) Value of systematic transition zone biopsies in the early detection of prostate cancer. J Urol 155:605–606

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bostwick DG (1995) The pathology of incidental carcinoma. Cancer Surv 23:7–18

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brossner C, Madersbacher S, de Mare P, Ponholzer A, Al-Ali B, Rauchenwald M (2005) Follow-up of men obtaining a six-core versus a ten-core benign prostate biopsy 7 years previously. World J Urol 23:419–421

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bunting PS (1995) A guide to the interpretation of serum prostate specific antigen levels. Clin Biochem 28:221–241

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Buskirk SJ, Pinkstaff DM, Petrou SP, Wehle MJ, Broderick GA, Young PR, Weigand SD, O’Brien PC, Igel TC (2004) Acute urinary retention after transperineal template-guided prostate biopsy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 59:1360–1366

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Carter HB (2004) Prostate cancers in men with low PSA levels—must we find them? N Engl J Med 350:2292–2294

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Carvalhal GF, Smith DS, Mager DE, Ramos C, Catalona WJ (1999) Digital rectal examination for detecting prostate cancer at prostate specific antigen levels of 4 ng./ml. or less. J Urol 161:835–839

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chang JJ, Shinohara K, Bhargava V, Presti JC Jr (1998) Prospective evaluation of lateral biopsies of the peripheral zone for prostate cancer detection. J Urol 160:2111–2114

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chang SS, Alberts G, Wells N, Smith JA Jr, Cookson MS (2001) Intrarectal lidocaine during transrectal prostate biopsy: results of a prospective doubleblind randomized trial. J Urol 166:2178–2180

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chen ME, Troncoso P, Johnston DA, Tang K, Babaian RJ (1997) Optimization of prostate biopsy strategy using computer based analysis. J Urol 158:2168–2175

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chen ME, Troncoso P, Tang K, Babaian RJ, Johnston D (1999) Comparison of prostate biopsy schemes by computer simulation. Urology 53:951–960

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng L, Bergstralh EJ, Scherer BG, Neumann RM, Blute ML, Zincke H, Bostwick DG (1999) Predictors of cancer progression in T1a prostate adenocarcinoma. Cancer 85:1300–1304

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chon CH, Lai FC, McNeal JE, Presti JC Jr (2002) Use of extended systematic sampling in patients with a prior negative prostate needle biopsy. J Urol 167:2457–2460

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Clements R, Aideyan OU, Griffiths GJ, Peeling WB (1993) Side effects and patient acceptability of transrectal biopsy of the prostate. Clin Radiol 47:125–126

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cornud F, Belin X, Piron D, Chretien Y, Flam T, Casanova JM, Helenon O, Mejean A, Thiounn N, Moreau JF (1997) Color Doppler-guided prostate biopsies in 591 patients with an elevated serum PSA level: impact on Gleason score for nonpalpable lesions. Urology 49:709–715

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cupp MR, Bostwick DG, Myers RP, Oesterling JE (1995) The volume of prostate cancer in the biopsy specimen cannot reliably predict the quantity of cancer in the radical prostatectomy specimen on an individual basis. J Urol 153:1543–1548

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dahnert WF, Hamper UM, Eggleston JC, Walsh PC, Sanders RC (1986) Prostatic evaluation by transrectal sonography with histopathologic correlation: the echopenic appearance of early carcinoma. Radiology 158:97–102

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Deliveliotis C, Varkarakis J, Albanis S, Argyropoulos V, Skolarikos A (2002) Biopsies of the transitional zone of the prostate. Should it be done on a routine basis, when and why? Urol Int 68:113–117

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Demura T, Hioka T, Furuno T, Kaneta T, Gotoda H, Muraoka S, Sato T, Mochizuki T, Nagamori S, Shinohara N (2005) Differences in tumor core distribution between palpable and nonpalpable prostate tumors in patients diagnosed using extensive transperineal ultrasound-guided template prostate biopsy. Cancer 103:1826–1832

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Djavan B, Ravery V, Zlotta A, Dobronski P, Dobrovits M, Fakhari M, Seitz C, Susani M, Borkowski A, Boccon-Gibod L, Schulman CC, Marberger M (2001) Prospective evaluation of prostate cancer detected on biopsies 1, 2, 3 and 4: when should we stop? J Urol 166:1679–1683

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Djavan B, Fong YK, Ravery V, Remzi M, Horninger W, Susani M, Kreuzer S, Boccon-Gibod L, Bartsch G, Marberger M (2005) Are repeat biopsies required in men with PSA levels <or =4 ng/ml? A Multiinstitutional Prospective European Study. Eur Urol 47:38–44; discussion 44

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Durkan GC, Sheikh N, Johnson P, Hildreth AJ, Greene DR (2002) Improving prostate cancer detection with an extended-core transrectal ultrasonographyguided prostate biopsy protocol. BJU Int 89:33–39

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Elabbady AA, Khedr MM (2006) Extended 12-core prostate biopsy increases both the detection of prostate cancer and the accuracy of Gleason score. Eur Urol 49:49–53

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Emiliozzi P, Maymone S, Paterno A, Scarpone P, Amini M, Proietti G, Cordahi M, Pansadoro V (2004) Increased accuracy of biopsy Gleason score obtained by extended needle biopsy. J Urol 172:2224–2226

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein JI, Potter SR (2001) The pathological interpretation and significance of prostate needle biopsy findings: implications and current controversies. J Urol 166:402–410

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein JI, Walsh PC, Brendler CB (1994) Radical prostatectomy for impalpable prostate cancer: the Johns Hopkins experience with tumors found on transurethral resection (stages T1A and T1B) and on needle biopsy (stage T1C). J Urol 152:1721–1729

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein JI, Walsh PC, Carter HB (2001) Importance of posterolateral needle biopsies in the detection of prostate cancer. Urology 57:1112–1116

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Eskew LA, Bare RL, McCullough DL (1997) Systematic 5 region prostate biopsy is superior to sextant method for diagnosing carcinoma of the prostate. J Urol 157:199–202; discussion 202–203

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Feneley MR, Webb JA, McLean A, Kirby RS (1995) Post-operative serial prostate-specific antigen and transrectal ultrasound for staging incidental carcinoma of the prostate. Br J Urol 75:14–20

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ficarra V, Novella G, Novara G, Galfano A, Pea M, Martignoni G, Artibani W (2005) The potential impact of prostate volume in the planning of optimal number of cores in the systematic transperineal prostate biopsy. Eur Urol 48:932–937

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fleshner N, Klotz L (2002) Role of “saturation biopsy” in the detection of prostate cancer among difficult diagnostic cases. Urology 60:93–97

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fleshner NE, Cookson MS, Soloway SM, Fair WR (1998) Repeat transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: a strategy to improve the reliability of needle biopsy grading in patients with well-differentiated prostate cancer. Urology 52:659–662

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fowler JE Jr, Bigler SA, Miles D, Yalkut DA (2000) Predictors of first repeat biopsy cancer detection with suspected local stage prostate cancer. J Urol 163:813–818

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fukagai T, Namiki T, Namiki H, Carlile RG, Shimada M, Yoshida H (2001) Discrepancies between Gleason scores of needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens. Pathol Int 51:364–370

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner TA, Lemer ML, Schlegel PN, Waldbaum RS, Vaughan ED Jr, Steckel J (1998) Microfocal prostate cancer: biopsy cancer volume does not predict actual tumour volume. Br J Urol 81:839–843

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Garzotto M, Park Y, Mongoue-Tchokote S, Bledsoe J, Peters L, Blank BH, Austin D, Beer TM, Mori M (2005) Recursive partitioning for risk stratification in men undergoing repeat prostate biopsies. Cancer 104:1911–1917

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Goossen TE, de la Rosette JJ, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa CA, van Leenders GJ, Wijkstra H (2003) The value of dynamic contrast enhanced power Doppler ultrasound imaging in the localization of prostate cancer. Eur Urol 43:124–131

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gore JL, Shariat SF, Miles BJ, Kadmon D, Jiang N, Wheeler TM, Slawin KM (2001) Optimal combinations of systematic sextant and laterally directed biopsies for the detection of prostate cancer. J Urol 165:1554–1559

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Griffith BC, Morey AF, Ali-Khan MM, Canby-Hagino E, Foley JP, Rozanski TA (2002) Single dose levofloxacin prophylaxis for prostate biopsy in patients at low risk. J Urol 168:1021–1023

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hankey BF, Feuer EJ, Clegg LX, Hayes RB, Legler JM, Prorok PC, Ries LA, Merrill RM, Kaplan RS (1999) Cancer surveillance series: interpreting trends in prostate cancer—part I: Evidence of the effects of screening in recent prostate cancer incidence, mortality, and survival rates. J Natl Cancer Inst 91:1017–1024

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Herschman JD, Smith DS, Catalona WJ (1997) Effect of ejaculation on serum total and free prostate-specific antigen concentrations. Urology 50:239–243

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hodge KK, McNeal JE, Terris MK, Stamey TA (1989) Random systematic versus directed ultrasound guided transrectal core biopsies of the prostate. J Urol 142:71–4; discussion 74–75

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Irani J, Fournier F, Bon D, Gremmo E, Dore B, Aubert J (1997) Patient tolerance of transrectal ultrasoundguided biopsy of the prostate. Br J Urol 79:608–610

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kamoi K, Troncoso P, Babaian RJ (2000) Strategy for repeat biopsy in patients with high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia. J Urol 163:819–823

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Karakiewicz PI, Bazinet M, Aprikian AG, Trudel C, Aronson S, Nachabe M, Peloquint F, Dessureault J, Goyal MS, Begin LR, Elhilali MM (1997) Outcome of sextant biopsy according to gland volume. Urology 49:55–59

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Karakiewicz PI, Hanley JA, Bazinet M (1998) Threedimensional computer-assisted analysis of sector biopsy of the prostate. Urology 52:208–212

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Karakiewicz PI, Perrotte P, McCormack M, Peloquin F, Perreault JP, Arjane P, Widmer H, Saad F (2005) Early detection of prostate cancer with ultrasoundguided systematic needle biopsy. Can J Urol 12Suppl 2:5–8

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Keetch DW, Catalona WJ (1995) Prostatic transition zone biopsies in men with previous negative biopsies and persistently elevated serum prostate specific antigen values. J Urol 154:1795–1797

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • King CR, Long JP (2000) Prostate biopsy grading errors: a sampling problem? Int J Cancer 90:326–330

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Klein LT, Lowe FC (1997) The effects of prostatic manipulation on prostate-specific antigen levels. Urol Clin North Am 24:293–297

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Klotz L (2002) Expectant management with selective delayed intervention for favorable risk prostate cancer. Urol Oncol 7:175–179

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lechevallier E, Eghazarian C, Ortega JC, Roux F, Coulange C (1999) Effect of digital rectal examination on serum complexed and free prostate-specific antigen and percentage of free prostate-specific antigen. Urology 54:857–861

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Leibovici D, Zisman A, Chen-Levyi Z, Cypele H, Siegel YI, Faitelovich S, Lindner A (2000) Elevated prostate specific antigen serum levels after intravesical instillation of bacillus Calmette-Guerin. J Urol 164:1546–1549

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Leibovici D, Zisman A, Siegel YI, Sella A, Kleinmann J, Lindner A (2002) Local anesthesia for prostate biopsy by periprostatic lidocaine injection: a doubleblind placebo controlled study. J Urol 167:563–565

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Levine MA, Ittman M, Melamed J, Lepor H (1998) Two consecutive sets of transrectal ultrasound guided sextant biopsies of the prostate for the detection of prostate cancer. J Urol 159:471–5; discussion 475–476

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lui PD, Terris MK, McNeal JE, Stamey TA (1995) Indications for ultrasound guided transition zone biopsies in the detection of prostate cancer. J Urol 153:1000–1003

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mai KT, Isotalo PA, Green J, Perkins DG, Morash C, Collins JP (2000) Incidental prostatic adenocarcinomas and putative premalignant lesions in TURP specimens collected before and after the introduction of prostrate-specific antigen screening. Arch Pathol Lab Med 124:1454–1456

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Master VA, Chi T, Simko JP, Weinberg V, Carroll PR (2005) The independent impact of extended pattern biopsy on prostate cancer stage migration. J Urol 174:1789–93; discussion 1793

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Matlaga BR, Eskew LA, McCullough DL (2003) Prostate biopsy: indications and technique. J Urol 169:12–19

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Matzkin H, Patel JP, Altwein JE, Soloway MS (1994) Stage T1A carcinoma of prostate. Urology 43:11–21

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Meng MV, Franks JH, Presti JC Jr, Shinohara K (2003) The utility of apical anterior horn biopsies in prostate cancer detection. Urol Oncol 21:361–365

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Naya Y, Ochiai A, Troncoso P, Babaian RJ (2004) A comparison of extended biopsy and sextant biopsy schemes for predicting the pathological stage of prostate cancer. J Urol 171:2203–2208

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Newcomer LM, Stanford JL, Blumenstein BA, Brawer MK (1997) Temporal trends in rates of prostate cancer: declining incidence of advanced stage disease, 1974 to 1994. J Urol 158:1427–1430

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nixon RG, Wener MH, Smith KM, Parson RE, Blasé AB, Brawer MK (1997) Day to day changes in free and total PSA: significance of biological variation. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 1:90–96

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Noguchi M, Stamey TA, Neal JE, Yemoto CE (2000) An analysis of 148 consecutive transition zone cancers: clinical and histological characteristics. J Urol 163:1751–1755

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ochiai A, Troncoso P, Chen ME, Lloreta J, Babaian RJ (2005) The relationship between tumor volume and the number of positive cores in men undergoing multisite extended biopsy: implication for expectant management. J Urol 174:2164–2168, discussion 2168

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ohori M, Wheeler TM, Dunn JK, Stamey TA, Scardino PT (1994) The pathological features and prognosis of prostate cancer detectable with current diagnostic tests. J Urol 152:1714–1720

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Onur R, Littrup PJ, Pontes JE, Bianco FJ Jr (2004) Contemporary impact of transrectal ultrasound lesions for prostate cancer detection. J Urol 172:512–514

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pinkstaff DM, Igel TC, Petrou SP, Broderick GA, Wehle MJ, Young PR (2005) Systematic transperineal ultrasound-guided template biopsy of the prostate: three-year experience. Urology 65:735–739

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pinthus JH, Witkos M, Fleshner NE, Sweet J, Evans A, Jewett MA, Krahn M, Alibhai S, Trachtenberg J (2006) Prostate cancers scored as Gleason 6 on prostate biopsy are frequently Gleason 7 tumors at radical prostatectomy: implication on outcome. J Urol 176:979–984

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Presti JC Jr, Chang JJ, Bhargava V, Shinohara K (2000) The optimal systematic prostate biopsy scheme should include 8 rather than 6 biopsies: results of a prospective clinical trial. J Urol 163:163–6; discussion 166–167

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rabets JC, Jones JS, Patel A, Zippe CD (2004) Prostate cancer detection with office based saturation biopsy in a repeat biopsy population. J Urol 172:94–97

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ragde H, Kenny GM, Murphy GP, Landin K (1997) Transrectal ultrasound microbubble contrast angiography of the prostate. Prostate 32:279–283

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Remzi M, Fong YK, Dobrovits M, Anagnostou T, Seitz C, Waldert M, Harik M, Marihart S, Marberger M, Djavan B (2005) The Vienna nomogram: validation of a novel biopsy strategy defining the optimal number of cores based on patient age and total prostate volume. J Urol 174:1256–60; discussion 1260–1261; author reply 1261

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sabbagh R, McCormack M, Peloquin F, Faucher R, Perreault JP, Perrotte P, Karakiewicz PI, Saad F (2004) A prospective randomized trial of 1-day versus 3-day antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. Can J Urol 11:2216–2219

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Satoh T, Matsumoto K, Fujita T, Tabata K, Okusa H, Tsuboi T, Arakawa T, Irie A, Egawa S, Baba S (2005) Cancer core distribution in patients diagnosed by extended transperineal prostate biopsy. Urology 66:114–118

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Scherr DS, Eastham J, Ohori M, Scardino PT (2002) Prostate biopsy techniques and indications: when, where, and how? Semin Urol Oncol 20:18–31

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schroder FH, van der Maas P, Beemsterboer P, Kruger AB, Hoedemaeker R, Rietbergen J, Kranse R (1998) Evaluation of the digital rectal examination as a screening test for prostate cancer. Rotterdam section of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 90:1817–1823

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schroder FH, van der Cruijsen-Koeter I, de Koning HJ, Vis AN, Hoedemaeker RF, Kranse R (2000) Prostate cancer detection at low prostate specific antigen. J Urol 163:806–812

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Seaman EK, Sawczuk IS, Fatal M, Olsson CA, Shabsigh R (1996) Transperineal prostate needle biopsy guided by transurethral ultrasound in patients without a rectum. Urology 47:353–355

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sedelaar JP, Vijverberg PL, De Reijke TM, de la Rosette JJ, Kil PJ, Braeckman JG, Hendrikx AJ (2001) Transrectal ultrasound in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: state of the art and perspectives. Eur Urol 40:275–284

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shannon BA, McNeal JE, Cohen RJ (2003) Transition zone carcinoma of the prostate gland: a common indolent tumour type that occasionally manifests aggressive behaviour. Pathology 35:467–471

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shigemura K, Tanaka K, Yasuda M, Ishihara S, Muratani T, Deguchi T, Matsumoto T, Kamidono S, Nakano Y, Arakawa S, Fujisawa M (2005) Efficacy of 1-day prophylaxis medication with fluoroquinolone for prostate biopsy. World J Urol 23:356–360

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shinghal R, Terris MK (1999) Limitations of transperineal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsies. Urology 54:706–708

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shinohara K, Wheeler TM, Scardino PT (1989) The appearance of prostate cancer on transrectal ultrasonography: correlation of imaging and pathological examinations. J Urol 142:76–82

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sieber PR, Rommel FM, Agusta VE, Breslin JA, Huffnagle HW, Harpster LE (1997) Antibiotic prophylaxis in ultrasound guided transrectal prostate biopsy. J Urol 157:2199–2200

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Singh H, Canto EI, Shariat SF, Kadmon D, Miles BJ, Wheeler TM, Slawin KM (2004) Improved detection of clinically significant, curable prostate cancer with systematic 12-core biopsy. J Urol 171:1089–1092

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sirovich BE, Schwartz LM, Woloshin S (2003) Screening men for prostate and colorectal cancer in the United States: does practice reflect the evidence? JAMA 289:1414–1420

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Siu W, Dunn RL, Shah RB, Wei JT (2005) Use of extended pattern technique for initial prostate biopsy. J Urol 174:505–509

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stamey TA (1995) Making the most out of six systematic sextant biopsies. Urology 45:2–12

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stamey TA, Caldwell M, McNeal JE, Nolley R, Hemenez M, Downs J (2004) The prostate specific antigen era in the United States is over for prostate cancer: what happened in the last 20 years? J Urol 172:1297–1301

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart CS, Leibovich BC, Weaver AL, Lieber MM (2001) Prostate cancer diagnosis using a saturation needle biopsy technique after previous negative sextant biopsies. J Urol 166:86–91; discussion 91–92

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sved PD, Gomez P, Manoharan M, Kim SS, Soloway MS (2004) Limitations of biopsy Gleason grade: implications for counseling patients with biopsy Gleason score 6 prostate cancer. J Urol 172:98–102

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tal R, Baniel J (2005) Sexual function-preserving cystectomy. Urology 66:235–241

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor HM, Bingham JB (1997) The use of prophylactic antibiotics in ultrasound-guided transrectal prostate biopsy. Clin Radiol 52:787–790

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson IM, Goodman PJ, Tangen CM, Lucia MS, Miller GJ, Ford LG, Lieber MM, Cespedes RD, Atkins JN, Lippman SM, Carlin SM, Ryan A, Szczepanek CM, Crowley JJ, Coltman CA Jr (2003) The influence of finasteride on the development of prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 349:215–224

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson IM, Pauler DK, Goodman PJ, Tangen CM, Lucia MS, Parnes HL, Minasian LM, Ford LG, Lippman SM, Crawford ED, Crowley JJ, Coltman CA Jr (2004) Prevalence of prostate cancer among men with a prostate-specific antigen level <or =4.0 ng per milliliter. N Engl J Med 350:2239–2246

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Unal D, Sedelaar JP, Aarnink RG, van Leenders GJ, Wijkstra H, Debruyne FM, de la Rosette JJ (2000) Three-dimensional contrast-enhanced power Doppler ultrasonography and conventional examination methods: the value of diagnostic predictors of prostate cancer. BJU Int 86:58–64

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Watanabe H (1989) History and applications of transrectal sonography of the prostate. Urol Clin North Am 16:617–622

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Weldon VE, Tavel FR, Neuwirth H, Cohen R (1995) Failure of focal prostate cancer on biopsy to predict focal prostate cancer: the importance of prevalence. J Urol 154:1074–1077

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wolff JM, Boekels O, Borchers H, Jakse G, Rohde D (2000) Altered prostate specific antigen reference range after transurethral resection of the prostate. Anticancer Res 20:4977–4980

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zeng J, Bauer J, Zhang W, Sesterhenn I, Moul J, Mun SK (1999) Prostate biopsy schemes: 3-D visualization-based evaluation. Stud Health Technol Inform 62:390–391

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zincke H, Blute ML, Fallen MJ, Farrow GM (1991) Radical prostatectomy for stage A adenocarcinoma of the prostate: staging errors and their implications for treatment recommendations and disease outcome. J Urol 146:1053–1058

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgical Oncology, McMaster University Juravinski Cancer Centre, 699 Concession Street, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

    Jehonathan H. Pinthus MD, PhD

  2. Department of Urology, University Hospital Brno, Jihlavská 20, 62500, Brno, Czech Republic

    Dalibor Pacik MD, CSc

  3. The Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Tel-Hashomer, Ramat-Gan, 52621, Israel

    Jacob Ramon MD

Authors
  1. Jehonathan H. Pinthus MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dalibor Pacik MD, CSc
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jacob Ramon MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. The Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Tel-Hashomer, Ramat-Gan, 52621, Israel

    Jacob Ramon MD

  2. Lange Gasthuisstraat 35-37, 2000, Antwerp, Belgium

    Louis J. Denis MD, FACS (Director Oncology Centre Antwerp Secretary Europa Uomo) (Director Oncology Centre Antwerp Secretary Europa Uomo)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Pinthus, J.H., Pacik, D., Ramon, J. (2007). Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer. In: Ramon, J., Denis, L.J. (eds) Prostate Cancer. Recent Results in Cancer Research, vol 175. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-40901-4_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-40901-4_6

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-40897-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-40901-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation