Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Morphometrically estimated variation in nuclear size

A useful tool in grading prostatic cancer

  • Original Articles
  • Published:
Urological Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

At present there are several grading systems for prostatic carcinoma. Most are difficult to reproduce. An objective method of grading seems to be necessary and could make comparisons between various groups of patients easier and grading more reliable.

In the present study morphometrically estimated nuclear size and variation in nuclear size are matched with the survival rates of 207 patients who underwent total perineal prostatetomy for cancer. On the basis of morphometrically estimated variation in nuclear size the patients could be divided into two groups with significantly differing survival rates. In this way it was possible to split the group of patients with grade 2 carcinoma (Mostofi's grading system) into two groups of patients with significantly different survival rates. The survival rates in these two groups did not differ significantly from those in the patients with Grade 1 and Grade 3 tumors respectively.

The results are discussed in the light of the recent literature on the subject. Morphometry seems to be a valuable tool in grading prostatic cancer.

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. Barnett RN (1971) Analysis of variance. In: Barnett RN (ed) Clinical laboratory statistics. Little, Brown and Company, Boston, p 32

    Google Scholar 

  2. Blom JHM, ten Kate FJW, Schroeder FH, van der Heul RO (1983) Grading of prostatic carcinoma — Evaluation of single parameters and cytomorphometry. In: Pavone-Macaluso M, smith PH (eds) Cancer of the prostate and kidney. Plenum Press, New York, p 109

    Google Scholar 

  3. Blom JHM, ten Kate FJW, Schroeder FH, van der Heul RO (1982) Nuclear pleomorphism as a parameter in grading prostatic carcinoma. A morphometrical study. Abstract 213, presented at the Annual Meeting of the AUA, Kansas City

  4. Blom JHM, ten Kate FJW, Schroeder FH, van der Heul RO (1983) Zellkernpleiomorphismus als ein Parameter beim Grading des Prostatakarzinoms. Eine morphometrische Studie. Beitr Urol 3:320

    Google Scholar 

  5. Broders AC (1920) Squamous-cell epithelioma of the lip. A study of five hundred and thirty-seven cases. JAMA 74:656

    Google Scholar 

  6. Diamond DA, Berry SJ, Umbricht Ch, Jewett HJ, Coffey DS (1982) Computerized image analysis of nuclear shape as a prognostic factor for prostatic cancer. Prostate 3:321

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gaeta JF, Gardner Jr WA (1979) Histologic grading of prostatic cancer: background and possibilities. In: Murphy GP (ed) Prostatic cancer, PSG Publishing Co, Littleton, p41

    Google Scholar 

  10. 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

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kaplan EL, Meier P (1958) Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc 53:457

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  13. Mostofi FK (1975) Grading of prostatic carcinoma. Part 1. Cancer Chemother Rep 59:111

    Google Scholar 

  14. Mostofi FK (1976) Problems of grading carcinoma of prostate. Semin Oncol 3:161

    Google Scholar 

  15. Oort J, Baak JPA, Boon ME, Swanson Beck J, Anderson JM, van der Heul RO, Meijer CJLM, van der Valk P (1983) Applications of morphometry in tumour pathology. In: Baak JPA, Oort J (eds) A manual of morphometry in diagnostic pathology, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, p48

    Google Scholar 

  16. Schroeder FH, Blom JHM, Hop WCJ, Mostofi FK (1985) Grading of prostatic cancer (I). An analysis of the prognostic significance of single characteristics. Prostate 6:81

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  18. Stöber U, Schmidt U (1980) Zur Klinik des Prostatakarzinoms unter Berücksichtigung zyto-und histomorphologischer Befunde. Urol Int 35:233

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    J. H. M. Blom & F. H. Schroeder

  2. Department of Pathology, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    F. J. W. Ten Kate & R. O. van der Heul

Authors
  1. J. H. M. Blom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. F. J. W. Ten Kate
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. F. H. Schroeder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. R. O. van der Heul
    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

Blom, J.H.M., Ten Kate, F.J.W., Schroeder, F.H. et al. Morphometrically estimated variation in nuclear size. Urol. Res. 18, 93–99 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00302467

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00302467

Key words

Search

Navigation