Prognostic and predictive factors and reporting of prostate carcinoma in prostate needle biopsy specimens

References

• Miyake H, Sakai I, Harada K, Hara I, Eto H. Increased detection of clinically significant prostate cancer by addi-tional sampling from the anterior lateral horns of the peripheral zone in combination with the standard sextant biopsy. Int J Urol 2004;11:402–6.
   Google Scholar
• Presti JC Jr. Prostate biopsy: how many cores are enough? Urol Oncol 2003;21:135–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peyromaure M, Ravery V, Boccon-Gibod L. Biopsies of the transitional zone: impact on the detection of prostatic cancer and prognostic value. Prog Urol 2002;12:8–14.
   Google Scholar
• Ravery V, Billebaud T, Toublanc M, Boccon-Gibod L, Hermieu JF, Moulinier F, et al. Diagnostic value of ten systematic TRUS-guided prostate biopsies. Eur Urol 1999; 35:298–303.
   Google Scholar
• Stewart CS, Leibovich BC, Weaver AL, Lieber MM. Prostate cancer diagnosis using a saturation needle biopsy technique after previous negative sextant biopsies. J Urol 2001;166:86-91; discussion 91–2.
   Google Scholar
• Srigley JR, Amin MB, Bostwick DG, Grignon DJ, Ham-mond ME. Updated protocol for the examination of specimens from patients with carcinomas of the prostate gland: a basis for checklists. Cancer Committee. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2000;124:1034–9.
   Google Scholar
• Bostwick DG, Grignon DJ, Hammond ME, Amin MB, Cohen M, Crawford D, et al. Prognostic factors in prostate cancer. College of American Pathologists Consensus State-ment 1999. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2000;124:995–1000.
   Google Scholar
• Amin MB, Grignon D, Bostwick D, Reuter V, Troncoso P, Ayala AG. Recommendations for the reporting of resected prostate carcinomas. Association of Directors of Anatomic and Surgical Pathology. Am J Chin Pathol 1996;105:667 — 70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Royal College of Pathologists. Standards and mini-mum datasets for reporting cancer. Minimum dataset for prostate cancer histopathology reports. London: The Royal College of Pathologists; 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Boccon-Gibod L, van der Kwast TH, Montironi R, Boccon-Gibod L, Bono A, European Society of Uropathol-ogy, et al. Handling and pathology reporting of prostate biopsies. Eur Urol 2004;46:177–81.
   Google Scholar
• Van der Kwast TH, Lopes C, Santonja C, Pihl CG, Neetens I, Martikainen P, et al. Guidelines for processing and reporting of prostatic needle biopsies. J Chin Pathol 2003;56:336–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Badalament RA, Miller MC, Peller PA, Young DC, Bahn DK, Kochie P, et al. An algorithm for predicting nonorgan confined prostate cancer using the results obtained from sextant core biopsies with prostate specific antigen level. J Urol 1996;156:1375–80.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou M, Epstein JI, The reporting of prostate cancer on needle biopsy: prognostic and therapeutic implications and the utility of diagnostic markers. Pathology 2003;35:472–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naya Y, Slaton JW, Troncoso P, Okihara K, Babaian RJ. Tumor length and location of cancer on biopsy predict for side specific extraprostatic cancer extension. J Urol 2004; 171:1093–7.
   Google Scholar
• Freedland SJ, Aronson WJ, Terris MK, Kane CJ, Amling CL, Dorey F, et al. The percentage of prostate needle biopsy cores with carcinoma from the more involved side of the biopsy as a predictor of prostate specific antigen recurrence after radical prostatectomy: results from the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital (SEARCH) database. Cancer 2003;98:2344–50.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koh H, Kattan MW, Scardino PT, Suyama K, Maru N, Slawin K, et al. A nomogram to predict seminal vesicle invasion by the extent and location of cancer in systematic biopsy results. J Urol 2003;170:1203–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Randolph TL, Amin MB, Ro JY, Ayala AG. Histologic variants of adenocarcinoma and other carcinomas of prostate: pathologic criteria and clinical significance. Mod Pathol 1997;10:612–29.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grignon DJ. Unusual subtypes of prostate cancer. Mod Pathol 2004;17:316–27.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shannon RL, Ro JY, Grignon DJ, Ordonez NG, Johnson DE, Mackay B, et al. Sarcomatoid carcinoma of the prostate. A clinicopathologic study of 12 patients. Cancer 1992;69:2676–82.
   Google Scholar
• Ro JY, Grignon DJ, Ayala AG, Fernandez PL, Ordonez NG, Wishnow KI. Mucinous adenocarcinoma of the prostate: histochemical and immunohistochemical studies. Hum Pathol 1990;21:593–600.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ro JY, el-Naggar A, Ayala AG, Mody DR, Ordonez NG. Signet-ring-cell carcinoma of the prostate. Electron-micro-scopic and immunohistochemical studies of eight cases. Am J Surg Pathol 1988;12:453–60.
   Google Scholar
• Brinker DA, Potter SR, Epstein JI. Ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate diagnosed on needle biopsy: correlation with clinical and radical prostatectomy findings and progression. Am J Surg Pathol 1999;23:1471–9.
   Google Scholar
• Parwani AV, Kronz JD, Genega EM, Gaudin P, Chang S, Epstein JI. Prostate carcinoma with squarnous differentia-tion: an analysis of 33 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 2004; 28:651–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oesterling JE, Hauzeur CG, Farrow GM. Small cell anaplastic carcinoma of the prostate: a clinical, pathological and immunohistological study of 27 patients. J Urol 1992; 147:804–7.
   Google Scholar
• Papandreou CN, Daliani DD, Thall PF, Tu SM, Wang X, Reyes A, et al. Results of a phase II study with doxorubicin, etoposide, and cisplatin in patients with fully characterized small-cell carcinoma of the prostate. J Chin Oncol 2002; 20:3072–80.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spieth ME, Lin YG, Nguyen TT. Diagnosing and treating small-cell carcinomas of prostatic origin. Chin Nucl Med 2002;27:11–7.
   Google Scholar
• Amin MB, Grignon D, Humphrey PH, Srigley JR. Gleason grading of prostate cancer: a contemporary approach. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Partin AW, Kattan MW, Subong EN, Walsh PC, Wojno KJ, Oesterling JE, et al. Combination of prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage, and Gleason score to predict pathological stage of localized prostate cancer. A multi-institutional update. JAMA 1997;277:1445–51.
   Google Scholar
• Kattan MW, Eastham JA, Wheeler TM, Maru N, Scardino PT, Erbersdobler A, et al. Counseling men with prostate cancer: a nomogram for predicting the presence of small, moderately differentiated, confined tumors. J Tirol 2003; 170:1792–7.
   Google Scholar
• Pisansky TM, Kahn MJ, Rasp GM, Cha SS, Haddock MG, Bostwick DG. A multiple prognostic index predictive of disease outcome after irradiation for clinically localized prostate carcinoma. Cancer 1997;79:337–44.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D'Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, Schultz D, Schnall M, Tomaszewski JE, et al. Combined modality staging of prostate carcinoma and its utility in predicting pathologic stage and postoperative prostate specific antigen failure. Urology 1997;49:23–30.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gancarczyk KJ, Wu H, McLeod DG, Kane C, Kusuda L, Lance R, et al. Using the percentage of biopsy cores positive for cancer, pretreatment PSA, and highest biopsy Gleason sum to predict pathologic stage after radical prostatectomy: the Center for Prostate Disease Research nomograms. Urology 2003;61:589–95.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ohori M, Kattan MW, Koh H, Maru N, Slawin KM, Shariat S, et al. Predicting the presence and side of extracapsular extension: a nomogram for staging prostate cancer. J Urol 2004;171:1844–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holmberg L, Bill-Axelson A, Helgesen F, Salo JO, Folmerz P, Haggman M, et al. A randomized trial comparing radical prostatectomy with watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2002;347:781–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang XJ, Lecksell K, Potter SR, Epstein JI. Significance of small foci of Gleason score 7 or greater prostate cancer on needle biopsy. Urology 1999;54:528–32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noguchi M, Stamey TA, McNeal JE, Nolley R. Prognostic factors for multifocal prostate cancer in radical prostatect-omy specimens: lack of significance of secondary cancers. J Urol 2003;170:459–63.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koppie TM, Grossfeld GD, Miller D, Yu J, Stier D, Broering JM, et al. Patterns of treatment of patients with prostate cancer initially managed with surveillance: results from The CaPSURE database. Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urological Research Endeavor. J Urol 2000;164: 81–8.
   Google Scholar
• Zietman AL, Thakral H, Wilson L, Schellhammer P. Conservative management of prostate cancer in the pros-tate specific antigen era: the incidence and time course of subsequent therapy. J Urol 2001;166:1702–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pilepich MV, Winter K, John MJ, Mesic JB, Sause W, Rubin P, et al. Phase III radiation therapy oncology group (RTOG) trial 86-10 of androgen deprivation adjuvant to definitive radiotherapy in locally advanced carcinoma of the prostate. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2001;50:1243–52.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kunz GM Jr, Epstein JI. Should each core with prostate cancer be assigned a separate Gleason score? Hum Pathol 2003;34:911 —4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rubin MA, Bismar TA, Curtis S, Montie JE. Prostate needle biopsy reporting: how are the surgical members of the society of urologic oncology using pathology reports to guide treatment of prostate cancer patients? Am J Surg Pathol 2004;28:946–52.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graefen M, Ohori M, Karakiewicz PI, Cagiannos I, Hammerer PG, Haese A, et al. Assessment of the enhance-ment in predictive accuracy provided by systematic biopsy in predicting outcome for clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 2004;171:200–3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Augustin H, Eggert T, Wenske S, Karakiewicz PI, Palisaar J, Daghofer F, et al. Comparison of accuracy between the Partin tables of 1997 and 2001 to predict final pathological stage in clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 2004; 171:177 —81.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grober ED, Tsihlias J, Jewett MA, Sweet JM, Evans AJ, Trachtenberg J, et al. Correlation of the primary Gleason pattern on prostate needle biopsy with clinico-pathological factors in Gleason 7 tumors. Can J Urol 2004;11:2157–62.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sakr WA, Tefilli MV, Grignon DJ, Banerjee M, Dey J, Gheiler EL, et al. Gleason score 7 prostate cancer: a heterogeneous entity? Correlation with pathologic para-meters and disease-free survival. Urology 2000;56:730–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Partin AW, Mangold LA, Lamm DM, Walsh PC, Epstein JI, Pearson JD. Contemporary update of prostate cancer staging nomograms (Partin Tables) for the new millen-nium. Urology 2001;58:843–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Makarov DV, Sanderson H, Partin AW, Epstein JI. Gleason score 7 prostate cancer on needle biopsy: is the prognostic difference in Gleason scores 4+3 and 3+4 independent of the number of involved cores? J Urol 2002;167:2440–2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Epstein JI. Gleason score 2-4 adenocarcinoma of the prostate on needle biopsy: a diagnosis that should not be made. Am J Surg Pathol 2000;24:477–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allsbrook WC Jr, Mangold KA, Johnson MH, Lane RB, Lane CG, Amin MB, et al. Interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma: urologic patholo-gists. Hum Pathol 2001;32:74–80.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fleshner NE, Cookson MS, Soloway SM, Fair WR. Repeat transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: a strategy to improve the reliability of needle biopsy grading in patients with well-differentiated prostate cancer. Urology 1998;52: 659–62.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D'Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, Cote K, Loffredo M, Schultz D, et al. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy or external beam radiation therapy for patients with clinically localized prostate carcinoma in the prostate specific antigen era. Cancer 2002;95:281–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freedland SJ, Csathy GS, Dorey F, Aronson WJ. Percent prostate needle biopsy tissue with cancer is more predictive of biochemical failure or adverse pathology after radical prostatectomy than prostate specific antigen or Gleason score. J Urol 2002;167:516–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Presti JC Jr, Shinohara K, Bacchetti P, Tigrani V, Bhargava V. Positive fraction of systematic biopsies predicts risk of relapse after radical prostatectomy. Urology 1998;52: 1079–84.
   Google Scholar
• Kestin LL, Goldstein NS, Vicini FA, Martinez AA. Percentage of positive biopsy cores as predictor of clinical outcome in prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy. J Urol 2002;168:1994 —9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freedland SJ, Aronson WJ, Terris MK, Kane CJ, Amling CL, Dorey F, et al. Percent of prostate needle biopsy cores with cancer is significant independent predictor of prostate specific antigen recurrence following radical prostatectomy: results from SEARCH database. J Urol 2003;169:2136–41.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D'Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, Schultz D, Fondurulia J, Chen MH, et al. Clinical utility of the percentage of positive prostate biopsies in defining bio-chemical outcome after radical prostatectomy for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:1164–72.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ravery V, Szabo J, Toublanc M, Boccon-Gibod LA, Bill-ebaud T, Hermieu JF, et al. A single positive prostate biopsy in six does not predict a low-volume prostate tumour. Br J Urol 1996;77:724–8.
   Google Scholar
• Hammerer P, Henke RP, Hubner D, Huland H. Preopera-tive assessment of tumor aggressiveness in localized pro-static carcinoma. Urologe A 1995;34:413–8.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rubin MA, Mucci NR, Manley S, Sanda M, Cushenberry E, Strawderman M, et al. Predictors of Gleason pattern 4/5 prostate cancer on prostatectomy specimens: can high grade tumor be predicted preoperatively? J Tirol 2001; 165:114–8.
   Google Scholar
• Thorson P, Vollmer RT, Arcangeli C, Keetch DW, Hum-phrey PA. Minimal carcinoma in prostate needle biopsy specimens: diagnostic features and radical prostatectomy follow-up. Mod Pathol 1998;11:543–51.
   Google Scholar
• Epstein JI, Walsh PC, Carmichael M, Brendler CB. Pathologic and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of nonpalpable (stage Tic) prostate cancer. JANIA 1994;271: 368–74.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D'Amico AV, Wu Y, Chen MH, Nash M, Renshaw AA, Richie JP. Pathologic findings and prostate specific antigen outcome after radical prostatectomy for patients diagnosed on the basis of a single microscopic focus of prostate carcinoma with a gleason score =7. Cancer 2000;89: 1810–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis JS Jr, Vollmer RT, Humphrey PA. Carcinoma extent in prostate needle biopsy tissue in the prediction of whole gland tumor volume in a screening population. Am J Chin Pathol 2002;118:442–50.
   Google Scholar
• Bismar TA, Lewis JS Jr, Vollmer RT, Humphrey PA. Multiple measures of carcinoma extent versus perineural invasion in prostate needle biopsy tissue in prediction of pathologic stage in a screening population. Am J Surg Pathol 2003;27:432–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Epstein JI. Diagnosis and reporting of limited adenocarci-noma of the prostate on needle biopsy. Mod Pathol 2004;17:307–15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freedland SJ, Kane CJ, Presti JC Jr, Terris MK, Amling CL, Dorey F, et al. Comparison of percentage of total prostate needle biopsy tissue with cancer to percentage of cores with cancer for predicting PSA recurrence after radical prostatectomy: results from the SEARCH database. Urology 2003;61:742–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freedland SJ, Csathy GS, Dorey F, Aronson WJ. Clinical utility of percent prostate needle biopsy tissue with cancer cutpoints to risk stratify patients before radical prostatect-omy. Urology 2002;60:84–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen RJ, Stables S. Intraprostatic fat. Hum Pathol 1998;29:424–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amin MB, Bostwick DG. Pigment in prostatic epithelium and adenocarcinoma: a potential source of diagnostic confusion with seminal vesicular epithelium. Mod Pathol 1996;9:791–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vallancien G, Prapotnich D, Veillon B, Brisset JM, Andre-Bougaran J. Seminal vesicle biopsies in the preoperative staging of prostatic cancer. Eur Urol 1991;19:196–200.
   Google Scholar
• Ravery V, Boccon-Gibod LA, Dauge-Geffroy MC, Bill-ebaud T, Delmas V, Meulemans A, et al. Systematic biopsies accurately predict extracapsular extension of pros-tate cancer and persistent/recurrent detectable PSA after radical prostatectomy. Urology 1994;44:371–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Viglione MP, Potter S, Partin AW, Lesniak MS, Epstein JI. Should the diagnosis of benign prostatic hyperplasia be made on prostate needle biopsy? Hum Pathol 2002;33: 796–800.
   Google Scholar
• Steinberg DM, Sauvageot J, Piantadosi S, Epstein JI. Correlation of prostate needle biopsy and radical prosta-tectomy Gleason grade in academic and community settings. Am J Surg Pathol 1997;21:566–76.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beard CJ, Chen MH, Cote K, Loffredo M, Renshaw AA, Hurwitz M, et al. Perineural invasion is associated with increased relapse after external beam radiotherapy for men with low-risk prostate cancer and may be a marker for occult, high-grade cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004;58:19–24.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Javidan J, Wood DP. Clinical interpretation of the prostate biopsy. Urol Oncol 2003;21:141–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quinn DI, Henshall SM, Brenner PC, Kooner R, Golovsky D, O'Neill GF, et al. Prognostic significance of preoperative factors in localized prostate carcinoma treated with radical prostatectomy: importance of percentage of biopsies that contain tumor and the presence of biopsy perineural invasion. Cancer 2003;97:1884–93.
   Google Scholar
• Sebo TJ, Cheville JC, Riehle DL, Lohse CM, Pankratz VS, Myers RP, et al. Predicting prostate carcinoma volume and stage at radical prostatectomy by assessing needle biopsy specimens for percent surface area and cores positive for carcinoma, perineural invasion, Gleason score, DNA ploidy and proliferation, and preoperative serum prostate specific antigen: a report of 454 cases. Cancer 2001;91:2196–204.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De la Taille A, Katz A, Bagiella E, Olsson CA, O'Toole KNI, Rubin MA. Perineural invasion on prostate needle biopsy: an independent predictor of final pathologic stage. Urology 1999;54:1039–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holmes GF, Walsh PC, Pound CR, Epstein JI. Excision of the neurovascular bundle at radical prostatectomy in cases with perineural invasion on needle biopsy. Urology 1999; 53:752–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vargas SO, Jiroutek M, Welch WR, Nucci MR, D'Amico AV, Renshaw AA. Perineural invasion in prostate needle biopsy specimens. Correlation with extraprostatic extension at resection. Am J Chin Pathol 1999;111:223–8.
   Google Scholar
• Egan AJ, Bostwick DG. Prediction of extraprostatic exten-sion of prostate cancer based on needle biopsy findings: perineural invasion lacks significance on multivariate ana-lysis. Am J Surg Pathol 1997;21:1496–500.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonin SR, Hanlon AL, Lee WR, Movsas B, al-Saleem TI, Hanks GE. Evidence of increased failure in the treatment of prostate carcinoma patients who have perineural invasion treated with three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy. Cancer 1997;79:75–80.
   Google Scholar
• Bastacky SI, Walsh PC, Epstein JI. Relationship between perineural tumor invasion on needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy capsular penetration in clinical stage B adenocarcinoma of the prostate. Am J Surg Pathol 1993;17:336–41.
   Google Scholar
• Ukimura O, Troncoso P, Ramirez El, Babaian RJ. Prostate cancer staging: correlation between ultrasound determined tumor contact length and pathologically confirmed extra-prostatic extension. J Urol 1998;159:1251–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson PR, Hanlon AL, Patchefsky A, Al-Saleem T, Hanks GE. Perineural invasion and Gleason 7–10 tumors predict increased failure in prostate cancer patients with pretreatment PSA 0 ng/ml treated with conformal external beam radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1998;41: 1087–92.
   Google Scholar
• Maru N, Ohori M, Kattan MW, Scardino PT, Wheeler TM. Prognostic significance of the diameter of perineural invasion in radical prostatectomy specimens. Hum Pathol 2001;32:828–33.
   Google Scholar
• Shariat SF, Khoddami SM, Saboorian H, Koeneman KS, Sagalowsky Al, Cadeddu JA, et al. Lymphovascular inva-sion is a pathological feature of biologically aggressive disease in patients treated with radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2004;171:1122–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ito K, Nakashima J, Mukai M, Asakura H, Ohigashi T, Saito S, et al. Prognostic implication of microvascular invasion in biochemical failure in patients treated with radical prostatectomy. Urol Int 2003;70:297–302.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stamey TA, McNeal JE, Yemoto CM, Sigal BM, Johnstone IM. Biological determinants of cancer progression in men with prostate cancer. JAMA 1999;281:1395–400.
   Google Scholar
• Salomao DR, Graham SD, Bostwick DG. Microvascular invasion in prostate cancer correlates with pathologic stage. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1995;119:1050–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bishara T, Ramnani DM, Epstein JI. High-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia on needle biopsy: risk of cancer on repeat biopsy related to number of involved cores and morphologic pattern. Am J Surg Pathol 2004;28:629–33.
   Google Scholar
• Naya Y, Ayala AG, Tamboli P, Babaian RJ. Can the number of cores with high-grade prostate intraepithelial neoplasia predict cancer in men who undergo repeat biopsy? Urology 2004;63:503–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kronz JD, Allan CH, Shaikh AA, Epstein JI. Predicting cancer following a diagnosis of high-grade prostatic intrae-pithelial neoplasia on needle biopsy: data on men with more than one follow-up biopsy. Am J Surg Pathol 2001;25: 1079–85.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davidson D, Bostwick DG, Qian J, Wollan PC, Oesterling JE, Rudders RA, et al. Prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia is a risk factor for adenocarcinoma: predictive accuracy in needle biopsies. J Urol 1995;154:1295–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mendrinos SE, Amin MB, Lim SD, Herrera CM, Srigley JR Predictive value of pathologic parameters of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN) in the initial biopsy for the subsequent detection of prostatic carcinoma (PCa). Mod Pathol 2004;17 (Suppl 1):168A.
   Google Scholar
• Gokden NRK, Humphrey PA. High grade prostatic in-traepithelial neoplasia in needle biopsy tissue as a risk factor for detection of adenocarcinoma: current level of risk in a screening population. Mod Pathol 2004;16:152.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ouyang RC, Kenwright DN, Nacey JN, Delahunt B. The presence of atypical small acinar proliferation in prostate needle biopsy is predictive of carcinoma on subsequent biopsy. BJU Int 2001;87:70–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iczkowski KA, Bassler TJ, Schwob VS, Bassler IC, Kunnel BS, Orozco RE, et al. Diagnosis of "suspicious for malignancy" in prostate biopsies: predictive value for cancer. Urology 1998;51:749–57.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iczkowski KA, MacLennan GT, Bostwick DG. Atypical small acinar proliferation suspicious for malignancy in prostate needle biopsies: clinical significance in 33 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 1997;21: 1489–95.
   Google Scholar
• Gokden N, Roehl KA, Catalona WJ, Humphrey PA. High-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia in needle biopsy as a risk factor for detection of adenocarcinoma: current level of risk in a screening population. Urology 2005; In press.
   Google Scholar
• Lopez-Corona E, Ohori M, Scardino PT, Reuter VE, Gonen M, Kattan MW. A nomogram for predicting a positive repeat prostate biopsy in patients with a previous negative biopsy. J Urol 2003;170:1184–8.
   Google Scholar
• Shah RB, Zhou M, LeBlanc M, Snyder M, Rubin MA. Comparison of the basal cell-specific markers, 34betaE12 and p63, in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Am J Surg Pathol 2002;26: 1161–8.
   Google Scholar
• Beach R, Gown AM, De Peralta-Venturina MN, Folpe AL, Yaziji H, Salles PG, et al. P504S immunohistochemical detection in 405 prostatic specimens including 376 18-gauge needle biopsies. Am J Surg Pathol 2002;26: 1588–96.
   Google Scholar
• Varma M, Morgan M, Jasani B, Tamboli P, Amin MB. Polyclonal anti-PSA is more sensitive but less specific than monoclonal anti-PSA: implications for diagnostic prostatic pathology. Am J Chin Pathol 2002;118:202–7.
   Google Scholar
• Pollack A, DeSilvio M, Khor LY, Li R, Al-Saleem TI, Hammond ME, et al. Ki-67 staining is a strong predictor of distant metastasis and mortality for men with prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy plus androgen depriva-tion: Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Trial 92–02. J Chin Oncol 2004;22: 2133–40.
   Google Scholar
• DeMarzo AM, Nelson WG, Isaacs WB, Epstein JI. Pathological and molecular aspects of prostate cancer. Lancet 2003;361:955–64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rhodes DR, Sanda MG, One AP, Chinnaiyan AM, Rubin MA. Multiplex biomarker approach for determining risk of prostate-specific antigen-defined recurrence of prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95:661–8.
   Google Scholar
• Dhanasekaran SM, Barrette TR, Ghosh D, Shah R, Varambally S, Kurachi K, et al. Delineation of prognostic biomarkers in prostate cancer. Nature 2001;412:822–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ross JS, Jennings TA, Nazeer T, Sheehan CE, Fisher HA, Kauffman RA, et al. Prognostic factors in prostate cancer. Am J Chin Pathol 2003;120 (Suppl):S85–100.
   Google Scholar
• Visakorpi T. The molecular genetics of prostate cancer. Urology 2003;62:3–10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Isaacs W, Kainu T. Oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes in prostate cancer. Epidemiol Rev 2001;23:36–41.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dhir R, Vietmeier B, Arlotti J, Acquafondata M, Landsittel D, Masterson R, et al. Early identification of individuals with prostate cancer in negative biopsies. J Urol 2004;171: 1419–23.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou W, Goodman M, Lyles RH, Lim SD, Williams TY, Rusthoven KE, et al. Surgical margin and Gleason score as predictors of postoperative recurrence in prostate cancer with or without chromosome 8p allelic imbalance. Prostate 2004;61:81–91.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogatsch H, Hittmair A, Reissigl A, Mikuz G, Feichtinger H. Microvessel density in core biopsies of prostatic adenocarcinoma: a stage predictor? J Pathol 1997;182: 205–10.
   Google Scholar