Display options
Cite
Niroomand H, Nowroozi M, Ayati M, et al. Relationship Between Perineural Invasion in Prostate Needle Biopsy Specimens and Pathologic Staging After Radical Prostatectomy. Nephrourol Mon. 2016;8(3):e36022doi: 10.5812/numonthly.36022.
Niroomand, H., Nowroozi, M., Ayati, M., Jamshidian, H., Arbab, A., Momeni, S. A., Ghadian, A., & Ghorbani, H. (2016). Relationship Between Perineural Invasion in Prostate Needle Biopsy Specimens and Pathologic Staging After Radical Prostatectomy. Nephro-urology monthly, 8(3), e36022. https://doi.org/10.5812/numonthly.36022
Niroomand, Hassan, et al. "Relationship Between Perineural Invasion in Prostate Needle Biopsy Specimens and Pathologic Staging After Radical Prostatectomy." Nephro-urology monthly vol. 8,3 (2016): e36022. doi: https://doi.org/10.5812/numonthly.36022
Niroomand H, Nowroozi M, Ayati M, Jamshidian H, Arbab A, Momeni SA, Ghadian A, Ghorbani H. Relationship Between Perineural Invasion in Prostate Needle Biopsy Specimens and Pathologic Staging After Radical Prostatectomy. Nephrourol Mon. 2016 Mar 16;8(3):e36022. doi: 10.5812/numonthly.36022. eCollection 2016 May. PMID: 27635390; PMCID: PMC5011638.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Nephrourol Mon. 2016 Mar 16;8(3):e36022. doi: 10.5812/numonthly.36022. eCollection 2016 May.

Relationship Between Perineural Invasion in Prostate Needle Biopsy Specimens and Pathologic Staging After Radical Prostatectomy.

Nephro-urology monthly

Hassan Niroomand, Mohammadreza Nowroozi, Mohsen Ayati, Hassan Jamshidian, Amir Arbab, Seyed Ali Momeni, Alireza Ghadian, Hamidreza Ghorbani

Affiliations

  1. Imam Reza Hospital, AJA University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, IR Iran.
  2. Uro-Oncology Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, IR Iran.
  3. Nephrology and Urology Research Center, Baqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, IR Iran.
  4. Imam Reza Hospital, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, IR Iran.

PMID: 27635390 PMCID: PMC5011638 DOI: 10.5812/numonthly.36022

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer is the second most common malignancy among men worldwide and the sixth cause of cancer-related death. Some authors have reported a relationship between perineural invasion (PNI), Gleason score, and the invasion of peripheral organs during prostatectomy. However, it is not yet clear whether pathological evidence of PNI is necessary for risk stratification in selecting treatment type.

OBJECTIVES: The clinical and pathological stages of prostate cancer are compared in patients under radical prostatectomy and in patients without perineural invasion.

PATIENTS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted using a sample of 109 patients who attended a tertiary health care center from 2008 to 2013. The selection criteria were PNI in prostate biopsy with Gleason scores less than six, seven, and eight to ten. The participants were enrolled in a census manner, and they underwent clinical staging. After radical prostatectomy, the rates of pathological staging were compared. The under-staging and over-staging rates among those with and without perineural invasion in biopsy samples were compared.

RESULTS: The concordance between Gleason scores according to biopsy and pathology was 36.7% (40 subjects). The concordance rate was 46.4% and 33.3% among those with and without PNI, respectively. The concordance rates were significantly varied in different subclasses of Gleason scores in patients without PNI (P = 0.003); the highest concordance rate was a Gleason score of 7 (63.6%) and the lowest was a Gleason score of eight to ten (25%). However, there were no significant differences in patients with PNI (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS: Although the presence of PNI in prostate biopsy is accompanied by higher surgical stages, PNI is not an appropriate independent factor in risk stratification.

Keywords: Perineural Invasion; Prostate Needle Biopsy; Radical Prostatectomy

References

  1. Am J Surg Pathol. 1993 Apr;17(4):336-41 - PubMed
  2. Am J Surg Pathol. 2000 Feb;24(2):183-9 - PubMed
  3. Cancer. 1972 Jul;30(1):5-13 - PubMed
  4. J Urol. 2002 Feb;167(2 Pt 1):516-20 - PubMed
  5. Mod Pathol. 1998 Jun;11(6):543-51 - PubMed
  6. BJU Int. 2002 Jul;90(2):174-84 - PubMed
  7. Urology. 2002 Jan;59(1):85-90 - PubMed
  8. Am J Surg Pathol. 2003 Apr;27(4):432-40 - PubMed
  9. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2010 Aug;19(8):1893-907 - PubMed
  10. Cancer. 2007 Jan 1;109(1):13-24 - PubMed
  11. Urology. 1999 Dec;54(6):1039-43 - PubMed
  12. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003 Oct 1;57(2):384-90 - PubMed
  13. J Urol. 2001 Jan;165(1):126-9 - PubMed
  14. J Urol. 2005 Feb;173(2):450-3 - PubMed
  15. Am J Surg Pathol. 1997 Dec;21(12):1496-500 - PubMed
  16. BJU Int. 2010 Jun;105(11):1510-3 - PubMed
  17. Prostate. 2005 Jun 1;63(4):336-40 - PubMed
  18. J Urol. 2001 Jan;165(1):114-8 - PubMed
  19. Int J Cancer. 2010 Dec 15;127(12):2893-917 - PubMed
  20. Mol Nutr Food Res. 2009 Feb;53(2):171-84 - PubMed
  21. Int J Cancer. 2000 Jan 1;85(1):60-7 - PubMed
  22. J Urol. 1998 Apr;159(4):1251-9 - PubMed
  23. Cancer. 2001 Jun 1;91(11):2196-204 - PubMed
  24. Am J Clin Pathol. 1999 Feb;111(2):223-8 - PubMed

Publication Types