METHODOLOGY: We categorise tissue images based on the texture of individual tissue components via the construction of a single classifier and also construct an ensemble learning model by merging the values obtained by each classifier. Another issue that arises is overfitting due to the high-dimensional texture of individual tissue components. We propose a new FS method, SVM-RFE(AC), that integrates a Support Vector Machine-Recursive Feature Elimination (SVM-RFE) embedded procedure with an absolute cosine (AC) filter method to prevent redundancy in the selected features of the SV-RFE and an unoptimised classifier in the AC.
RESULTS: We conducted experiments on H&E histopathological prostate and colon cancer images with respect to three prostate classifications, namely benign vs. grade 3, benign vs. grade 4 and grade 3 vs. grade 4. The colon benchmark dataset requires a distinction between grades 1 and 2, which are the most difficult cases to distinguish in the colon domain. The results obtained by both the single and ensemble classification models (which uses the product rule as its merging method) confirm that the proposed SVM-RFE(AC) is superior to the other SVM and SVM-RFE-based methods.
CONCLUSION: We developed an FS method based on SVM-RFE and AC and successfully showed that its use enabled the identification of the most crucial texture feature of each tissue component. Thus, it makes possible the distinction between multiple Gleason grades (e.g. grade 3 vs. grade 4) and its performance is far superior to other reported FS methods.
METHODS: Study subjects included men with initial PSA between 4.0 and 10.0 ng/ml that have undergone 12-core TRUS-guided prostate biopsy between 2009 and 2016. The prostate cancer detection rate was calculated, while potential factors associated with detection were investigated via univariable and multivariable analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 617 men from a multi-ethnic background encompassing Chinese (63.5%), Malay (23.1%) and Indian (13.3%) were studied. The overall cancer detection rate was 14.3% (88/617), which included cancers detected at biopsy 1 (first biopsy), biopsy 2 (second biopsy with previous negative biopsy) and biopsy ≥ 3 (third or more biopsies with prior negative biopsies). Indian men displayed higher detection rate (23.2%) and increased risk of prostate cancer development (OR 1.85, 95% CI 1.03-3.32, p
MATERIALS AND METHODS: From March 2015 to August 2016, all men consecutively undergoing transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy with total PSA values ≤ 20ng/ ml were recruited. Blood samples were taken immediately before undergoing prostate biopsy. The performance of total PSA, %fPSA, %p2PSA and PHI in determining the presence of PCa on prostate biopsy were compared.
RESULTS: PCa was diagnosed in 25 of 84 patients (29.7%). %p2PSA and PHI values were significantly higher (p<0.05) in patients with PCa than those without PCa. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves for total PSA, %fPSA, %p2PSA and PHI were 0.558, 0.560, 0.734 and 0.746, respectively. At 90% sensitivity, the specificity of PHI (42.4%) was five times better than total PSA (8.5%) and two times better than %fPSA (20.3%). By utilising PHI cut-off >22.52, 27 of 84 (32.1%) patients could have avoided undergoing biopsy.
CONCLUSION: Findings of our study support the potential clinical effectiveness of PHI in predicting PCa in a wider concentration range of total PSA up to 20ng/ml.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic online search was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis statement. Eligible publications reporting the overall survival (OS) and/or disease-specific survival (DSS) were included. A total of 14 studies, including 17,869 patients, were considered for analysis. The impact of therapeutic modalities on survival was assessed, with a risk of bias assessment according to the Newcastle Ottawa Scale.
RESULTS: For RP, RT, and HT, the mean 10-year OS was 70.7% (95% CI 61.3-80.2), 65.8% (95% CI 48.1-83.3), and 22.6% (95% CI 4.9-40.3; p = 0.001), respectively. The corresponding 10-year DSS was 84.1% (95% CI 75.1-93.2), 89.4% (95% CI 70.1-108.6), and 50.4% (95% CI 31.2-69.6; p = 0.0127), respectively. Among all treatment combinations, RP displayed significant improvement in OS when included in the treatment (Z = 4.01; p < 0.001). Adjuvant RT significantly improved DSS (Z = 2.7; p = 0.007). Combination of RT and HT favored better OS in comparison to monotherapy with RT or HT (Z = 3.61; p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Improved outcomes in advanced PC were detected for RP plus adjuvant RT vs. RP alone and RT plus adjuvant HT vs. RT alone with comparable survival results between both regimens. RP with adjuvant RT may present the modality of choice when HT is contraindicated.
CASE REPORT: A 40-year-old Japanese man presented with lower abdominal pain. Computed tomography revealed a prostatic mass; furthermore, prostate core needle biopsy revealed proliferating bland spindle cells, without necrosis or prominent mitoses. Tumour cells were positive for CD34 and progesterone receptor on immunohistochemical analysis; thus, a prostatic stromal tumour of uncertain malignant potential was initially suspected. However, as the tumour cells showed positive immunoreactivity for STAT6, the final diagnosis was an SFT of the prostate. The patient underwent tumour resection, and at the 6-month postoperative follow-up, neither local recurrence nor distant metastasis occurred.
CONCLUSION: For an accurate diagnosis of an SFT of the prostate, STAT6 immunohistochemistry should be conducted for all mesenchymal tumours of the prostate. When STAT6 immunohistochemical analysis is unfeasible, pathologists should be aware that the morphological and immunohistochemical characteristics of SFT variable from case to case and diagnose with combined analysis of several immunohistochemical markers.
METHODS: Collaborating investigators from 15 prospective studies provided individual-participant records (from predominantly men of white European ancestry) on blood or toenail selenium concentrations and prostate cancer risk. Odds ratios of prostate cancer by selenium concentration were estimated using multivariable-adjusted conditional logistic regression. All statistical tests were two-sided.
RESULTS: Blood selenium was not associated with the risk of total prostate cancer (multivariable-adjusted odds ratio [OR] per 80 percentile increase = 1.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.83 to 1.23, based on 4527 case patients and 6021 control subjects). However, there was heterogeneity by disease aggressiveness (ie, advanced stage and/or prostate cancer death, Pheterogeneity = .01), with high blood selenium associated with a lower risk of aggressive disease (OR = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.21 to 0.87) but not with nonaggressive disease. Nail selenium was inversely associated with total prostate cancer (OR = 0.29, 95% CI = 0.22 to 0.40, Ptrend < .001, based on 1970 case patients and 2086 control subjects), including both nonaggressive (OR = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.22 to 0.50) and aggressive disease (OR = 0.18, 95% CI = 0.11 to 0.31, Pheterogeneity = .08).
CONCLUSIONS: Nail, but not blood, selenium concentration is inversely associated with risk of total prostate cancer, possibly because nails are a more reliable marker of long-term selenium exposure. Both blood and nail selenium concentrations are associated with a reduced risk of aggressive disease, which warrants further investigation.
Materials and Methods: We analyzed 101 cases of prostate adenocarcinoma diagnosed from January 2011 to June 2015 in 100 patients. Immunohistochemical staining of ER-beta and Ki67 was analyzed according to Gleason score categorized into prognostic groups of 1 to 5. Double-immunofluorescent staining of ER-beta and Ki67 was performed in a total of 20 cases to study the co-expression and the relationship between these markers within the same tumor.
Results: A total of 53 of 101 cases (52.5%) were positive for ER-beta expression. There was a positive correlation whereby a high percentage of ER-beta expression was seen in the higher prognostic groups (groups 4 and 5; p=0.007). High Ki67 expression was observed in the higher prognostic group, whereas low Ki67 or negative expression was found in the lower prognostic group (p<0.001). The majority of cases evaluated with double-immunofluorescent staining (14/20) showed co-expression of ER-beta and Ki67 at the individual cell level.
Conclusions: ER-beta and Ki67 are independent tumor markers in high prognostic groups. Hence, co-expression of ER-beta and Ki67 indicates a more aggressive tumor with a poorer prognosis.
METHODS: Tissues were collected from 80 patients with clinically detected prostate cancer and treated with radical prostatectomy. Cases were tested for ERG by immunohistochemistry using the mouse monoclonal antibody EP111. All blocks on 48 cases were tested in order to determine the extent of heterogeneity of ERG expression within individual cases. ERG expression was analysed in relation to patient age, ethnicity and tumour stage and grade.
RESULTS: Forty-six percent of cases were ERG positive. There was no significant association between ERG and tumour grade or stage. Sixty-nine percent of Indian patients had ERG positive tumours; this was significantly higher (p=0.031) than for Chinese (40%) and Malay (44%) patients. Heterogeneity of ERG expression, in which both positive and negative clones were present, was seen in 35% of evaluated cases. Evaluation by tumour foci showed younger patients had more ERG positive tumour foci than older patients (p=0.01). Indian patients were more likely to have the majority of tumour foci with ERG staining positively, compared to either Chinese or Malay patients (P <0.01).
CONCLUSION: In this study, tumour expression of ERG was more likely to occur in patients of Indian ethnicity.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-eight specimens of needle prostate biopsy and its subsequent radical prostatectomy were retrospectively studied. The GSs of the needle biopsy were compared with the corresponding prostatectomy specimens. The percentage of GP4 in GS7 needle biopsy groups was calculated and correlated with the pathological staging.
RESULTS: More than half (60%) of GS 6 needle biopsy cases (PGG 1) were upgraded in the prostatectomy specimen, while the majority (80%) of the GS7 needle biopsy groups (PGG 2 and 3) remain unchanged. Cohen's Kappa shows fair agreement in the Gleason scoring between needle biopsies and prostatectomy specimens, K = 0.324 (95% CI, 6.94 to 7.29), p <0.0005 and in the percentage of GP4 in GS7 needle biopsy groups and their corresponding radical prostatectomy specimens, K = 0.399 (95% CI 34.2 - 49.2), p<0.0005. A significant relationship was seen between the percentage of GP4 in GS7 needle biopsy with the pT and pN stage of its radical prostatectomy (p = 0.008 and p=0.001 respectively).
CONCLUSION: A higher percentage of GP4 in GS7 tumour is associated with worse tumour behaviour, therefore it is crucial for clinicians to realise this in deciding the optimal treatment.
METHODS: We used three single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) (rs8176746, rs505922, and rs8176704) to determine ABO genotype in 2,774 aggressive prostate cancer cases and 4,443 controls from the Breast and Prostate Cancer Cohort Consortium (BPC3). Unconditional logistic regression was used to calculate age and study-adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for the association between blood type, genotype, and risk of aggressive prostate cancer (Gleason score ≥8 or locally advanced/metastatic disease (stage T3/T4/N1/M1).
RESULTS: We found no association between ABO blood type and risk of aggressive prostate cancer (Type A: OR = 0.97, 95%CI = 0.87-1.08; Type B: OR = 0.92, 95%CI =n0.77-1.09; Type AB: OR = 1.25, 95%CI = 0.98-1.59, compared to Type O, respectively). Similarly, there was no association between "dose" of A or B alleles and aggressive prostate cancer risk.
CONCLUSIONS: ABO blood type was not associated with risk of aggressive prostate cancer.