M J Häggman, J Adolfsson, S Khoury, J E Montie, J Norlén
{"title":"前列腺癌前病变的临床处理。世卫组织泌尿生殖系统癌前病变的公共卫生和临床意义合作项目和共识会议。","authors":"M J Häggman, J Adolfsson, S Khoury, J E Montie, J Norlén","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The presence of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN) in a prostate biopsy is a considerable risk factor for the presence of prostate cancer, with up to 73% of patients having cancer on rebiopsy. The risk is related to the clinical setting (screening vs urological practice) and patient factors such as prostatic serum antigen (PSA) and findings on digital rectal examination (DRE). Thus, high-grade PIN has serious clinical implications. The aim of this paper is to propose practical guidelines for the clinical management of PIN. Based on current knowledge we recommend that: Only patients considered for curative treatment of prostate cancer be further investigated for a PIN biopsy finding; A palpable nodule or tumor-suspicious transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) finding, in conjunction with a finding of high-grade PIN on prostate biopsy, should prompt rebiopsy; An elevated PSA level or an elevated PSA density should also warrant repeat biopsy, as the most likely cause of PSA elevation is concomitant prostate cancer; The presence of high-grade PIN on biopsy without concomitant prostate cancer in patients suitable for curative treatment, notwithstanding normal DRE, TRUS or PSA, should prompt repeat biopsies, as the association with prostate cancer is significant; The presence of PIN alone on biopsy does not warrant treatment, as a substantial number of rebiopsies yield only PIN.</p>","PeriodicalId":76529,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian journal of urology and nephrology. Supplementum","volume":" 205","pages":"44-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical management of premalignant lesions of the prostate. WHO Collaborative Project and Consensus Conference on Public Health and Clinical Significance of Premalignant Alterations in the Genitourinary Tract.\",\"authors\":\"M J Häggman, J Adolfsson, S Khoury, J E Montie, J Norlén\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The presence of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN) in a prostate biopsy is a considerable risk factor for the presence of prostate cancer, with up to 73% of patients having cancer on rebiopsy. The risk is related to the clinical setting (screening vs urological practice) and patient factors such as prostatic serum antigen (PSA) and findings on digital rectal examination (DRE). Thus, high-grade PIN has serious clinical implications. The aim of this paper is to propose practical guidelines for the clinical management of PIN. Based on current knowledge we recommend that: Only patients considered for curative treatment of prostate cancer be further investigated for a PIN biopsy finding; A palpable nodule or tumor-suspicious transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) finding, in conjunction with a finding of high-grade PIN on prostate biopsy, should prompt rebiopsy; An elevated PSA level or an elevated PSA density should also warrant repeat biopsy, as the most likely cause of PSA elevation is concomitant prostate cancer; The presence of high-grade PIN on biopsy without concomitant prostate cancer in patients suitable for curative treatment, notwithstanding normal DRE, TRUS or PSA, should prompt repeat biopsies, as the association with prostate cancer is significant; The presence of PIN alone on biopsy does not warrant treatment, as a substantial number of rebiopsies yield only PIN.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":76529,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scandinavian journal of urology and nephrology. Supplementum\",\"volume\":\" 205\",\"pages\":\"44-9\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2000-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scandinavian journal of urology and nephrology. Supplementum\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian journal of urology and nephrology. Supplementum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Clinical management of premalignant lesions of the prostate. WHO Collaborative Project and Consensus Conference on Public Health and Clinical Significance of Premalignant Alterations in the Genitourinary Tract.
The presence of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN) in a prostate biopsy is a considerable risk factor for the presence of prostate cancer, with up to 73% of patients having cancer on rebiopsy. The risk is related to the clinical setting (screening vs urological practice) and patient factors such as prostatic serum antigen (PSA) and findings on digital rectal examination (DRE). Thus, high-grade PIN has serious clinical implications. The aim of this paper is to propose practical guidelines for the clinical management of PIN. Based on current knowledge we recommend that: Only patients considered for curative treatment of prostate cancer be further investigated for a PIN biopsy finding; A palpable nodule or tumor-suspicious transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) finding, in conjunction with a finding of high-grade PIN on prostate biopsy, should prompt rebiopsy; An elevated PSA level or an elevated PSA density should also warrant repeat biopsy, as the most likely cause of PSA elevation is concomitant prostate cancer; The presence of high-grade PIN on biopsy without concomitant prostate cancer in patients suitable for curative treatment, notwithstanding normal DRE, TRUS or PSA, should prompt repeat biopsies, as the association with prostate cancer is significant; The presence of PIN alone on biopsy does not warrant treatment, as a substantial number of rebiopsies yield only PIN.