Page 20 - Read Online

Murray Primary circulating prostate cells

prostatitis, may have PSA-positive circulating tumor REFERENCES
cells detected but they were P504S negative.
[79]
Validation in multicenter prospective clinical trials is 1. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Murray T, Xu J, Smigal C, Thun MJ.
therefore essential to assess its potential usefulness Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 2006;56:106-30.
[Table 2]. 2. Draisma G, Etzioni R, Tsodikov A, Mariotto A, Wever E, Gulati R,
Feuer E, de Koning H. Lead time and over-diagnosis in prostate-
As a prognostic marker to guide in the decision specific antigen screening: importance of methods and context. J Natl
Cancer Inst 2009;101:374-83.
to treat or to observe 3. Andiole GL, Crawford ED, Grubb RL 3rd, Buys SS, Chia D, Church
As a prognostic factor, primary CPCs do not appear to TR, Fouad MN, Gelmann EP, Kvale PA, Reding DJ, Weissfeld
have a definitive use. This is because the majority of JL, Yokochi LA, O’Brien B, Clapp JD, Rathmell JM, Riley TL,
these cells will be eliminated by the primary treatment, Hayes RB, Kramer BS, Izmirlian G, Miller AB, Pinsky PF, Prorok
be destroyed by the host’s defense mechanisms, or PC, Gohagan JK, Berg CD; PLCO Project Team. Mortality results
not have the phenotypic characteristics to be able to from a randomized prostate cancer screening trial. N Eng J Med
implant and survive. In men with early stage prostate 4. 2009;360:1310-9.
Schroder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, Tammela TL, Ciatto S, Nelen
cancer, the detection of circulating tumor cells using V, Kwiatkowski M, Lujan M, Lilja H, Zappa M, Denis LJ, Recker F,
[98]
RT-PCR was associated with a worse prognosis. Berenguer A, Määttänen L, Bangma CH, Aus G, Villers A, Rebillard
Using PSA and PSMA genes to identify circulating X, van der Kwast T, Blijenberg BG, Moss SM, de Koning HJ, Auvinen
tumor cells in men prior to radical prostatectomy, men A; ERSPC Investigators. Screening and prostate cancer mortality in a
negative for the test had significantly better outcomes. randomized European study. N Eng J Med 2009;360:1320-8.
[99]
Using a positive/negative cutoff value, men negative 5. Carter HB, Albertsen PC, Barry MJ, Etzioni R, Freedland SJ, Greene
for circulating tumor cells have a significantly better KL, Holmberg L, Kantoff P, Konety BR, Murad MH, Penson DF,
Zietman AL. Early detection of prostate cancer: AUA guideline. J
10-year biochemical free failure survival after radical Urol 2013;190:419-26.
prostatectomy than men positive for CPCs. [100] 6. Smith DS, Humphrey PA, Catalona WJ. The early detection of prostate
carcinoma with prostate specific antigen: the Washington University
When used as a predictive prognostic factor and experience. Cancer 1997;80:1852-6.
compared with predictive nomograms, using the 7. Belbase NP, Agrawal CS, Pokharel PK, Agrawal S, Lamsal M,
CellSearch system [101] or the PSA/P504S combined Shakya VC. Prostate cancer screening in a healthy population cohort
®
immunocytochemical assay, [102] there was little if in Eastern Nepal: an explanatory trial study. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev
2013;14:2835-8.
any improvement in predicting the prognosis of men 8. Lalitha K, Suman G, Pruthvish S, Mathew A, Murthy NS. Estimation
pretreatment [Table 2]. of time trends of incidence of prostate cancer: an Indian scenario.
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2012;13:6245-50.
Thus, the possibility of identifying circulating tumor cells 9. Anastasiadis E, van der Meulin J, Emberton M. Hospital admissions
in early stage prostate cancer seems to be achievable. after TRUS biopsy of the prostate in men diagnosed with prostate
However, the methods need to be clinically validated cancer: a database analysis in England. Int J Urol 2015;22:181-6.
in multicenter studies. The use of primary CPCs as 10. Dall`Era MA, Cooperberg MR, Chan JM, Davies BJ, Albertsen PC,
a sequential test to detect prostate cancer and as a Klotz LH, Warlick CA, Holmberg L, Bailey DE Jr, Wallace ME,
Kantoff PW, Carroll PR. Active surveillance for early stage prostate
guide to treatment seems a very fascinating area of cancer: review of the current literature. Cancer 2008;112:1650-9.
research that warrants further studies. 11. Warlick C, Trock BJ, Landis P, Epstein JI, Carter HB. Delayed versus
immediate surgical intervention and prostate cancer outcome. J Natl
Acknowledgments Cancer Inst 2006;98:355-7.
The author wants to thank Mrs. Ana Maria Palazuelos 12. Wilt TJ, Brawer MK, Jones KM, Barry MJ, Aronson WJ, Fox S,
for her help in writing this manuscript. Gingrich JR, Wei JT, Gilhooly P, Grob BM, Nsouli I, Iyer P, Cartagena
R, Snider G, Roehrborn C, Sharifi R, Blank W, Pandya P, Andriole
Financial support and sponsorship GL, Culkin D, Wheeler T; Prostate Cancer Intervention versus
Observation Trial (PIVOT) Study Group. Radical prostatectomy
Nil. versus observation for localized prostate cancer. N Eng J Med
2012;367:203-13.
Conflicts of interest 13. Epstein JI, Walsh PC, Carmichael M, Brendler CB. Pathologic and
Dr. Murray has received consultancy fees from Viatar clinical findings to predict tumor extent of non-palpable (stage T1c)
CTC solutions, Boston, USA. prostate cancer. JAMA 1994;271:368-74.
14. Patel MI, DeConcini DT, Lopez-Corona E, Ohori M, Wheeler T,
Patient consent Scardino PT. An analysis of men with clinically localized prostate
There is no patient involved. cancer who deferred definitive treatment. J Urol 2004;171:1520-4.
15. Klotz L. Active surveillance versus radical treatment for favorable
risk localized prostate. Curr Treat Options Oncol 2006;7:355-62.
Ethics approval 16. Carter HB, Walsh PC, Landis P, Epstein JI. Expectant management of
This article does not contain any studies with human non-palpable prostate cancer with curative intent: preliminary results.
participants or animals. J Urol 2002;167:1231-4.
Journal of Cancer Metastasis and Treatment ¦ Volume 2 ¦ December 16, 2016 459