 |
 |

Natural History of Early Localized Prostate Cancer
 |
 |
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
 |
 |
To the Editor: In their study of the natural history of prostate cancer, Dr Johansson and colleagues1 concluded that their findings support early radical treatment of localized prostate cancer. An important limitation of this study is that most of the patients were diagnosed by cytological evaluation of a fine-needle prostate aspirate.2 The Gleason histological grading system is the most common method for grading prostate tumors, and we believe it to be a more accurate predictor of prognosis. Using this system, Albertson et al3-4 were able to show that the long-term outcome following conservative therapy was significantly different for tumors with Gleason scores of 5 vs Gleason scores of 6, and for Gleason scores of 6 vs Gleason scores of 7. Patients with tumors with these scores would have been combined in the moderately differentiated tumor group in the Johansson study. Because such a division into 3 subgroups is not possible . . . [Full Text of this Article]
Jonathan R. Osborn, MBChB, MSc, MRCS
j.osborn@prostatecancerresearch.org
Gerald W. Chodak, MD
Midwest Urology Research Foundation Chicago, Ill
CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati Twitter
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLES
Natural History of Early, Localized Prostate Cancer
, , , , , , and
JAMA. ;291():2713-2719.
FULL TEXT
Natural History of Early Localized Prostate Cancer
JAMA. ;292():1549-1549.
FULL TEXT
Natural History of Early Localized Prostate Cancer--Reply
, , , , , , and
JAMA. ;292():1549-1550.
FULL TEXT
|