Is anyone with intermediate-risk prostate cancer a “good” candidate for AS?

There is no longer any doubt that men initially diagnosed with low- and very low-risk forms of prostate cancer are, in most cases, either excellent or good candidates for first-line management on active surveillance (AS). … READ MORE …

Les Raff “gives people cancer” … sort of …

Here is a link to a clever article by a pathologist in the Chicago suburbs who spends a lot of his working days deciding whether he can or can’t see prostate cancer cells in the biopsy samples sent to his laboratory. It makes a good read. … READ MORE …

Low volume, Gleason 3 + 4 = 7 disease: is active surveillance a realistic option?

It would be easy to misinterpret (or at least “over-interpret”) a recent paper from the group at Johns Hopkins about the pathological outcomes of men initially diagnosed with very low-, low-, or “favorable” intermediate-risk localized disease and treated by immediate radical prostatectomy. … READ MORE …

A pathological “take” on the potential role of focal therapy

Various forms of focal therapy are now being used by some physicians to treat selected patients with well-identified, usually relatively small, “dominant” or “index” tumors that are confined to highly defined areas of the prostate. … READ MORE …

Are low serum levels of vitamin D a risk factor for aggressive forms of prostate cancer?

It has long between understood that there is an association between a man’s serum levels of vitamin D and his risk for prostate cancer in general and clinically significant prostate cancer in particular. … READ MORE …

Post-surgical pathology, active surveillance, and selection of appropriate candidates for expectant management

An interesting — if unsurprising — new set of data in the Journal of Korean Medical Science has again shown that most of the current “standard” sets of criteria for selection of patients aren’t even close to being perfect at identification of “the surgically ideal” patients for management on active surveillance. … READ MORE …

The biology and pathology of “young age” prostate cancer

A recent article in the Journal of Clinical Pathology reviews available data about the epidemiology, biology, and clinical pathology of “young age” prostate cancer, which the authors define as clinically significant cancer in men under 55 years of age. … READ MORE …