ABSTRACT
Gene expression profiles may lend insight into whether prostate adenocarcinoma (CaP) predominantly occurs in the peripheral zone (PZ) compared to the transition zone (TZ). From human prostates, tissue sets consisting of PZ and TZ were isolated to investigate whether there is a differential level of gene expression between these two regions of this gland. Gene expression profiling using Affymetrix Human Genome U133 plus 2.0 arrays coupled with quantitative real-time reverse transcriptase-PCR was employed. Genes associated with neurogenesis, signal transduction, embryo implantation and cell adhesion were found to be expressed at a higher level in the PZ. Those overexpressed in the TZ were associated with neurogenesis development, signal transduction, cell motility and development. Whether such differential gene expression profiles may identify molecular mechanisms responsible for susceptibility to CaP remains to be ascertained.
Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma/genetics , Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic , Neoplasm Proteins/genetics , Prostate/metabolism , Prostatic Neoplasms/genetics , Adenocarcinoma/metabolism , Adenocarcinoma/pathology , Aged , Gene Expression Profiling , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Proteins/biosynthesis , Organ Specificity , Prostate/pathology , Prostatic Neoplasms/metabolism , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , RNA, Messenger/biosynthesis , RNA, Messenger/genetics , RNA, Neoplasm/biosynthesis , RNA, Neoplasm/genetics , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction , Signal Transduction/genetics , Transcription, GeneticABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Lidocaine periprostatic nerve block (PPNB) provides good procedural pain relief for transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) prostatic biopsy. However, post-procedural pain can be significant. The addition of diclofenac suppository (DS) to lidocaine PPNB might provide additional, particularly post-procedural pain relief. We assessed the procedural and post-procedural pain relief for TRUS biopsy provided by DS, and the combination of DS and lidocaine PPNB compared with lidocaine PPNB alone. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 165 patients were randomized into 3 groups, namely group 1-lidocaine PPNB, group 2-DS and group 3-a combination of lidocaine PPNB and DS. In all patients 12 core biopsy was performed. Pain/discomfort at various intervals after the procedure was recorded on a visual analogue scale of 0 to 10 cm. RESULTS: Biopsy pain was significantly lower in patients who received lidocaine alone or in combination compared with DS alone (median 1.95, IQR 1.08 to 3.12, 3, IQR 1.25 to 5.47 and 1.8, IQR 0.85 to 3.0, respectively, p = 0.018), while evening pain scores were significantly lower in patients who received DS alone or in combination compared with that in patients who received lidocaine alone (median 1.25, IQR 0.38 to 3.0, 0.3, IQR 0.03 to 1.08 and 0.4, IQR 0 to 1.0, respectively, p = 0.001). There were no significant differences in pain/discomfort due to the probe (p = 0.107), that 1 hour after biopsy (p = 0.076) and that on the day after the procedure (p = 0.165). There were no significant differences in hemorrhagic or infective complications among the groups. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of lidocaine PPNB with DS provides additional pain relief during and after prostatic TRUS biopsy.
Subject(s)
Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal/administration & dosage , Diclofenac/administration & dosage , Prostate/pathology , Ultrasound, High-Intensity Focused, Transrectal , Aged , Anesthetics, Local , Humans , Lidocaine , Male , Middle Aged , Nerve Block , SuppositoriesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To assess the cancer detection rate per individual core biopsy in a 12-core protocol and develop an optimal biopsy regimen for detecting early prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study included 445 new patients who had a 12-core transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)-guided prostatic biopsy over a 40-month period. The 12- core biopsy protocol included parasagittal sextant and six peripheral biopsies. The cancer detection rate per individual core was evaluated to give an optimal biopsy protocol. RESULTS: Prostate cancer was detected in 142 patients (31.9%). Parasagittal sextant biopsy would have failed to detect 40 (28.2%) of the cancers. Among the various possible biopsy protocols, the optimum 10-core biopsy strategy excluding the parasagittal mid-zone biopsies from the 12-core protocol achieved a cancer detection rate of 98.6%. CONCLUSION: The cancer detection rate increased from 71.8% for parasagittal sextant biopsies to 88.7% by adding peripheral basal biopsies (8-biopsy protocol); 98.6% of cancers in the series would have been detected with a 10-biopsy strategy omitting the parasagittal mid-zone biopsies. Thus we recommend a 10-core protocol incorporating six peripheral biopsies in patients with elevated age- specific prostate-specific antigen levels (2.6-10.0 ng/mL) for maximising cancer detection.
