The total cancer core length from all positive biopsies for a particular lesion that detected more than 95% of lesions 0.5 ml or greater and 0.2 ml or greater was 10 mm or greater and 6 mm or greater, respectively. The maximum cancer core length that detected more than 95% of lesions 0.5 ml or greater and 0.2 ml or greater was 6 mm or greater and 4 mm or greater, respectively. We combined these cancer burden thresholds with dominant and nondominant Gleason pattern 4 to derive 2 definitions of clinically significant disease.
Conclusions: Transperineal prostate mapping may provide an effective method to risk stratify men SB273005 concentration with localized prostate cancer. The definitions that we present require prospective validation.”
prominent models of reading posit that attention is distributed to support the parallel lexical processing
of multiple words. We contend that the auxiliary assumptions underlying this attention-gradient hypothesis are not well founded. Here, we address three specific selleck products issues related to the ongoing debate about attention allocation during reading: (i) why the attention-gradient hypothesis is widely endorsed, (ii) why processing several words in parallel in reading is implausible and (iii) why attention must be allocated to only one word at a time. Full consideration of these arguments supports the hypothesis that attention is allocated serially during reading.”
“Purpose: We evaluated the reproducibility of Gleason grading as relevant to the clinical selleck inhibitor treatment of men on active surveillance.
Materials and Methods: Three sets of digital images of prostatic adenocarcinoma in biopsies were reviewed and assigned Gleason scores by a total of
11 pathologists from 7 institutions. Interobserver and intra-observer reproducibility were assessed for assignment of the highest Gleason pattern (3 vs 4 or higher). We also identified 97 consecutive patients on active surveillance. Prostate biopsy glass slides from 82 of the patients were available for re-review and the frequency of carcinoma requiring the distinction of tangentially sectioned Gleason pattern 3 from 4 was determined.
Results: Interobserver reproducibility for classic Gleason patterns was substantial (Light’s kappa 0.76). Interobserver reproducibility for the histological distinction of tangentially sectioned Gleason pattern 3 from Gleason pattern 4 was only fair (Light’s kappa 0.27). Intra-observer reproducibility ranged from 65% to 100% (mean 81.5%). Of the 82 patients on active surveillance 61 had carcinoma and 15 (24.5%) had a set of biopsies with at least 1 focus in which the distinction between tangentially sectioned Gleason pattern 3 and poorly formed pattern 4 glands had to be considered.
Conclusions: The reproducibility of grading classic Gleason patterns is high. However, variability in grading occurred when distinguishing between tangentially sectioned pattern 3 glands and the poorly formed gland subset of pattern 4.