PubMed · 10440283
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
S Hsu, M W Lee, S Carlton, E M Kramer. 1999. Nodular morphea in a linear pattern.. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-4362.1999.00728.x
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
PURPOSE: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) failure within 2 years after radical prostatectomy (RP) has been shown to be a clinically significant predictor of distant failure. This study was performed to estimate 2-year PSA failure rates on the basis of readily available clinical and pathologic factors to identify patients for whom effective adjuvant systemic therapy is needed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A Cox regression multivariable analysis was used to determine whether the percentage of positive prostate biopsies, PSA level, and the pathologic findings at RP in 1,728 men provided clinically relevant information about PSA outcome after RP. A bootstrapping technique with 2,000 replications was used to provide 95% confidence intervals for the predicted 2-year PSA failure rates, which were determined on the basis of the independent clinical and pathologic predictors of PSA outcome. RESULTS: The independent predictors of time to PSA failure included a percentage of positive prostate biopsies of greater than 34% (P: < or =.009), PSA level greater than 10 ng/mL (P: < or =.01), seminal vesicle invasion (P: =. 02), prostatectomy Gleason score of 8 to 10 (P: =.04), and positive surgical margins (P: =.0001). Predictions of 2-year PSA failure rates and bootstrap estimates of the 95% confidence intervals were arranged in a tabular format, stratified by independent clinical and pathologic predictors of PSA outcome. CONCLUSION: Patients who are most likely to benefit from effective adjuvant systemic therapy after RP can be identified using readily available clinical and pathologic data.
Due to the suspicion of a gynaecologist, a pathologist was suspected of incorrect diagnoses in cases of breast cancer and the interchanging of tissue samples. Many women applied to the attorney's bureau to clarify the reproaches. The privately owned laboratory for pathology was searched and 926 histological slides, roughly the same number of paraffin blocks and about 20 formalin fixed tissue samples were confiscated. Together with other confiscated material, at least 1236 histological slides and additional 249 paraffin blocks had to be sorted. Histological slides and paraffin blocks were matched with patients as far as possible following the laboratory book. Many of the warranted samples which were diagnosed as containing the carcinoma by the pathologist were missing. A total of 160 samples were chosen and rediagnosed by two independent pathologists. The formalin fixed tissue was negative for DNA most likely due to storage in formalin for years. Most of the histological slides were positive for DNA. On the whole, 18 expertises about histological findings and the DNA results were given. In some cases only DNA results could be presented, as previous experts had only performed DNA examinations without controlling the histological diagnosis. In six cases a carcinoma could be confirmed and the DNA profile matched with patient's DNA; in seven cases a carcinoma was confirmed without match with the patient; in two cases the carcinoma could not be confirmed in the presented samples. A jurisdictional solution was impossible because the accused pathologist died during the investigation. In conclusion, it must be stated that a DNA examination of histological slides should never be performed without a rediagnosis of an independent pathologist and photographic documentation of the findings. Whenever possible, material should be left on the slide.