article from john hopkins on positive margins

New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> ]

2busymom
Regular Member


Date Joined Nov 2006
Total Posts : 118
   Posted 6/22/2007 6:18 PM (GMT -7)   
I thought this article might be helpful. It was originally printed 10 years ago, but the copyright on the bottom of the webpage said 2007

bec


A Publication of the James Buchanan Brady
Urological Institute Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions

Volume IV, Spring 1997

IN BRIEF
After Radical Prostatectomy
When Surgical Margins are Positive, or Too Close to Call

In an ideal world, after radical prostatectomy, the pathologist would send a triumphant report to the surgeon: "I've looked at the prostate tissue you removed from Mr. Jones, and all of the edges are clear. Congratulations! You've removed all the cancer!"

Most often, it happens that way. Sometimes, however, the pathologist's report is more ambiguous: Either the margins -- the edges of the removed tumor -- are "positive," meaning they show cancer cells, or they're "close," meaning cancer is just a hair's breadth away from the edge of the specimen.

Hopkins pathologist Jonathan I. Epstein, M.D., who has probably looked at more radical prostatectomy specimens than anyone in the world and is an expert at interpreting how prostate cancer cells look, has good news about margins:

Close margins are almost always negative. Epstein recently finished a study of patients whose tumors were particularly close -- less than two tenths of a millimeter -- from the surgical margin, the edge of the removed tissue. Even though there wasn't a comfortable cushion of tissue between the tumor and the edge of the prostate, " those patients do just as well as if there's more separation between the tumor and the margin."

And, even if the surgical margins are positive, this does not necessarily mean that the cancer is left behind. How can this be? "There are several different explanations why, when the margins are positive, the tumor may still be cure," says Epstein. "One is that literally you cut across the last few tumor cells" -- that what appears to be remaining cancer is actually a cross-section of the perimeter of the tumor. "And even though it looks like it's a positive margin, there's really nothing left in the patient."

Another explanation is that the act of surgery itself finishes the job, killing any remaining cells. No cut or injury to tissue happens in a vacuum; the area around the cut is affected, too. (Think of lightning striking a tree; the tree dies, but so does a ring of grass around it). "When the surgeon cuts across tissue the blood supply is cut off, there's dead tissue, and that can kill off the last few tumor cells that might have been left behind," Epstein says.

There's also potential -- "and this probably accounts for a lot of cases" -- that it's an "artificial" (basically, a fake) positive margin. Sometimes, "since there's so little tissue next to the prostate, when the surgeon tries to dissect it from the body, and he hands it to the nurse, and then the nurse hands it to the pathologist, and everyone's kind of touching the gland, and if you're talking about two tenths of a millimeter of tissue, that tissue can get disrupted very easily. It can appear that the tumor is at the margin -- but in fact, there was some additional tissue there that just got disrupted during all the handling of the specimen." In other words, a few good "buffer" cells got rubbed off.

And then there's the "sticky cell" phenomenon. When cancer reaches beyond the prostate to invade nearby tissue, it produces a dense scar tissue that acts, as surgeon Patrick C. Walsh, M.D., describes it, "like Super Glue." As a surgeon removes the prostate, this thick scar tissue sticks to the surrounding cancer cells -- picking them up like a lint brush. So in some cases, although the pathologist may see cancer cells at the margin -- and make a judgment of "positive surgical margins" -- there are no cancer cells left inside the patient. The sticky scar tissue took them all away.

Epstein recently studied such instances, when Walsh removed the prostate, looked at it, suspected that some cancer cells were present, went back and cut out more of the surrounding tissue. "So in pathology, we got two separate specimens," says Epstein. "One was the prostate, one was this extra tissue, the neurovascular bundle that he was thinking of leaving in the patient, but decided to remove." Even when there appeared to be a positive surgical margin at the edge of the prostate, in 40 percent of these patients there turned out to be no cancer left behind in that adjacent tissue.

"So when pathologists call a positive margin, or for that matter, a close margin, it doesn't necessarily mean that these patients need some other form of therapy, like radiation," says Epstein "and also that they need not necessarily be tremendously worried."

But what if a positive margin does mean that there's still cancer in the area? Many of these men may still be cured with radiation to the prostate bed, the area where the prostate used to be. Here is where other factors come into play. For more on these, and who might benefit from radiation, see the next story.
husband Jeff 45 years old, diagnosed 8/25/06
PSA 2.1, 2 of 12 samples at 3% & 4%, involving 1 side of prostate
Gleason 3+3=6 in both samples
laparoscopic radical prost. 10/17/06
cancer in both sides of prostate, positive in one area of margin
first PSA results 1/07 <0.01%

Post Edited (2busymom) : 6/22/2007 7:24:12 PM (GMT-6)


anniea
Regular Member


Date Joined May 2007
Total Posts : 234
   Posted 6/22/2007 10:02 PM (GMT -7)   

Hi Toobusymom!

I just read the article you posted on positive margins. Thank you! at the end it said read next story, where can I find it?

 

Thanks Rick


Rick & Diana
Diag: 2-14-07 Gleason 8 Stage T1c PSA 5.09
Bone Scan 3-1-07 Clear
Radical retropubic surgery 4-2-07  Post surgery Gleason 9 Stage T3a Positive margins
4-29-07 PSA 0.02
 


2busymom
Regular Member


Date Joined Nov 2006
Total Posts : 118
   Posted 6/22/2007 10:33 PM (GMT -7)   
I believe this is the next article. The one I posted had the number 410 in the address, so I think this is it. I had also posted in originally, but I thought it might discourage some readers, the way it's worded. Since it was written back in '97 I'm sure there are advances in treatment that aren't mentioned, and I didn't want anyone new to the site to get confused, so I removed it from my post. But it has some very good information in it.




http://urology.jhu.edu/newsletter/prostate_cancer411.php
husband Jeff 45 years old, diagnosed 8/25/06
PSA 2.1, 2 of 12 samples at 3% & 4%, involving 1 side of prostate
Gleason 3+3=6 in both samples
laparoscopic radical prost. 10/17/06
cancer in both sides of prostate, positive in one area of margin
first PSA results 1/07 <0.01%


bluebird
Veteran Member


Date Joined May 2006
Total Posts : 2542
   Posted 6/23/2007 5:02 AM (GMT -7)   

  tongue Direct links to articles stated above:

 

http://urology.jhu.edu/newsletter/prostate_cancer410.php

 

A Publication of the James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions
Volume IV, Spring 1997

 

IN BRIEF
After Radical Prostatectomy
When Surgical Margins are Positive, or Too Close to Call

 

 

http://urology.jhu.edu/newsletter/prostate_cancer411.php

 

A Publication of the James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions
Volume IV, Spring 1997

 

IN BRIEF
When PSA Goes Up After Surgery
Is it Local Recurrence? Distant Metastasis? Would Radiation Help?

 

 

Articles referred to in the information above are within this link:

Newsletters  http://urology.jhu.edu/newsletter/index.php

 

 

«  bluebird ~  Moderator for Prostate Cancer Forum

 


anniea
Regular Member


Date Joined May 2007
Total Posts : 234
   Posted 6/23/2007 9:36 PM (GMT -7)   
Thank you, Toobybusymom & Bluebird

I plan to take these articles with me to my next appointment. I have a feeling I need to avoid radiation & hormone treatment as long as my PSA stays down and I think I am looking for something to prove me wrong???? I don't know???

Thanks Again
Rick
Rick & Diana
Diag: 2-14-07 Gleason 8 Stage T1c PSA 5.09
Bone Scan 3-1-07 Clear
Radical retropubic surgery 4-2-07  Post surgery Gleason 9 Stage T3a Positive margins
4-29-07 PSA 0.02
 


2busymom
Regular Member


Date Joined Nov 2006
Total Posts : 118
   Posted 6/24/2007 3:15 PM (GMT -7)   
Hey Rick,

It certainly can't hurt to ask the dr.s We were fortunate that Jeff's Gleason remained a 6, with T2c. From what the dr. said, the cancer in the margin was in a very small area. The more details the dr. can give you, and the more questions you ask, the better you'll feel about your decision.

bec
husband Jeff 45 years old, diagnosed 8/25/06
PSA 2.1, 2 of 12 samples at 3% & 4%, involving 1 side of prostate
Gleason 3+3=6 in both samples
laparoscopic radical prost. 10/17/06
cancer in both sides of prostate, positive in one area of margin
first PSA results 1/07 <0.01%

New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
Forum Information
Currently it is Monday, December 18, 2017 1:47 PM (GMT -7)
There are a total of 2,906,813 posts in 319,001 threads.
View Active Threads


Who's Online
This forum has 158342 registered members. Please welcome our newest member, Typingservice2017.
434 Guest(s), 11 Registered Member(s) are currently online.  Details
scifigal2k, Solaris719, Planny, HaleyBugs07, 1000Daisies, NKinney, gabybee, Szabo246, jackinthebox, kodaska, straydog