SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Keywords:

  • ERG;
  • high grade PIN;
  • prostate cancer

Abstract

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. INTRODUCTION
  4. PATIENTS AND METHODS
  5. RESULTS
  6. DISCUSSION
  7. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
  8. REFERENCES

Study Type – Diagnosis (cohort)

Level of Evidence 2b

What's known on the subject? and What does the study add?

High grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia is a pre-malignant lesion to prostate cancer and is associated with 20%–25% risk of prostate cancer in subsequent repeat biopsies. ERG is a highly prostate-cancer-specific marker.

Expression of ERG is rare in isolated high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia diagnosed in prostate biopsy and is not associated with cancer risk in subsequent repeat biopsies.

OBJECTIVES

  • • 
    To evaluate how often ERG, a highly prostate-cancer-specific marker, is expressed in isolated high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN) by immunohistochemistry.
  • • 
    To study whether a positive ERG immunostain in HGPIN correlates with prostate cancer (PCa) detection in subsequent repeat biopsies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

  • • 
    Patients with initial HGPIN in biopsies and at least one follow-up prostate biopsy were included.
  • • 
    Biopsies with HGPIN were immunostained for ERG.
  • • 
    The ERG staining results were then correlated with the PCa risk in subsequent biopsies.

RESULTS

  • • 
    The mean age of 94 patients was 63 years (range 48–78). A mean of 1.8 (range 1–5) repeat biopsy sessions were carried out at a mean interval of 27.4 months (range 1.5–140). The repeat biopsies showed PCa and non-cancer lesions (benign, HGPIN, atypical glands suspicious for cancer) in 36 patients (38%) and 58 patients (62%) respectively.
  • • 
    ERG immunostain was positive in five (5.3%) biopsies with HGPIN, in which PCa was found in two (40%) subsequent biopsies. Of 89 biopsies with negative ERG staining, PCa was found in 34 (38%) repeat biopsies. The cancer detection rate was not different between ERG positive and negative cases (P= 0.299).

CONCLUSIONS

  • • 
    This is the first study to investigate the ERG protein expression in prostate biopsy containing HGPIN only and its use to stratify the cancer risk associated with HGPIN. We found that ERG expression is distinctly uncommon in isolated HGPIN (5.3%).
  • • 
    Positive ERG expression is not associated with increased cancer detection in subsequent repeat biopsies. The use of ERG immunostain in the evaluation and cancer risk stratification of HGPIN is of limited value.

Abbreviations
HGPIN

high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia

PCa

prostate cancer

AMACR

α-methylacyl-CoA racemase

PTOV1

prostate tumour overexpressed gene 1

APC

adenomatous polyposis coli

FISH

fluorescence in situ hybridization

ATYP

atypical glands suspicious for cancer.

INTRODUCTION

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. INTRODUCTION
  4. PATIENTS AND METHODS
  5. RESULTS
  6. DISCUSSION
  7. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
  8. REFERENCES

High grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN) is generally accepted as a precursor lesion of prostate cancer (PCa) [1]. The frequency of HGPIN in needle biopsy series ranges from 0% to 24.6% with the mean incidence being 7.6% [2]. The clinical importance of HGPIN is its association with PCa in concurrent or subsequent prostate needle biopsies. HGPIN has been associated with 20%–32% risk of PCa in subsequent biopsies [3–5], although the cancer detection rate in re-biopsy has declined in recent studies due to the contemporary use of an extended sampling scheme [6]. The cancer risk of HGPIN in contemporary studies is 20%–25% [2,4,7].

Many studies have attempted to identify clinical, pathological and molecular markers that may identify patients who are at risk of harbouring or developing PCa. Currently published studies have not found utility of clinical parameters, including age, serum PSA levels and abnormal DRE, in such risk prediction [4]. Among the histopathological features of HGPIN, the number of cores containing HGPIN has been shown to correlate with the risk of PCa in subsequent biopsies, with multifocal HGPIN (involving two cores or more) conferring significantly higher cancer risk than unifocal HGPIN [8,9].

Studies have also explored molecular tumour markers that identify men with HGPIN who may be at risk of PCa. Several potential candidate markers, including α-methylacyl-CoA racemase (AMACR) [10], prostate tumour overexpressed gene 1 (PTOV1) [11] and adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) [12], have been proposed. Investigation of genes involved in the carcinogenic transformation of HGPIN to PCa could be helpful in determining patients at risk for PCa in repeat biopsies.

TMPRSS2-ERG fusion, the most common recurrent genetic alteration in PCa [13,14], is highly specific for PCa and present in approximately 40%–50% of PCa. It is also present in approximately 20% of HGPIN glands that are always intermingled with or immediately adjacent to fusion-positive cancer glands [15,16]. Studies have demonstrated that ERG gene fusion plays an important role in early prostate carcinogenesis, including transition of HGPIN to PCa [17].

Several recent studies have demonstrated that detection of ERG protein by immunohistochemistry in PCa is highly correlated with the ERG rearrangement status by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) or RT-PCR [18–20]. In the present study, we investigated whether ERG gene fusion determined by ERG immunohistochemistry in HGPIN may be of value in stratifying PCa risk in patients with HGPIN. We addressed two main issues: (i) how often are ERG-positive HGPIN glands identified in prostate biopsies that do not harbour PCa; and (ii) does a positive ERG immunostain in HGPIN correlate with PCa detection in subsequent biopsies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. INTRODUCTION
  4. PATIENTS AND METHODS
  5. RESULTS
  6. DISCUSSION
  7. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
  8. REFERENCES

CASE COHORT

The study was approved by the authors' institutional review boards. Consecutive prostate biopsies with an initial HGPIN diagnosis from 1999 to 2009 and at least one repeat follow-up biopsy were retrieved from the institutional pathology database. Cases with prior or concomitant PCa or atypical glands suspicious for cancer (ATYP) were excluded. Cases without tissue blocks for immunohistochemistry were also excluded.

ERG IMMUNOSTAIN IN HGPIN

Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded prostate biopsy tissue was sectioned at 4 µm. Immunohistochemistry for ERG protein was performed as previously described [21]. Briefly, antigen retrieval was performed in Tris/borate/EDTA buffer, pH 8.0–8.5, for 8 min at 95 °C, 12 min at 100 °C and then 8 min at room temperature. Sections were then incubated with an anti-ERG rabbit monoclonal antibody (1:100 dilution, clone ID EPR3864, Epitomics, San Diego, CA, USA) for 32 min at room temperature. Subsequently, sections were incubated with a secondary antibody for 16 min at room temperature. The chromogenic substrate was applied for 8 min at room temperature. Slides were counterstained with haematoxylin II. Vascular endothelial cells that were uniformly and strongly positive for ERG expression were used as the internal positive control.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Between-group comparison was done using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test (or t test) for continuous variables and the chi-squared test for categorical variables. Where contingency table cell counts were fewer than 5, Fisher's exact test was used in place of the chi-squared test. All tests were two-sided and the results were considered significant at the level of α= 0.05.

RESULTS

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. INTRODUCTION
  4. PATIENTS AND METHODS
  5. RESULTS
  6. DISCUSSION
  7. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
  8. REFERENCES

CHARACTERISTICS OF PATIENTS WITH HGPIN AND SUBSEQUENT CANCER RISK

The clinicopathological characteristics of 94 patients with an initial HGPIN diagnosis are shown in Table 1. The mean age was 64 years (range 48–79). All cases had at least one repeat biopsy with a mean follow-up time of 27.4 months (range 1.5–140). The detailed follow-up data are available for 84 of these patients. The follow-up was less than 1 year in 28 patients (33.3%) and more than 1 year in 56 patients (66.7%). The mean number of initial biopsy cores was 12 (range 6–20). Unifocal HGPIN (involving one core) was found in 69 cases (82.1%) and multifocal HGPIN was found in 15 cases (17.9%). A mean of 1.8 (range 1–5) repeat biopsy sessions were performed. Forty-four patients had one re-biopsy and 40 patients had at least two re-biopsies.

Table 1. Clinicopathological characteristics and ERG protein expression in HGPIN
VariableAll patients (N= 94), number (%)Cancer group (N= 36), number (%)Non-cancer group (N= 58), number (%) P
  • *

    Data available on 84 patients: cancer group, N= 36; non-cancer group, N= 48.

Age (years)   0.890
 Mean646563
 Range48–7948–7849–79
Follow-up length (months)*   0.397
 Mean27.424.929.6
 Range1.5–1401.5–1403–102
Follow-up length   0.640
 ≤1 year28 (33.3)13 (36.1)15 (31.3)
 >1 year56 (66.7)23 (63.9)33 (68.8)
Number of initial biopsy cores*   0.119
 Mean13.211.814.1
 Range6–207–206–20
Number of repeat biopsy sessions*   0.874
 144 (52.4)18 (50)26 (54.2)
 ≥240 (47.6)18 (50)22 (45.8)
Number of cores involved by HGPIN in initial biopsy*   0.138
 169 (82.1)27 (75.0)42 (87.5)
 ≥215 (17.9)9 (25.0)6 (12.5)
ERG expression   0.299
 Positive5 (5.3)2 (5.6)3 (5.2)
 Negative89 (94.7)34 (94.4)55 (94.8)

PCa was found in subsequent biopsies in 36 of 94 patients (38.3%). The remaining 58 cases had non-cancer diagnoses, including HGPIN in 27 (29%), ATYP in five (5%) and benign prostatic tissue in 26 (28%). The cancer detection rate was not statistically different with respect to patient age, follow-up length, number of initial biopsy cores, number of repeat biopsy sessions and multifocality of HGPIN (Table 1).

EXPRESSION OF ERG IN HGPIN AND SUBSEQUENT CANCER RISK

ERG expression was detected in five of 94 (5.3%) of the initial prostate biopsies with HGPIN (Fig. 1). PCa was found in two such cases (40%) in subsequent biopsies. Of 89 cases with negative ERG staining, PCa was found in 34 (38.2%) in repeat biopsies. The cancer detection rate was not different between ERG positive and negative cases (P= 0.299).

image

Figure 1. A prostate biopsy containing a focus of HGPIN (A), which demonstrates enlarged nuclei and prominent nucleoli (B) and positive immunostain for ERG protein (C).

Download figure to PowerPoint

DISCUSSION

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. INTRODUCTION
  4. PATIENTS AND METHODS
  5. RESULTS
  6. DISCUSSION
  7. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
  8. REFERENCES

The most important clinical significance of an HGPIN diagnosis is the risk of PCa in repeat biopsies in patients with such a diagnosis. Patients with HGPIN may have a concomitant cancer that was missed in the initial biopsy. Patients with HGPIN without concomitant PCa at the time of the initial biopsy may develop PCa during follow-up. Because not all patients with HGPIN harbour or develop PCa, clinical, pathological or molecular markers that may be predictive of PCa risk have been sought.

TMPRSS2-ERG gene rearrangement is highly specific for PCa [13,22,23]. The gene arrangement can be determined by FISH [22] and quantitative PCR [24]. Recently, several studies have found that immunohistochemistry for ERG protein is a highly specific surrogate for TMPRSS2-ERG gene fusions with a specificity higher than 95% [18–20,25]. Two different antibodies, one mouse monoclonal and one rabbit monoclonal, have been utilized and both are highly correlated with ERG gene rearrangement status [26]. Both antibodies also stain vascular endothelial cells and vascular neoplasms [27,28]. Immunohistochemistry for ERG has been used in the evaluation of prostate biopsy specimens [21,29,30]. ERG gene status determined by immunohistochemistry has been correlated to other clinicopathological and molecular markers for prostate cancer [31–33].

TMPRSS2-ERG gene rearrangement is also identified in approximately 20% of HGPIN glands; the latter almost always intermingle with or are immediately adjacent to the fusion-positive cancer glands, and very rarely are found in other benign prostatic lesions [15,16]. ERG gene fusion plays an important role in early prostate carcinogenesis, including the transition of HGPIN to PCa [17]. It is therefore hypothesized that positive ERG expression in HGPIN may be able to identify ERG-fusion-positive PCa that is missed by the initial prostate biopsy or PCa that develops from ERG-positive HGPIN glands.

To our knowledge, the present study is the first to investigate ERG protein expression by immunohistochemistry in prostate biopsies containing HGPIN and to explore its utility to stratify the cancer risk associated with HGPIN. Of 94 prostate biopsies with HGPIN, only five (5.3%) contained ERG-positive HGPIN glands. This positive rate is much lower than the 20%–25% of HGPIN reported to harbour TMPRSS2-ERG gene rearrangement detected by FISH or RT-PCR in the literature [15,16]. Such a difference is not due to different detection methods (FISH or RT-PCR vs immunohistochemistry) as positive ERG immunostaining using the same anti-ERG antibody as in the present study highly correlated with the ERG gene rearrangement [18–20]. Rather, previous studies investigated ERG gene rearrangement in HGPIN that was intimately associated with ERG-rearranged PCa [15,16]. In contrast, in the present study we have studied isolated HGPIN not associated with PCa. In our prior study that examined ERG expression in limited PCa in prostate biopsies, we found positive ERG expression in 29% of HGPIN, which were all intermingled with or immediately adjacent to the ERG-positive cancer glands. In contrast, HGPIN glands away from the cancer glands were all negative for ERG [29]. In radical prostatectomy specimens, ERG-positive HGPIN glands were almost always adjacent to ERG-positive cancer glands and were rarely found in HGPIN glands that were not associated with or were distant from ERG-positive cancer glands (He et al., manuscript in preparation).

In addition to a low positive rate in HGPIN, positive ERG immunostain does not stratify the cancer risk associated with HGPIN, as the cancer detection rate in ERG-positive HGPIN (2/5, 40%) is not different from that in ERG-negative HGPIN (34/89, 38.2%). Therefore ERG immunostain has no utility in identifying patients with an HGPIN diagnosis who are at increased risk for having PCa. We do not advocate using ERG immunostain to stratify cancer risk when evaluating HGPIN.

Even though the present study did not show that ERG is useful to predict PCa risk after an HGPIN diagnosis, other molecular markers may be of predictive value for PCa risk in such a setting. For example, AMACR [10], PTOV1 [11], APC [12] and testosterone [34] have been found to be useful to determine which HGPIN patients are at higher cancer risk. Of course, these molecular markers need to be validated in large studies.

The overall PCa detection rate at repeat biopsy in this series was 38.3%, higher than the 20%–32% in other published reports [3–5]. The difference is probably due to the longer follow-up in our series. The mean follow-up in the present study is 27.4 months and almost half of the patients had at least two follow-up biopsies. Longer follow-up detects not only concomitant PCa but also new PCa that develops from HGPIN; therefore the incidence of PCa detection increases with the number of repeat biopsies and follow-up duration [35,36]. As Lefkowitz et al. [37,38] reported, the risk of PCa after initial unifocal HGPIN increased from 2.3% at 1-year follow-up to 25.8% at 3-year follow-up.

Many studies have found that clinical parameters, including a patient's age, various forms of serum PSA measurement and abnormal DRE, do not correlate with the cancer risk associated with HGPIN in subsequent biopsy [5,36]. In the present study, we did not find that a patient's age and the number of repeat biopsy sessions were associated with different cancer risk. The multifocality of HGPIN seems to confer different cancer risks with cancer detected in 39% of cases with unifocal HGPIN and in 60% of cases with multifocal HGPIN, although this difference is not statistically significant (P= 0.128), probably due to small sample size.

In conclusion, this is the first study to investigate ERG protein expression in prostate biopsies containing HGPIN only and its use to stratify the cancer risk associated with HGPIN. We found that ERG expression in isolated HGPIN is very uncommon (5.3%). In addition, a positive ERG expression is not associated with increased cancer detection in subsequent repeat biopsy. We therefore do not advocate using ERG immunostain in the evaluation and cancer risk stratification of HGPIN.

REFERENCES

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. INTRODUCTION
  4. PATIENTS AND METHODS
  5. RESULTS
  6. DISCUSSION
  7. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
  8. REFERENCES
  • 1
    Bostwick DG, Cheng L. Precursors of prostate cancer. Histopathology 2012; 60: 427
  • 2
    Epstein JI, Herawi M. Prostate needle biopsies containing prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia or atypical foci suspicious for carcinoma: implications for patient care. J Urol 2006; 175: 82034
  • 3
    Gallo F, Chiono L, Gastaldi E, Venturino E, Giberti C. Prognostic significance of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN): risk of prostatic cancer on repeat biopsies. Urology 2008; 72: 62832
  • 4
    Montironi R, Mazzucchelli R, Lopez-Beltran A, Scarpelli M, Cheng L. Prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia: its morphological and molecular diagnosis and clinical significance. BJU Int 2011; 108: 1394401
  • 5
    Antonelli A, Tardanico R, Giovanessi L et al. Predicting prostate cancer at rebiopsies in patients with high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia: a study on 546 patients. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2011; 14: 1736
  • 6
    Herawi M, Kahane H, Cavallo C, Epstein JI. Risk of prostate cancer on first re-biopsy within one year following a diagnosis of high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia is related to the number of cores sampled. J Urol 2006; 175: 1214
  • 7
    Schoenfield L, Jones JS, Zippe CD et al. The incidence of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and atypical glands suspicious for carcinoma on first-time saturation needle biopsy and the subsequent risk of cancer. BJU Int 2007; 99: 7704
  • 8
    Clouston D, Bolton D. In situ and intraductal epithelial proliferations of prostate: definitions and treatment implications. Part 1: prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia. BJU Int 2012; 109 (Suppl. 3): 226
  • 9
    Lee MC, Moussa AS, Yu C, Kattan MW, Magi-Galluzzi C, Jones JS. Multifocal high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia is a risk factor for subsequent prostate cancer. J Urol 2010; 184: 195862
  • 10
    Stewart J, Fleshner N, Cole H, Toi A, Sweet J. Prognostic significance of α-methylacyl-CoA racemase among men with high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia in prostate biopsies. J Urol 2008; 179: 17515
  • 11
    Morote J, Fernández S, Alaña L et al. PTOV1 expression predicts prostate cancer in men with isolated high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia in needle biopsy. Clin Cancer Res 2008; 14: 261722
  • 12
    Trock BJ, Brotzman MJ, Mangold LA et al. Evaluation of GSTP1 and APC methylation as indicators for repeat biopsy in a high-risk cohort of men with negative initial prostate biopsies. BJU Int 2012; 110: 5662
  • 13
    Clark JP, Cooper CS. ETS gene fusions in prostate cancer. Nat Rev Urol 2009; 6: 42939
  • 14
    Mosquera JM, Mehra R, Regan MM et al. Prevalence of TMPRSS2-ERG fusion prostate cancer among men undergoing prostate biopsy in the United States. Clin Cancer Res 2009; 15: 470611
  • 15
    Mosquera JM, Perner S, Genega EM et al. Characterization of TMPRSS2-ERG fusion high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and potential clinical implications. Clin Cancer Res 2008; 14: 33805
  • 16
    Perner S, Mosquera JM, Demichelis F et al. TMPRSS2-ERG fusion prostate cancer: an early molecular event associated with invasion. Am J Surg Pathol 2007; 31: 8828
  • 17
    Carver BS, Tran J, Gopalan A et al. Aberrant ERG expression cooperates with loss of PTEN to promote cancer progression in the prostate. Nat Genet 2009; 41: 61924
  • 18
    Park K, Tomlins SA, Mudaliar KM et al. Antibody-based detection of ERG rearrangement-positive prostate cancer. Neoplasia 2010; 12: 5908
  • 19
    Furusato B, Tan SH, Young D et al. ERG oncoprotein expression in prostate cancer: clonal progression of ERG-positive tumor cells and potential for ERG-based stratification. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2010; 13: 22837
  • 20
    Falzarano SM, Zhou M, Carver P et al. ERG gene rearrangement status in prostate cancer detected by immunohistochemistry. Virchows Arch 2011; 459: 4417
  • 21
    He H, Magi-Galluzzi C, Li J et al. The diagnostic utility of novel immunohistochemical marker ERG in the workup of prostate biopsies with ‘atypical glands suspicious for cancer’. Am J Surg Pathol 2011; 35: 60814
  • 22
    Tomlins SA, Rhodes DR, Perner S et al. Recurrent fusion of TMPRSS2 and ETS transcription factor genes in prostate cancer. Science 2005; 310: 6448
  • 23
    Kumar-Sinha C, Tomlins SA, Chinnaiyan AM. Recurrent gene fusions in prostate cancer. Nat Rev Cancer 2008; 8: 497511
  • 24
    Wang J, Cai Y, Ren C, Ittmann M. Expression of variant TMPRSS2/ERG fusion messenger RNAs is associated with aggressive prostate cancer. Cancer Res 2006; 66: 834751
  • 25
    Furusato B, van Leenders GJ, Trapman J et al. Immunohistochemical ETS-related gene detection in a Japanese prostate cancer cohort: diagnostic use in Japanese prostate cancer patients. Pathol Int 2011; 61: 40914
  • 26
    Braun M, Goltz D, Shaikhibrahim Z et al. ERG protein expression and genomic rearrangement status in primary and metastatic prostate cancer – a comparative study of two monoclonal antibodies. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2012; 15: 1659
  • 27
    Miettinen M, Wang ZF, Paetau A et al. ERG transcription factor as an immunohistochemical marker for vascular endothelial tumors and prostatic carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 2011; 35: 43241
  • 28
    Yaskiv O, Rubin B, He H, Falzarano SM, Magi-Galluzzi C, Zhou M. ERG protein expression in human tumors detected by a rabbit monoclonal antibody. Am J Clin Pathol (in press)
  • 29
    Yaskiv O, Zhang X, Simmerman K et al. The utility of ERG/P63 double immunohistochemical staining in the diagnosis of limited cancer in prostate needle biopsies. Am J Surg Pathol 2011; 35: 10628
  • 30
    van Leenders GJ, Boormans JL, Vissers CJ et al. Antibody EPR3864 is specific for ERG genomic fusions in prostate cancer: implications for pathological practice. Mod Pathol 2011; 24: 112838
  • 31
    Kron K, Liu L, Trudel D et al. Correlation of ERG expression and DNA methylation biomarkers with adverse clinicopathologic features of prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2012; 18: 2896904
  • 32
    Minner S, Enodien M, Sirma H et al. ERG status is unrelated to PSA recurrence in radically operated prostate cancer in the absence of antihormonal therapy. Clin Cancer Res 2011; 17: 587888
  • 33
    Hoogland AM, Jenster G, van Weerden WM et al. ERG immunohistochemistry is not predictive for PSA recurrence, local recurrence or overall survival after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. Mod Pathol 2012; 25: 4719
  • 34
    García-Cruz E, Piqueras M, Ribal MJ et al. Low testosterone level predicts prostate cancer in re-biopsy in patients with high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia. BJU Int 2012; 110: E199E202
  • 35
    Chun FK, Epstein JI, Ficarra V et al. Optimizing performance and interpretation of prostate biopsy: a critical analysis of the literature. Eur Urol 2010; 58: 85164
  • 36
    Roscigno M, Scattoni V, Freschi M et al. Diagnosis of isolated high-grade prostatic intra-epithelial neoplasia: proposal of a nomogram for the prediction of cancer detection at saturation re-biopsy. BJU Int 2012; 109: 132934
  • 37
    Lefkowitz GK, Sidhu GP, Torre P et al. Is repeat prostate biopsy for high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia necessary after routine 12-core sampling? Urology 2001; 58: 9991003
  • 38
    Lefkowitz GK, Taneja SS, Brown J et al. Follow up interval prostate biopsy 3 years after diagnosis of high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia is associated with high likelihood of prostate cancer, independent of change in prostate specific antigen levels. J Urol 2002; 168: 14158