Search

Background:Partner of SLD5 1 (PSF1) is an evolutionarily conserved DNA replication factor. Previous studies have suggested that transcriptional activity of the PSF1 gene correlated with malignancy of cancer cells. The objective of the current study was to evaluate the relationship between PSF1 expression and the clinical features of prostate cancer.Methods:We determined the expression of PSF1 in 120 needle biopsy samples of prostate cancer by immunohistochemistry. We divided patients into PSF1-positive or -negative groups and analyzed the relationships between the expression of PSF1, the Gleason score, PSA level, TNM classification and prognosis.Results:Our results showed that the PSF1 expression correlated significantly with PSA values at diagnosis (P=0.0028), with tumor grade (P<0.0001), and with clinical stage (P=0.0005). Moreover, the PSF1 expression correlated significantly with overall survival (hazard ratio (HR) 5.5; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.17-15.8; P=0.003) and progression-free survival in 99 consecutive patients with prostate cancer. Noteworthy, the prognosis of PSF1-positive cases was also worse in patients with a Gleason score of 8-10 (HR 3.7; 95% CI 1.28-13.43; P=0.0143). Limitations include that this study had a retrospective design, that patients in the study were heterogeneous and included those with early and advanced cancer, and that small tumor fragments may not be representative of the entire carcinoma.Conclusions:PSF1 is expressed in high-grade prostate cancer and may be a useful biomarker to identify patients with a poor prognosis at the time of diagnosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study was designed to assess the efficacy of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI), in comparison with power Doppler ultrasound (PDUS), for visualizing prostate cancer. 111 men suspected of having prostate cancer underwent imaging before undergoing octant biopsy. Subsequently, 31 cancer-positive patients were enrolled in this study. DCE-MRI was obtained using a three-dimensional fast-field echo sequence, which assured wide coverage of the prostate gland. The transrectal PDUS were scored according to the degree of power Doppler flow signals. The time intensity curve types for the DCE-MRI and the PDUS scores were compared with the histopathologic results for each region. The time intensity curves were correlated significantly with PDUS scores (p<0.001). Using PDUS, the overall sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of cancer visualization in peripheral zones were 69%, 61% and 66%, respectively. Using DCE-MRI, the corresponding values were 87%, 74% and 82%. In the inner gland, using PDUS, the overall sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were 68%, 94% and 83%, respectively. Using DCE-MRI, the corresponding values were similar (68%, 86% and 78%). DCE-MRI was significantly more sensitive than transrectal PDUS in peripheral zones (p<0.05). In conclusion, both transrectal PDUS and DCE-MRI can be used to demonstrate hypervascularity in many prostate cancers. DCE-MRI was significantly more sensitive than PDUS for visualizing of prostate cancers without loss of specificity in the peripheral zone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]