medigraphic.com
ISSN 0185-6014 (Print)
Órgano oficial de difusión de la Federación Mexicana de Patología Clínica, AC y de la Asociación Latinoamericana de Patología Clínica/Medicina de Laboratorio

2005, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Rev Mex Patol Clin Med Lab 2005; 52 (1)

Risk factors related with the preceding lesions of prostatic carcinoma at the INOR

García FI, Pereda MCM, Quintero CS, Jiménez GJ, González HJ, Bouzó LA, Laborí CC

Language: Spanish
References: 21
Page: 59-62
PDF size: 48.61 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: Benign prostate cancer hiperplasia (BPH) is the most common disorder in the prostate gland, in spite of its higher incidence it is not a prostate cancer precursor as itself but there are many lesions, such as prostate intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN) that are related with the tumorigenesis process in the prostate gland, that could be hidden inside those benign lesions. Objective: To find a relation between some risk factors and precursor lesions. Material and methods: Surveys were made to these patients and were taken some sociodemographics data. Results: In our sample population we found the highest relation between benign prostatic hyperplasia and PIN, beside low grade lesions were more frequently found in relation both prostate hyperplasia and cancer. Smoking habits, familial prostate cancer disorder and riding bike were the more frequently risk factors related to PIN lesions. The most important was smoking as same as previous studies but it is dark cigars and not light the most common cigar’s consume in our sample. Conclusions: Smoking habits, familial prostate cancer disorder and riding bike were the most related risk factors with prostate cancer intraepithelial neoplasia appearance.


REFERENCES

  1. Schulman CC, Zlotta AR, Denis L, Schroder FH, Sakr WA. Prevention of prostate cancer. Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl 2000; (205): 50-61.

  2. Montironi R, Mazzucchelli R, Marshall IR, Bartels PH. Prostate cancer prevention: Review of target populations, pathological biomarkers, and chemopreventive agents. J Clin Pathol 1999; 52 (11): 793.

  3. De Marzo AM, Coffey DS, Nelson WG. New concepts in tissue specific for prostate cancer and benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urology 1999; 53 (suppl 3): 29-42.

  4. Chokkalingam AP, Adamis HO, Nyren O, Johansson JE, Gridley G et al. Prostate carcinoma subsequent to diagnosis of benign prostatic hyperplasia. A population based cohort study in Sweden. Cancer 2003.

  5. Nelson WG, De Marzo AM, De Weese TL. The molecular pathogenesis of prostate cancer: Implications for prostate cancer prevention. Urology 2001; 57 (4 Suppl 1): 39-45.

  6. Di Silverio F, Gentile V, de Matteis et al. Distribution of inflammation, premalignant lesions, incidental carcinoma in histologically confirmed benign hyperplasia: a retrospective analysis. Eur Urol 2003; 43 (2): 164-175.

  7. Herranz AF, Arias FF, Arrizabalaga MM, Calahorra FFJ, Carballido RJ, Diz RR et al. Prostate cancer in the Community of Madrid in the year 2000. III. Study of tumor extent. Actas Urol Esp 2003; 27 (6): 411-417.

  8. Regueiro LJC, Moreno AP, Leva VM, Prieto CR, Anglada CFJ, Blanco EA et al. [Incidence of high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia in urologic practice], [Incidencia de la neoplasia intraepitelial prostática de alto grado en la práctica urológica]. Actas Urol Esp 2000; 24 (6): 446-451.

  9. Epstein JI, Potter SR. The pathological interpretation and significance of prostate needle biopsy findings: implications and current controversies. J Urol 2001; 166 (2): 402-410.

  10. Meng MU, Shinohara K, Grossfeld BD. Significance of high-grade prostatic neoplasia on prostate biopsy. Urol Oncol 2003; 21 (2): 145-151.

  11. Bartels PH, Montironi R, Duval da Silva V, Hamilton PW, Thompson D, Vaught L, Bartels HG. Tissue architecture analysis in prostate cancer and its precursors: An innovative approach to computerized histometry. Eur Urol 1999; 35(5-6): 484-491.

  12. Crawford ED. Epidemiology of prostate cancer. Urology 2003; 62 (6 suppl 1): 3-12.

  13. Hsieh K, Albertsen PC. Populations at high risk for prostate cancer. Urol Clin North Am 2003; 30 (4): 669-676.

  14. Lichtenstein P, Holm NV, Pia K. Verkasalo AI, Jaakko K, Markku K et al. Environmental and Heritable Factors in the Causation of Cancer-Analyses of Cohorts of Twins from Sweden, Denmark, and Finland. NJM 2000; 343: 78-85.

  15. Bouffioux L, Willems E, Waltregny D. Can the development of prostate cancer be prevented? Rev Med Liege 2003; 58 (4): 240-246.

  16. Narod SA, Dupont A, Cusan L, Diamond P, Gomez JL, Suburu R et al. The impact of family history on early detection of prostate cancer. Nature Med 1995; 1: 99-101.

  17. Matikainen MP, Schleutker I, Morsky P, Kallioniemi OP, Tammela TL. Detection of subclinical cancers by prostate-specific antigen screening in asymptomatic men from high-risk prostate cancer families. Clin Cancer Res 1999; 5 (6): 1275-1279.

  18. Huiatt RA, Armstrong MA, Klatsky AL, Sidney S. Alcohol consumption, smoking, and other risk factors and prostate cancer in a large health plan cohort in California, United States. Cancer Causes Control 1994; 5: 66-72.

  19. Platz EA, Rimm EB, Kawachi I, Colditz GA, Stampfer MJ, Willet WC, Giovannucci E. Alcohol consumption, cigarette smoking, and risk of bening prostatic hyperplasia. Am J Epidemiol 1999; 149 (2): 106-115.

  20. Giovannucci E, Rimm EB, Ascheiro A, Graham A et al. Smoking and risk of total fatal prostate cancer in United States health professionals. CEBP 1999; 8(4): 277-282.

  21. Klaunig JE, Xu Y, Han C, Kamendulis LM, Chen J, Heiser C et al. The effect of tea consumption on oxidative stress in smokers and nonsmokers. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 1999: 249-254.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com