Person: Steele, Graeme
Email Address
AA Acceptance Date
Birth Date
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Job Title
Last Name
First Name
Name
Search Results
Publication Blood-Based Biomarkers of Aggressive Prostate Cancer
(Public Library of Science, 2012) Liong, Men Long; Lim, Chun Ren; Yang, Hengxuan; Chao, Samuel; Bong, Chin Wei; Leong, Wing Seng; Das, Prashanta Kumar; Loh, Chit Sin; Lau, Ban Eng; Yu, Choon Geok; Ooi, Edie Jian Jiek; Nam, Robert K.; Allen, Paul; Steele, Graeme; Wassmann, Karl; Richie, Jerome; Liew, Choong ChinPurpose: Prostate cancer is a bimodal disease with aggressive and indolent forms. Current prostate-specific-antigen testing and digital rectal examination screening provide ambiguous results leading to both under-and over-treatment. Accurate, consistent diagnosis is crucial to risk-stratify patients and facilitate clinical decision making as to treatment versus active surveillance. Diagnosis is currently achieved by needle biopsy, a painful procedure. Thus, there is a clinical need for a minimally-invasive test to determine prostate cancer aggressiveness. A blood sample to predict Gleason score, which is known to reflect aggressiveness of the cancer, could serve as such a test. Materials and Methods: Blood mRNA was isolated from North American and Malaysian prostate cancer patients/controls. Microarray analysis was conducted utilizing the Affymetrix U133 plus 2·0 platform. Expression profiles from 255 patients/controls generated 85 candidate biomarkers. Following quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR) analysis, ten disease-associated biomarkers remained for paired statistical analysis and normalization. Results: Microarray analysis was conducted to identify 85 genes differentially expressed between aggressive prostate cancer (Gleason score ≥8) and controls. Expression of these genes was qRT-PCR verified. Statistical analysis yielded a final seven-gene panel evaluated as six gene-ratio duplexes. This molecular signature predicted as aggressive (ie, Gleason score ≥8) 55% of G6 samples, 49% of G7(3+4), 79% of G7(4+3) and 83% of G8-10, while rejecting 98% of controls. Conclusion: In this study, we have developed a novel, blood-based biomarker panel which can be used as the basis of a simple blood test to identify men with aggressive prostate cancer and thereby reduce the overdiagnosis and overtreatment that currently results from diagnosis using PSA alone. We discuss possible clinical uses of the panel to identify men more likely to benefit from biopsy and immediate therapy versus those more suited to an “active surveillance” strategy.
Publication Variability in MRI vs. ultrasound measures of prostate volume and its impact on treatment recommendations for favorable-risk prostate cancer patients: a case series
(BioMed Central, 2014) Murciano-Goroff, Yonina; Wolfsberger, Luciant D; Parekh, Arti; Fennessy, Fiona; Tuncali, Kemal; Orio, Peter; Niedermayr, Thomas R; Suh, W Warren; Devlin, Phillip; Tempany, Clare Mary C; Sugar, Emily H Neubauer; O’Farrell, Desmond A; Steele, Graeme; O’Leary, Michael; Buzurovic, Ivan; Damato, Antonio L.; Cormack, Robert; Fedorov, Andriy; Nguyen, PaulBackground: Prostate volume can affect whether patients qualify for brachytherapy (desired size ≥20 mL and ≤60 mL) and/or active surveillance (desired PSA density ≤0.15 for very low risk disease). This study examines variability in prostate volume measurements depending on imaging modality used (ultrasound versus MRI) and volume calculation technique (contouring versus ellipsoid) and quantifies the impact of this variability on treatment recommendations for men with favorable-risk prostate cancer. Methods: We examined 70 patients who presented consecutively for consideration of brachytherapy for favorable-risk prostate cancer who had volume estimates by three methods: contoured axial ultrasound slices, ultrasound ellipsoid (height × width × length × 0.523) calculation, and endorectal coil MRI (erMRI) ellipsoid calculation. Results: Average gland size by the contoured ultrasound, ellipsoid ultrasound, and erMRI methods were 33.99, 37.16, and 39.62 mLs, respectively. All pairwise comparisons between methods were statistically significant (all p < 0.015). Of the 66 patients who volumetrically qualified for brachytherapy on ellipsoid ultrasound measures, 22 (33.33%) did not qualify on ellipsoid erMRI or contoured ultrasound measures. 38 patients (54.28%) had PSA density ≤0.15 ng/dl as calculated using ellipsoid ultrasound volumes, compared to 34 (48.57%) and 38 patients (54.28%) using contoured ultrasound and ellipsoid erMRI volumes, respectively. Conclusions: The ultrasound ellipsoid and erMRI ellipsoid methods appeared to overestimate ultrasound contoured volume by an average of 9.34% and 16.57% respectively. 33.33% of those who qualified for brachytherapy based on ellipsoid ultrasound volume would be disqualified based on ultrasound contoured and/or erMRI ellipsoid volume. As treatment recommendations increasingly rely on estimates of prostate size, clinicians must consider method of volume estimation.
Publication A Mammary-type Myofibroblastoma of the Prostate: A Case Report
(Elsevier, 2016) Cohen, Aaron; Steele, GraemeWe report the case of a 51-year-old gentleman presenting with obstructive and irritative urinary symptoms, found to have a large prostate mass on imaging. A radical prostatectomy was performed and pathological diagnosis revealed a 12 cm mammary-type myofibroblastoma replacing the entire prostate. Mammary-type myofibroblastoma is a rare lesion outside of the breast, and is considered benign. This is the first reported case of a mammary-type myofibroblastoma occurring in the prostate.
Publication The Management of Nonseminomatous Testicular Cancer
(TheScientificWorldJOURNAL, 2004) Steele, Graeme; Richie, Jerome