Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

William J Ellis

Publications and source records attributed to William J Ellis.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Detection and isolation of prostate cancer cells from peripheral blood and bone marrow.

OBJECTIVES: To detect and isolate disseminated prostate cancer cells because significant effort has been directed toward defining the characteristics of the primary tumor that predict progression, but little progress has been made on evaluating the disseminated prostate cancer cell. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction results in the bone marrow (BM) and peripheral blood (PB) of men with prostate cancer suggest many have disseminated cancer cells. METHODS: Disseminated epithelial cells were isolated from the BM and PB using Miltenyi antibody-coated paramagnetic microparticle technology. In the two-step selection process, anti-CD45 and anti-CD61 were used for negative selection, and anti-human epithelial antigen was used for positive selection. Cells were then stained for Ber-EP4 (a distinct epitope of the human epithelial antigen) and PSA. PSA reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction was performed on an enriched aliquot. RESULTS: The normal controls were negative. Before prostatectomy, PSA-expressing epithelial cells were detected in 54% of BM and 24% of PB samples. At a median of 4 months after prostatectomy, PSA-expressing cells were detected in 33% of BM and 9% of PB specimens from men without evidence of disease. In men more than 5 years after prostatectomy, PSA-expressing cells were detected in the BM of 4 (29%) of 14, 2 of whom subsequently developed evidence of disease recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that dissemination of cells is an early event in prostate cancer that is insufficient for the development of metastases. Isolation will allow interrogation of the phenotype and genotype of the cells.

Bone Marrow Cells↗

Prostate brachytherapy.

Prostate brachytherapy has been practiced for nearly 100 years in various forms. However, technological advances over the past 20 years in imaging, computing, and devices have propelled this technique into the mainstream of prostate cancer treatments. A discussion of radiobiology principles is important to the understanding of modern brachytherapy technique. For low risk tumors, brachytherapy may be administered as monotherapy. For high risk tumors combination therapy with external beam therapy is indicated. Androgenablation therapy is used for hormonal downsizing or for select high risk tumors. Diseases free survival appears similar to that seen with other definitive therapies for clinically localized prostate cancer. The short term morbidity of the procedure includes significant obstructive and irritative voiding symptoms. Future brachytherapy goals are discussed.

Brachytherapy↗

Treatment decision-making by men with localized prostate cancer: the influence of personal factors.

OBJECTIVES: For many men with localized prostate cancer, there is no definite answer or unequivocal choice regarding treatment modality. This high-stakes treatment decision is made in the context of great uncertainty. The purpose of this study is to systematically document meaningful and relevant aspects of treatment decision-making reported by men with localized prostate cancer. METHODS: Focus groups and individual interviews were conducted with 44 men who were within 6 months of a diagnosis of localized prostate cancer. Using content analysis and grounded theory analytic techniques, major aspects and processes of men's treatment decision making are identified and described. RESULTS: The participants reported their experiences beginning with influential personal history factors, followed by detailed descriptions of information gathering and the important influence of expected treatment outcomes and other individuals' cancer histories and/or shared opinions. Twenty of the 44 (45%) participants relied heavily on the influence of another's opinion or history to finalize a decision, yet only 10 of the 44 (22.7%) reported this individual to be their physician. A common process, "making the best choice for me" was explicated. CONCLUSION: Clinicians assume that men are making rational treatment decisions based on reliable information, yet this study documents a different reality. Patient education about medical therapies and the patients' own medical factors is not enough. A clinic visit dialogue that brings personal factors to the conversation along with medical factors can guide a man to making his "best choice" for localized prostate cancer.

Aged↗