Literature DB >> 11422794

Discrepancies between Gleason scores of needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens.

T Fukagai1, T Namiki, H Namiki, R G Carlile, M Shimada, H Yoshida.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy of Gleason scores in prostate needle biopsy diagnosis and to investigate factors affecting the accuracy of the tumor grade. A single pathologist reviewed 116 sets of prostate cancer biopsies and radical prostatectomy specimens. The following factors were examined to determine their effect on the accuracy of the biopsy Gleason scores: (i) relative tumor differentiation; (ii) pathological stage; (iii) amount of tissue in the biopsy specimen; (iv) amount of cancer tissue in the biopsy specimen; (v) tumor heterogeneity; (vi) clinical findings (prostate specific antigen value and digital rectal examination); and (vii) interobserver variability. In 53 cases the Gleason score of biopsy specimens was identical to the score of prostatectomy specimens (45.7%). Fifty-four cases (46.6%) of biopsy specimens were undergraded. The most common discrepancy was diagnosis of well-differentiated carcinoma in the biopsy but diagnosis of moderately differentiated tumor in the corresponding prostatectomy specimen. This discrepancy occurred when the amount of tumor in the biopsy was 3 mm or less. Biopsy and prostatectomy results showed less agreement when the original biopsy tumor grade rendered by nine different pathologists was used, suggesting that interobserver variability can adversely affect the accuracy of tumor grade. Clarifying the histologic criteria for distinguishing each grade, especially between Gleason grades 2 and 3, is important for accurate grading.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11422794     DOI: 10.1046/j.1440-1827.2001.01207.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pathol Int        ISSN: 1320-5463            Impact factor:   2.534


  14 in total

1.  Predictive models for worsening prognosis in potential candidates for active surveillance of presumed low-risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Prasanna Sooriakumaran; Abhishek Srivastava; Paul Christos; Sonal Grover; Maria Shevchuk; Ashutosh Tewari
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2011-06-26       Impact factor: 2.370

2.  How reliable is 12-core prostate biopsy procedure in the detection of prostate cancer?

Authors:  Ege Can Serefoglu; Serkan Altinova; Nevzat Serdar Ugras; Egemen Akincioglu; Erem Asil; M Derya Balbay
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2013-05-13       Impact factor: 1.862

3.  Low-Risk Prostate Cancer and Tumor Upgrading in the Surgical Specimen: Analysis of Clinical Factors Predicting Tumor Upgrading in a Contemporary Series of Patients Who were Evaluated According to the Modified Gleason Score Grading System.

Authors:  Antonio B Porcaro; Salvatore Siracusano; Nicolò de Luyk; Paolo Corsi; Marco Sebben; Alessandro Tafuri; Daniele Mattevi; Leonardo Bizzotto; Irene Tamanini; Maria A Cerruto; Guido Martignoni; Matteo Brunelli; Walter Artibani
Journal:  Curr Urol       Date:  2017-07-30

4.  Association between percentage of tumor involvement and Gleason score upgrading in low-risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Qiang Fu; Judd W Moul; Lionel L Bañez; Leon Sun; Vladimir Mouraviev; Dongha Xie; Thomas J Polascik
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2012-06-12       Impact factor: 3.064

5.  Upgrading and downgrading of prostate needle biopsy specimens: risk factors and clinical implications.

Authors:  Stephen J Freedland; Christopher J Kane; Christopher L Amling; William J Aronson; Martha K Terris; Joseph C Presti
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 2.649

6.  Frequency and determinants of disagreement and error in gleason scores: a population-based study of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Michael Goodman; Kevin C Ward; Adeboye O Osunkoya; Milton W Datta; Daniel Luthringer; Andrew N Young; Katerina Marks; Vaunita Cohen; Jan C Kennedy; Michael J Haber; Mahul B Amin
Journal:  Prostate       Date:  2012-01-06       Impact factor: 4.104

7.  Digital pathology image analysis: opportunities and challenges.

Authors:  Anant Madabhushi
Journal:  Imaging Med       Date:  2009

8.  Risk of Upgrading from Prostate Biopsy to Radical Prostatectomy Pathology-Does Saturation Biopsy of Index Lesion during Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy Help?

Authors:  Brian P Calio; Abhinav Sidana; Dordaneh Sugano; Sonia Gaur; Mahir Maruf; Amit L Jain; Maria J Merino; Peter L Choyke; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto; Baris Turkbey
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2018-01-20       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  The long-term outcomes after radical prostatectomy of patients with pathologic Gleason 8-10 disease.

Authors:  Dan Lewinshtein; Brandon Teng; Ashley Valencia; Robert Gibbons; Christopher R Porter
Journal:  Adv Urol       Date:  2011-09-16

10.  Does the time from biopsy to radical prostatectomy affect Gleason score upgrading in patients with clinical t1c prostate cancer?

Authors:  Muzaffer Eroglu; Omer Gokhan Doluoglu; Hasmet Sarici; Onur Telli; Berat Cem Ozgur; Selen Bozkurt
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2014-06-16
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.