Literature DB >> 11942960

Prognostic value of the Gleason score in prostate cancer.

L Egevad1, T Granfors, L Karlberg, A Bergh, P Stattin.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the prognostic value of the Gleason score in prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A consecutive series of 305 men with prostate cancer diagnosed at transurethral resection (1975-1990) and with no curative treatment was analysed. There was no assessment of prostate-specific antigen level during this period. The mean (range) age at diagnosis was 73.7 (52-95) years and the mean follow-up was 6.4 (0-22) years. The influence of Gleason score and the percentage of the specimen area with tumour (% cancer) on disease-specific survival were assessed using Kaplan-Meier analyses.
RESULTS: Of 305 cancers, 22% had a Gleason score of 4-5, 29% of 6, 18% of 7 and 32% of 8-10. At the follow-up, 89% of the men had died, of whom 42% had died from prostate cancer. The disease-specific 10-year survival was 56%. The disease-specific mean survival (DSMS) for Gleason score 4-5, 6, 7 and 8-10 was 20, 16, 10 and 5 years, respectively (P < 0.001). The DSMS did not differ significantly between Gleason 4 and 5 or between 8-10. There was a trend towards shorter survival for Gleason 4 + 3=7 (DSMS 9 years) than GS 3 + 4=7 (DSMS 13 years; P = 0.16). Gleason score and % cancer were independent predictors of DSMS (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: The long-term prognosis of prostate cancer on deferred treatment is predicted well by the Gleason score. Four prognostic categories of prostate cancer are suggested, i.e. Gleason score 4-5, 6, 7 and 8-10.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11942960     DOI: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.2002.02669.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  46 in total

1.  Prostate cancer: predicting tumor aggressiveness using DWI-guided biopsy.

Authors:  Chan Kyo Kim; Satoru Takahashi
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2011-10-25       Impact factor: 14.432

2.  The significance of modified Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma in biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens.

Authors:  Burkhard Helpap; Lars Egevad
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2006-11-08       Impact factor: 4.064

3.  An improved prognostic model for stage T1a and T1b prostate cancer by assessments of cancer extent.

Authors:  Ramzi Rajab; Gabrielle Fisher; Michael W Kattan; Christopher S Foster; Henrik Møller; Tim Oliver; Victor Reuter; Peter T Scardino; Jack Cuzick; Daniel M Berney
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2010-09-10       Impact factor: 7.842

4.  Gland segmentation in prostate histopathological images.

Authors:  Malay Singh; Emarene Mationg Kalaw; Danilo Medina Giron; Kian-Tai Chong; Chew Lim Tan; Hwee Kuan Lee
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2017-06-21

5.  Gleason Grade Group Concordance between Preoperative Targeted Biopsy and Radical Prostatectomy Histopathologic Analysis: A Comparison Between In-Bore MRI-guided and MRI-Transrectal US Fusion Prostate Biopsies.

Authors:  Daniel N Costa; Qi Cai; Yin Xi; Debora Z Recchimuzzi; Naveen Subramanian; Aditya Bagrodia; Neil M Rofsky; Claus G Roehrborn; Brad Hornberger; Rajal B Shah; Kenneth Goldberg; Alberto Diaz de Leon; Ivan Pedrosa
Journal:  Radiol Imaging Cancer       Date:  2021-03-05

6.  Recent developments in tissue-type imaging (TTI) for planning and monitoring treatment of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Ernest J Feleppa; Christopher R Porter; Jeffrey Ketterling; Paul Lee; Shreedevi Dasgupta; Stella Urban; Andrew Kalisz
Journal:  Ultrason Imaging       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 1.578

7.  Interobserver reproducibility of modified Gleason score in radical prostatectomy specimens.

Authors:  Axel Glaessgen; Hans Hamberg; Carl-Gustaf Pihl; Birgitta Sundelin; Bo Nilsson; Lars Egevad
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2004-05-20       Impact factor: 4.064

8.  Prediction of biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy with PI-RADS version 2 in prostate cancers: initial results.

Authors:  Sung Yoon Park; Young Taik Oh; Dae Chul Jung; Nam Hoon Cho; Young Deuk Choi; Koon Ho Rha; Sung Joon Hong
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-11-11       Impact factor: 5.315

9.  Opposing prognostic relevance of junction plakoglobin in distinct prostate cancer patient subsets.

Authors:  Tanja Spethmann; Lukas Clemens Böckelmann; Vera Labitzky; Ann-Kristin Ahlers; Jennifer Schröder-Schwarz; Sarah Bonk; Ronald Simon; Guido Sauter; Hartwig Huland; Robert Kypta; Udo Schumacher; Tobias Lange
Journal:  Mol Oncol       Date:  2021-02-17       Impact factor: 6.603

10.  Clinical Utility of Negative Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer and Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Vinayak G Wagaskar; Micah Levy; Parita Ratnani; Kate Moody; Mariely Garcia; Adriana M Pedraza; Sneha Parekh; Krunal Pandav; Bhavya Shukla; Sonya Prasad; Stanislaw Sobotka; Kenneth Haines; Sanoj Punnen; Peter Wiklund; Ash Tewari
Journal:  Eur Urol Open Sci       Date:  2021-04-19
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.