Literature DB >> 16461089

Role of prostate biopsy schemes in accurate prediction of Gleason scores.

Badar M Mian1, David J Lehr, Courtenay K Moore, Hugh A G Fisher, Ronald P Kaufman, Jeffery S Ross, Timothy A Jennings, Tipu Nazeer.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether improved prostate sampling by the extended biopsy scheme also improves the accuracy of the biopsy Gleason score (bGS). Because most prostate cancer cases are now detected at an early stage with a low prostate-specific antigen level, the bGS may be the most important factor in therapeutic decision-making. Sextant biopsy schemes had poor correlation with prostatectomy Gleason scores. Extended prostate biopsies have replaced the sextant scheme because of the former's greater cancer detection rate.
METHODS: We identified 426 patients whose biopsy and prostatectomy specimens were reviewed at our center. To minimize the effect of stage migration, all patients before 1997 were excluded. Of the 426 included patients, 221 men had undergone sextant biopsy and 205 men extended biopsy before prostatectomy. The rate of grading concordance and the effect of different variables on the concordance rate was determined.
RESULTS: The overall accuracy of the extended and sextant schemes was 68% and 48% (P <0.001), respectively. Upgrading of the bGS was significantly less likely with the extended scheme (17% versus 41%, P <0.001). The sextant biopsy was more likely to be upgraded for a bGS of 6 or less (44% versus 25%, P <0.002) and a bGS of 7 (14% versus 3%, P <0.02). On multivariate analysis, the biopsy scheme was the only independent predictor of accurate Gleason scoring (P <0.001) and age, prostate-specific antigen level, digital rectal examination findings, prostate size, clinical stage, and number of positive cores were not.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of an extended prostate biopsy scheme significantly improves the correlation between the bGS and prostatectomy Gleason score and reduces the risk of upgrading to a worse Gleason group at prostatectomy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16461089     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2005.08.018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  36 in total

1.  Should we abstain from Gleason score 2-4 in the diagnosis of prostate cancer? Results of a German multicentre study.

Authors:  Sabine Brookman-May; Matthias May; Wolf-Ferdinand Wieland; Steffen Lebentrau; Sven Gunia; Stefan Koch; Christian Gilfrich; Jan Roigas; Bernd Hoschke; Maximilian Burger
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2010-12-30       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Using biopsy to detect prostate cancer.

Authors:  Shahrokh F Shariat; Claus G Roehrborn
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2008

3.  The influence of expertise of the surgical pathologist to undergrading, upgrading, and understaging of prostate cancer in patients undergoing subsequent radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Attila Majoros; Attila Marcell Szász; Péter Nyirády; Eszter Székely; Péter Riesz; Attila Szendrői; Attila Keszthelyi; Janina Kulka; Imre Romics
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2013-08-30       Impact factor: 2.370

Review 4.  Standards for prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Marc A Bjurlin; Samir S Taneja
Journal:  Curr Opin Urol       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 2.309

5.  Predictors of Gleason Score (GS) upgrading on subsequent prostatectomy: a single Institution study in a cohort of patients with GS 6.

Authors:  Vikas Mehta; Kevin Rycyna; Bart M M Baesens; Güliz A Barkan; Gladell P Paner; Robert C Flanigan; Eva M Wojcik; Girish Venkataraman
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Pathol       Date:  2012-07-29

Review 6.  Saturation biopsies for prostate cancer: current uses and future prospects.

Authors:  Nicolas B Delongchamps; Gabriel P Haas
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2009-11-10       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 7.  Reproducibility and reliability of tumor grading in urological neoplasms.

Authors:  Rainer Engers
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2007-09-09       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 8.  Optimization of initial prostate biopsy in clinical practice: sampling, labeling and specimen processing.

Authors:  Marc A Bjurlin; H Ballentine Carter; Paul Schellhammer; Michael S Cookson; Leonard G Gomella; Dean Troyer; Thomas M Wheeler; Steven Schlossberg; David F Penson; Samir S Taneja
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2013-02-26       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 9.  Pathologic basis of focal therapy for early-stage prostate cancer.

Authors:  Vladimir Mouraviev; Janice M Mayes; Thomas J Polascik
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 14.432

10.  Focal treatment of prostate cancer with vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy.

Authors:  Scott E Eggener; Jonathan A Coleman
Journal:  ScientificWorldJournal       Date:  2008-10-03
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.