OBJECTIVES: The stage and grade shift of currently diagnosed prostate cancer has led to a diminished prognostic power of the Gleason score system. We investigated the predictive value of the amount of high-grade cancer (Gleason growth patterns 4/5) in the biopsy for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and clinical relapse after radical prostatectomy. METHODS: PSA-tested participants (N=281) of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) who underwent radical prostatectomy were analyzed. Besides clinical features, and serum-PSA, histopathologic features as determined in the diagnostic biopsy and matching radical prostatectomy specimen were related to patient outcome. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 7 yr, 39 (13.9%), 24 (8.5%), and 12 (4.3%) patients had PSA >/=0.1 ng/ml, PSA >/=1.0 ng/ml, and clinical relapse after radical prostatectomy, respectively. Using Cox proportional hazards, PSA level (p=0.002), length of tumour (p=0.040), and length of high-grade cancer (p=0.006) in the biopsy, but not Gleason score, were independent prognostic factors for biochemical relapse (PSA >/=0.1 ng/ml) when assessed as continuous variables. In radical prostatectomies, the proportion of high-grade cancer (p<0.001) was most predictive of relapse (PSA >/=0.1 ng/ml). For PSA >/=1.0 ng/ml and clinical relapse, the amount of high-grade cancer, both in the biopsy specimen (p=0.016 and p=0.004, respectively) and radical prostatectomy specimen (p=0.002 and p=0.005, respectively), but not Gleason score, was an independent predictor. CONCLUSIONS: In biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens of surgically treated prostate cancer, the amount of high-grade cancer is superior to the Gleason grading system in predicting patient outcome. We propose that, in addition to the Gleason score, the amount of Gleason growth patterns 4/5 in the biopsy (whether absolute length or proportion) should be mentioned in the pathology report.
OBJECTIVES: The stage and grade shift of currently diagnosed prostate cancer has led to a diminished prognostic power of the Gleason score system. We investigated the predictive value of the amount of high-grade cancer (Gleason growth patterns 4/5) in the biopsy for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and clinical relapse after radical prostatectomy. METHODS:PSA-tested participants (N=281) of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) who underwent radical prostatectomy were analyzed. Besides clinical features, and serum-PSA, histopathologic features as determined in the diagnostic biopsy and matching radical prostatectomy specimen were related to patient outcome. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 7 yr, 39 (13.9%), 24 (8.5%), and 12 (4.3%) patients had PSA >/=0.1 ng/ml, PSA >/=1.0 ng/ml, and clinical relapse after radical prostatectomy, respectively. Using Cox proportional hazards, PSA level (p=0.002), length of tumour (p=0.040), and length of high-grade cancer (p=0.006) in the biopsy, but not Gleason score, were independent prognostic factors for biochemical relapse (PSA >/=0.1 ng/ml) when assessed as continuous variables. In radical prostatectomies, the proportion of high-grade cancer (p<0.001) was most predictive of relapse (PSA >/=0.1 ng/ml). For PSA >/=1.0 ng/ml and clinical relapse, the amount of high-grade cancer, both in the biopsy specimen (p=0.016 and p=0.004, respectively) and radical prostatectomy specimen (p=0.002 and p=0.005, respectively), but not Gleason score, was an independent predictor. CONCLUSIONS: In biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens of surgically treated prostate cancer, the amount of high-grade cancer is superior to the Gleason grading system in predicting patient outcome. We propose that, in addition to the Gleason score, the amount of Gleason growth patterns 4/5 in the biopsy (whether absolute length or proportion) should be mentioned in the pathology report.
Authors: Lars Egevad; Ferran Algaba; Daniel M Berney; Liliane Boccon-Gibod; Eva Compérat; Andrew J Evans; Rainer Grobholz; Glen Kristiansen; Cord Langner; Gina Lockwood; Antonio Lopez-Beltran; Rodolfo Montironi; Pedro Oliveira; Matthias Schwenkglenks; Ben Vainer; Murali Varma; Vincent Verger; Philippe Camparo Journal: Virchows Arch Date: 2011-06-23 Impact factor: 4.064
Authors: Charlotte F Kweldam; Intan P Kümmerlin; Daan Nieboer; Ewout W Steyerberg; Chris H Bangma; Luca Incrocci; Theodorus H van der Kwast; Monique J Roobol; Geert J van Leenders Journal: Mod Pathol Date: 2017-05-19 Impact factor: 7.842
Authors: Kristen L Zakian; Hedvig Hricak; Nicole Ishill; Victor E Reuter; Steven Eberhardt; Chaya S Moskowitz; Amita Shukla-Dave; Liang Wang; Peter T Scardino; James A Eastham; Jason A Koutcher Journal: J Urol Date: 2010-10-16 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: T Van der Kwast; L Bubendorf; C Mazerolles; M R Raspollini; G J Van Leenders; C-G Pihl; P Kujala Journal: Virchows Arch Date: 2013-08-06 Impact factor: 4.064
Authors: Fang-Ming Deng; Nicholas M Donin; Ruth Pe Benito; Jonathan Melamed; Julien Le Nobin; Ming Zhou; Sisi Ma; Jinhua Wang; Herbert Lepor Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2015-10-30 Impact factor: 20.096