Literature DB >> 17091254

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

Burkhard Helpap1, Lars Egevad.   

Abstract

At an International Society of Urological Pathology consensus conference in 2005, the Gleason grading system for prostatic carcinoma underwent its first major revision. Gleason pattern 4 now includes most cribriform patterns and also fused and poorly formed glands. Our aims were to compare the grade distributions and assess the agreement between biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens for the modified and conventional Gleason grading. More than 3,000 radical prostatectomy (RP), needle biopsies (NB) and transurethral resection specimens were assigned modified Gleason score (GS). In NB, modified GS 3 + 3 = 6 and 3 + 4 = 7a were almost equally common, while in RP, 3 + 4 = 7a was most common followed by 4 + 3 = 7b. After application of the modified GS on NB, a substantial shift in GS distribution occurred: The proportion of GS 6 and 7 were 48 and 26%, respectively, with conventional Gleason grading as compared to 22 and 68%, respectively, with modified grading. In 368 men, the agreement between NB and RP with a modified GS 6, 7a, 7b and 8-10 in NB was 28, 88, 68 and 64-100%, respectively. The overall agreement improved from 58 to 72% (p < 0.001) compared to conventional GS. The higher agreement with modified Gleason grading may facilitate therapeutic decisions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17091254     DOI: 10.1007/s00428-006-0310-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Virchows Arch        ISSN: 0945-6317            Impact factor:   4.064


  31 in total

1.  Current practice of Gleason grading among genitourinary pathologists.

Authors:  Lars Egevad; William C Allsbrook; Jonathan I Epstein
Journal:  Hum Pathol       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 3.466

2.  Correlation between Gleason score of needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimen: accuracy and clinical implications.

Authors:  M S Cookson; N E Fleshner; S M Soloway; W R Fair
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1997-02       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  Prediction of prognosis for prostatic adenocarcinoma by combined histological grading and clinical staging.

Authors:  D F Gleason; G T Mellinger
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1974-01       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 4.  Histologic grading of prostate cancer: a perspective.

Authors:  D F Gleason
Journal:  Hum Pathol       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 3.466

5.  Classification of prostatic carcinomas.

Authors:  D F Gleason
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Rep       Date:  1966-03

6.  The histology and prognosis of prostatic cancer.

Authors:  G T Mellinger; D Gleason; J Bailar
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1967-02       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  Prognostic value of the Gleason score in prostate cancer.

Authors:  L Egevad; T Granfors; L Karlberg; A Bergh; P Stattin
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 5.588

8.  Gleason grading of prostatic needle biopsies. Correlation with grade in 316 matched prostatectomies.

Authors:  D G Bostwick
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  1994-08       Impact factor: 6.394

9.  Interobserver reproducibility of percent Gleason grade 4/5 in total prostatectomy specimens.

Authors:  Axel Glaessgen; Hans Hamberg; Carl-Gustaf Pihl; Birgitta Sundelin; Bo Nilsson; Lars Egevad
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 10.  Grading prostate cancer.

Authors:  D G Bostwick
Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 2.493

View more
  45 in total

1.  Improving the reproducibility of the Gleason scores in small foci of prostate cancer--suggestion of diagnostic criteria for glandular fusion.

Authors:  B Helpap; G Kristiansen; M Beer; J Köllermann; U Oehler; A Pogrebniak; Ch Fellbaum
Journal:  Pathol Oncol Res       Date:  2011-12-17       Impact factor: 3.201

2.  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

3.  [The 2014 consensus conference of the ISUP on Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma].

Authors:  G Kristiansen; L Egevad; M Amin; B Delahunt; J R Srigley; P A Humphrey; J I Epstein
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 1.011

Review 4.  [The value of the modified Gleason grading system of prostate adenocarcinoma in routine urological diagnostics].

Authors:  B Helpap; L Egevad
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 0.639

5.  Do adenocarcinomas of the prostate with Gleason score (GS) ≤6 have the potential to metastasize to lymph nodes?

Authors:  Hillary M Ross; Oleksandr N Kryvenko; Janet E Cowan; Jeffry P Simko; Thomas M Wheeler; Jonathan I Epstein
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 6.394

6.  Interactive digital slides with heat maps: a novel method to improve the reproducibility of Gleason grading.

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

Review 7.  Current perspectives on Gleason grading of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Kenneth A Iczkowski; M Scott Lucia
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 3.092

8.  The role of PSA density to predict a pathological tumour upgrade between needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy for low risk clinical prostate cancer in the modified Gleason system era.

Authors:  Stavros Sfoungaristos; Ioannis Katafigiotis; Petros Perimenis
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2013 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 9.  [Trends in prostate biopsy interpretation].

Authors:  J Köllermann; G Sauter
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 10.  Reproducibility and reliability of tumor grading in urological neoplasms.

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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.