Literature DB >> 17826489

Risk stratification of men with Gleason score 7 to 10 tumors by primary and secondary Gleason score: results from the SEARCH database.

David E Kang1, Nicholas J Fitzsimons, Joseph C Presti, Christopher J Kane, Martha K Terris, William J Aronson, Christopher L Amling, Stephen J Freedland.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Gleason score 4+3 prostate cancer is associated with worse clinicopathologic outcomes than is Gleason score 3+4. Whether the increased risk associated with Gleason score 4+3 disease is equivalent to that of Gleason score 4+4 or greater is unclear.
METHODS: We reviewed the data from two separate cohorts pulled from the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital database. The first consisted of 374 men with biopsy Gleason score 3+4 or greater disease and the second of 636 men with radical prostatectomy (RP) Gleason score 3+4 or greater disease. We estimated the odds ratios of unfavorable surgical pathologic findings for the biopsy Gleason score categories using logistic regression analysis. Using a Cox proportional hazards regression model, we estimated the relative risk of biochemical progression associated with each biopsy and RP Gleason score category.
RESULTS: In the biopsy Gleason score cohort, a Gleason score of 4+3 was associated with an increased risk of extracapsular extension (P = 0.01) and seminal vesicle invasion (P <0.001) relative to a biopsy Gleason score of 3+4. A biopsy Gleason score of 4+3 was associated with a similar risk of adverse pathologic findings relative to a biopsy Gleason score of 4+4 or greater (all P >0.10), except for higher grade pathologic tumors among men with a biopsy Gleason score of 4+4 or more (P = 0.001). After adjusting for multiple clinical characteristics, a biopsy Gleason score of 4+3 was associated with an increased recurrence risk relative to a biopsy Gleason score of 3+4 (P = 0.001), but a similar progression risk as that for a biopsy Gleason score of 4+4 or more (P = 0.53). In the RP Gleason cohort, and after adjustment for multiple clinicopathologic features, an RP Gleason score of 4+3 was associated with increased progression risk relative to an RP Gleason score of 3+4 (P = 0.03), but similar progression risk as that for an RP Gleason score of 4+4 or more (P = 0.24).
CONCLUSIONS: In a multicenter database using pooled data from multiple pathologists, Gleason scores 4+3 and 4+4 or more exhibited similar clinicopathologic outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17826489      PMCID: PMC3275808          DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2007.03.059

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


  23 in total

Review 1.  Accuracy of biopsy Gleason scores from a large uropathology laboratory: use of a diagnostic protocol to minimize observer variability.

Authors:  G D Carlson; C B Calvanese; H Kahane; J I Epstein
Journal:  Urology       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 2.649

2.  Risk of prostate cancer-specific mortality following biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Stephen J Freedland; Elizabeth B Humphreys; Leslie A Mangold; Mario Eisenberger; Frederick J Dorey; Patrick C Walsh; Alan W Partin
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2005-07-27       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Biological determinants of cancer progression in men with prostate cancer.

Authors:  T A Stamey; J E McNeal; C M Yemoto; B M Sigal; I M Johnstone
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1999-04-21       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Prostate cancer and the Will Rogers phenomenon.

Authors:  Peter C Albertsen; James A Hanley; George H Barrows; David F Penson; Pam D H Kowalczyk; M Melinda Sanders; Judith Fine
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2005-09-07       Impact factor: 13.506

5.  Combination of prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage, and Gleason score to predict pathological stage of localized prostate cancer. A multi-institutional update.

Authors:  A W Partin; M W Kattan; E N Subong; P C Walsh; K J Wojno; J E Oesterling; P T Scardino; J D Pearson
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1997-05-14       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Postoperative nomogram predicting the 10-year probability of prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Andrew J Stephenson; Peter T Scardino; James A Eastham; Fernando J Bianco; Zohar A Dotan; Christopher J DiBlasio; Alwyn Reuther; Eric A Klein; Michael W Kattan
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2005-10-01       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Disease progression following radical prostatectomy in men with Gleason score 7 tumor.

Authors:  J I Epstein; C R Pound; A W Partin; P C Walsh
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  Analysis of risk factors for progression in patients with pathologically confined prostate cancers after radical retropubic prostatectomy.

Authors:  S E Lerner; M L Blute; E J Bergstralh; D G Bostwick; J T Eickholt; H Zincke
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  A V D'Amico; R Whittington; S B Malkowicz; D Schultz; K Blank; G A Broderick; J E Tomaszewski; A A Renshaw; I Kaplan; C J Beard; A Wein
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1998-09-16       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 10.  Use of nomograms to predict the risk of disease recurrence after definitive local therapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Christopher J Diblasio; Michael W Kattan
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2003-12-29       Impact factor: 2.649

View more
  15 in total

1.  [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

2.  Biopsy Detected Gleason Pattern 5 is Associated with Recurrence, Metastasis and Mortality in a Cohort of Men with High Risk Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Sean P Stroup; Daniel M Moreira; Zinan Chen; Lauren Howard; Jonathan H Berger; Martha K Terris; William J Aronson; Matthew R Cooperberg; Christopher L Amling; Christopher J Kane; Stephen J Freedland
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2017-07-11       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  The effect of Rapid Access Prostate Clinics on the outcomes of Gleason 7 prostate cancer: does earlier diagnosis lead to better outcomes?

Authors:  M P Broe; J C Forde; M S Inder; D J Galvin; D W Mulvin; D M Quinlan
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2017-03-09       Impact factor: 1.568

4.  Gleason score 6 adenocarcinoma: should it be labeled as cancer?

Authors:  H Ballentine Carter; Alan W Partin; Patrick C Walsh; Bruce J Trock; Robert W Veltri; William G Nelson; Donald S Coffey; Eric A Singer; Jonathan I Epstein
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-10-01       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 5.  Advancements in MR imaging of the prostate: from diagnosis to interventions.

Authors:  David Bonekamp; Michael A Jacobs; Riham El-Khouli; Dan Stoianovici; Katarzyna J Macura
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2011 May-Jun       Impact factor: 5.333

6.  The prostate cancer susceptibility variant rs2735839 near KLK3 gene is associated with aggressive prostate cancer and can stratify gleason score 7 patients.

Authors:  Jeri Kim; Xifeng Wu; Yonggang He; Jian Gu; Sara Strom; Christopher J Logothetis
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2014-10-01       Impact factor: 12.531

7.  Gleason score and lethal prostate cancer: does 3 + 4 = 4 + 3?

Authors:  Jennifer R Stark; Sven Perner; Meir J Stampfer; Jennifer A Sinnott; Stephen Finn; Anna S Eisenstein; Jing Ma; Michelangelo Fiorentino; Tobias Kurth; Massimo Loda; Edward L Giovannucci; Mark A Rubin; Lorelei A Mucci
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-05-11       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Prognostic Gleason grade grouping: data based on the modified Gleason scoring system.

Authors:  Phillip M Pierorazio; Patrick C Walsh; Alan W Partin; Jonathan I Epstein
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2013-03-06       Impact factor: 5.588

9.  Robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer: technical considerations and review of the literature.

Authors:  Sean P Stroup; Christopher J Kane
Journal:  ISRN Urol       Date:  2011-09-25

10.  The utility of ADC parameters in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer by 3.0-Tesla diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Aylin Altan Kus
Journal:  Pol J Radiol       Date:  2021-05-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.