Literature DB >> 18718699

Prevalence of a tertiary Gleason grade and its impact on adverse histopathologic parameters in a contemporary radical prostatectomy series.

Hendrik Isbarn1, Sascha A Ahyai, Felix K H Chun, Lars Budäus, Thorsten Schlomm, Georg Salomon, Mario Zacharias, Andreas Erbersdobler, Jens Köllermann, Guido Sauter, Hartwig Huland, Markus Graefen, Thomas Steuber.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The presence of a tertiary Gleason grade (TGG) pattern in radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens has been described as associated with adverse pathology and a higher biochemical recurrence (BCR) rate after RP.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the prevalence of a TGG in a contemporary, consecutive, single-centre RP series and its association with adverse pathology. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: From January to August 2007, 800 eligible patients (no prior neoadjuvant hormonal therapy) underwent RP for clinically localised prostate cancer (pCA) in our institution. The presence of the third most prevalent Gleason pattern was documented, regardless of whether it was better or worse than the two predominant Gleason grades. MEASUREMENTS: The overall prevalence of a TGG was described. Uni- and multivariate logistic regression analyses tested the association between the presence of a TGG <5% versus >or=5% of the whole tumour volume and extracapsular extension (ECE), seminal vesicle invasion (SVI), positive surgical margins (PSM), and lymph node invasion (LNI). Subanalyses were performed to assess the impact of different TGGs at various Gleason scores. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A TGG was reported in 180 RP specimens (22.5%). In univariate analysis, the presence of a TGG >/=5% was significantly associated with ECE, SVI, PSM, and LNI (p<0.001). In multivariate analysis, a TGG >or=5% showed an independent association with ECE and PSM (p<0.05). Accordingly, in subanalyses, a significant association with adverse pathology was only documented if the amount of a TGG was at least 5% of the tumour volume. Our study is limited by the relatively low overall frequency of a TGG, thereby reducing the statistical expressiveness, especially for subanalyses.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings confirm the association of the presence of a TGG with adverse pathologic features. Further follow-up is needed to assess the prognostic impact of a TGG on the risk of BCR and overall survival following RP.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18718699     DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2008.08.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol        ISSN: 0302-2838            Impact factor:   20.096


  4 in total

1.  Clinical significance of prospectively assigned Gleason tertiary pattern 4 in contemporary Gleason score 3+3=6 prostate cancer.

Authors:  Chirag Doshi; Michael Vacchio; Kristopher Attwood; Christine Murekeyisoni; Diana C Mehedint; Shervin Badkhshan; Gissou Azabdaftari; Norbert Sule; Khurshid A Guru; James L Mohler; Eric C Kauffman
Journal:  Prostate       Date:  2016-02-16       Impact factor: 4.104

2.  Oncologic outcomes of patients with Gleason score 7 and tertiary Gleason pattern 5 after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Yi-Hsueh Leng; Won Jun Lee; Seung Ok Yang; Jeong Ki Lee; Tae Young Jung; Yun Beom Kim
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2013-09-10

3.  The 2019 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma.

Authors:  Geert J L H van Leenders; Theodorus H van der Kwast; David J Grignon; Andrew J Evans; Glen Kristiansen; Charlotte F Kweldam; Geert Litjens; Jesse K McKenney; Jonathan Melamed; Nicholas Mottet; Gladell P Paner; Hemamali Samaratunga; Ivo G Schoots; Jeffry P Simko; Toyonori Tsuzuki; Murali Varma; Anne Y Warren; Thomas M Wheeler; Sean R Williamson; Kenneth A Iczkowski
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2020-08       Impact factor: 6.298

4.  The validation of the 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grading system for patients with high-risk prostate cancer: a single-center retrospective study.

Authors:  Jiandong Liu; Jinge Zhao; Mengni Zhang; Ni Chen; Guangxi Sun; Yaojing Yang; Xingming Zhang; Junru Chen; Pengfei Shen; Ming Shi; Hao Zeng
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2019-07-12       Impact factor: 3.989

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.