Literature DB >> 18782303

Prostate biopsy clinical and pathological variables that predict significant grading changes in patients with intermediate and high grade prostate cancer.

Ayman S Moussa1, Jianbo Li, Meghan Soriano, Eric A Klein, Fei Dong, J Stephen Jones.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To identify the clinical and pathological variables that predict pathological changes in the significant proportion of men with prostate cancer who have an intermediate- or high-grade biopsy Gleason score (GS) of >or=7 and who are upgraded or downgraded on interpretation of radical prostatectomy (RP) pathological specimens, as GS is critical in treatment decisions. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 1129 patients who had RP after a biopsy showing a GS of >or=7, at our institution, from 2000 to 2007. Complete relevant clinical information was available for all patients. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify predictors of pathological grading changes.
RESULTS: The overall mean age was 61 years, with median prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of 6 ng/mL. Of the 1129 patients, the surgical GS was upgraded in 296 (26.2%), downgraded in 210 (18.6%), and remained the same in 623 (55.2%). Factors predicting a surgical GS upgrade were a higher PSA level (P = 0.005), presence of perineural invasion (P = 0.043), absence of inflammation (P < 0.001), and absence of associated high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (P = 0.02). In an analysis of pathological variables the number of positive cores (P = 0.033) was predictor of upgrading. Large prostate volume (P = 0.004) and low maximum percentage cancer in any core (P = 0.001) were predictors of downgrading.
CONCLUSION: Men with a higher PSA level, perineural invasion and high-volume cancer at biopsy are most likely to be upgraded, while men with a large prostate volume and low-volume cancer at biopsy are more likely to be downgraded. These findings have implications for men with prostate cancer managed without confirmation by RP of their true GS.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18782303     DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2008.08059.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  33 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.  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

3.  Characteristics of modern Gleason 9/10 prostate adenocarcinoma: a single tertiary centre experience within the Republic of Ireland.

Authors:  F O'Kelly; S Elamin; A Cahill; P Aherne; J White; J Buckley; K N O'Regan; A Brady; D G Power; M F O'Brien; P Sweeney; N Mayer; P J Kelly
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2013-10-16       Impact factor: 4.226

4.  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

5.  Multiparametric 3T MRI for the prediction of pathological downgrading after radical prostatectomy in patients with biopsy-proven Gleason score 3 + 4 prostate cancer.

Authors:  Tatsuo Gondo; Hedvig Hricak; Evis Sala; Junting Zheng; Chaya S Moskowitz; Melanie Bernstein; James A Eastham; Hebert Alberto Vargas
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-08-07       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Predicting the risk of harboring high-grade disease for patients diagnosed with prostate cancer scored as Gleason ≤ 6 on biopsy cores.

Authors:  Thomas Seisen; Françoise Roudot-Thoraval; Pierre Olivier Bosset; Aurélien Beaugerie; Yves Allory; Dimitri Vordos; Claude-Clément Abbou; Alexandre De La Taille; Laurent Salomon
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-07-02       Impact factor: 4.226

7.  The Modulating Effects of Benign Prostate Enlargement Medications on Upgrading Predictors in Patients with Gleason 6 at Biopsy.

Authors:  Seyed Behzad Jazayeri; Young S Kwon; Russell McBride; Michael Leapman; Shemille Collingwood; Adele Hobbs; David B Samadi
Journal:  Curr Urol       Date:  2017-05-30

8.  Predictive factors of Gleason score upgrading in localized and locally advanced prostate cancer diagnosed by prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Seung Jin Moon; Sung Yul Park; Tchun Yong Lee
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2010-10-21

9.  Clinical and pathological variables that predict changes in tumour grade after radical prostatectomy in patients with prostate cancer.

Authors:  Stavros Sfoungaristos; Petros Perimenis
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2013 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.862

10.  Cribriform morphology predicts upstaging after radical prostatectomy in patients with Gleason score 3 + 4 = 7 prostate cancer at transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided needle biopsy.

Authors:  Daniel T Keefe; Nicola Schieda; Soufiane El Hallani; Rodney H Breau; Chris Morash; Susan J Robertson; Kien T Mai; Eric C Belanger; Trevor A Flood
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2015-07-31       Impact factor: 4.064

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.