Literature DB >> 19076142

Usefulness of the 2005 International Society of Urologic Pathology Gleason grading system in prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens.

Hiroji Uemura1, Koji Hoshino, Takeshi Sasaki, Yasuhide Miyoshi, Hitoshi Ishiguro, Yoshiaki Inayama, Yoshinobu Kubota.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the 2005 International Society of Urologic Pathology (ISUP) Gleason Grading Consensus is clinically more useful than the conventional Gleason score (CGS), we compared the CGS and ISUP GS (IGS) of prostate needle biopsy (NB) and radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens, and evaluated the prognostic value of the ISUP GS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Of 250 patients undergoing RP, 103 with clinical stage T1-2 N0M0 were enrolled. Pathological tumour grades of NB and RP specimens were classified according to CGS by experienced pathologists in the central pathology department of our hospital, and retrospectively according to IGS by one uropathologist at the central pathology department of another hospital. All patients had RP with no neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy. We analysed associations of CGS and IGS with biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS) after RP.
RESULTS: The concordance rates between NB and RP specimens by CGS and IGS were 64.1% and 69.9%. Under-grading and over-grading rates by CGS and IGS were 28.2% and 7.8% for NB, and 27.2% and 2.9% for RP, respectively. There was a significant difference in the over-grading rate between CGS and IGS (P = 0.026). When CGS and IGS of NB and RP specimens were compared, the concordance rates were similar, at 67% and 69.9%. The IGS was higher, by 15.6% in NB and by 20.4% in RP specimens, than CGS. Patients were divided into three groups based on IGS of NB specimens (< or =6, 7 and > or =8). These groups differed significantly in BRFS after RP (P = 0.022); CGS showed no such association.
CONCLUSIONS: The IGS of NB specimens were significantly associated with BRFS after RP. The ISUP system is thus clinically useful for determining the most appropriate treatments for patients with early-stage prostate cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19076142     DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2008.08197.x

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


  18 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.  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

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

Review 4.  Biomarker research in prostate cancer--towards utility, not futility.

Authors:  Sheng Fei Oon; Stephen R Pennington; John M Fitzpatrick; R William G Watson
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 14.432

5.  [Documentation quality of histopathology reports of prostate needle biopsies: a snapshot].

Authors:  S Biesterfeld
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 0.639

6.  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

7.  The value of the 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) modified Gleason grading system as a predictor of biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Athanase Billis; Maisa M Q Quintal; Luciana Meirelles; Leandro L L Freitas; Larissa B E Costa; João F L Bonfitto; Betina L Diniz; Paola H Poletto; Luís A Magna; Ubirajara Ferreira
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2013-10-06       Impact factor: 2.370

8.  The Significance of Accurate Determination of Gleason Score for Therapeutic Options and Prognosis of Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Burkhard Helpap; Daniel Ringli; Jens Tonhauser; Immanuel Poser; Jürgen Breul; Heidrun Gevensleben; Hans-Helge Seifert
Journal:  Pathol Oncol Res       Date:  2015-11-12       Impact factor: 3.201

9.  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

Review 10.  The evolving Gleason grading system.

Authors:  Ni Chen; Qiao Zhou
Journal:  Chin J Cancer Res       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 5.087

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.