Literature DB >> 19154461

Concordance between Gleason scores of needle biopsies and radical prostatectomy specimens: a population-based study.

Rune Kvåle1, Bjørn Møller, Rolf Wahlqvist, Sophie D Fosså, Aasmund Berner, Christer Busch, Anne E Kyrdalen, Aud Svindland, Trond Viset, Ole J Halvorsen.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To study the concordance between the Gleason scores of needle biopsies and radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens in a population-based registry, to clarify whether the concordance depends on the annual number of RP specimens assessed in the pathology unit, and to identify preoperative clinical factors that predict upgrading from a Gleason score of <or=6 in the biopsy to >or=7 in the RP specimen. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Through the Cancer Registry of Norway, we identified 1116 patients with available Gleason scores from biopsy and RP specimens. Concordance was evaluated using the kappa coefficient, and predictors of concordance were assessed in univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses.
RESULTS: The Gleason scores were identical in biopsy and RP specimens in 591 of the 1116 (53%) patients. The biopsy-based Gleason score more often under-graded (38%) than over-graded (9%) the RP-based Gleason score. Pathology units that examined >40 RP specimens annually had a higher concordance between the Gleason score in the biopsy and RP specimen than did lower-volume units. The rate of upgrading from a Gleason score of <or=6 in the biopsy to >or=7 in the RP specimen increased with increasing preoperative prostate-specific antigen serum levels, and with increasing intervals between biopsy and RP.
CONCLUSIONS: The concordance in Gleason score between biopsy and RP was highest among the pathology departments that regularly evaluated RP specimens. Careful consideration of clinical factors and biopsy grading might improve the identification of patients considered as suitable for active surveillance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19154461     DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2008.08255.x

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


  65 in total

1.  Prostate cancer: predicting tumor aggressiveness using DWI-guided biopsy.

Authors:  Chan Kyo Kim; Satoru Takahashi
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2011-10-25       Impact factor: 14.432

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.  Prostatic ductal adenocarcinoma: an aggressive tumour variant unrecognized on T2 weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

Authors:  Nicola Schieda; Niamh Coffey; Previn Gulavita; Omran Al-Dandan; Wael Shabana; Trevor A Flood
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-04-01       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  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

5.  Restriction spectrum imaging improves MRI-based prostate cancer detection.

Authors:  Kevin C McCammack; Natalie M Schenker-Ahmed; Nathan S White; Shaun R Best; Robert M Marks; Jared Heimbigner; Christopher J Kane; J Kellogg Parsons; Joshua M Kuperman; Hauke Bartsch; Rahul S Desikan; Rebecca A Rakow-Penner; Michael A Liss; Daniel J A Margolis; Steven S Raman; Ahmed Shabaik; Anders M Dale; David S Karow
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2016-05

Review 6.  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

7.  Population-based study of grade progression in patients who harboured Gleason 3 + 3.

Authors:  Fanny Sampurno; Arul Earnest; Jeremy Millar; Mark Frydenberg; Declan Murphy; Warwick Delprado; Sue Evans
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2017-05-12       Impact factor: 4.226

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

9.  Is time from diagnosis to radical prostatectomy associated with oncological outcomes?

Authors:  Kirsti Aas; Sophie Dorothea Fosså; Rune Kvåle; Bjørn Møller; Tor Åge Myklebust; Ljiljana Vlatkovic; Stig Müller; Viktor Berge
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-11-27       Impact factor: 4.226

10.  The factors predicting upgrading of prostate cancer by using International Society for Urological Pathology (ISUP) 2014 Gleason grading system.

Authors:  Turgay Turan; Berrin Güçlüer; Özgür Efiloğlu; Furkan Şendoğan; Ramazan Gökhan Atış; Turhan Çaşkurlu; Asıf Yıldırım
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2018-09-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.