Literature DB >> 20414754

Nuclear grading versus Gleason grading in small samples containing prostate cancer: a tissue microarray study.

Daniel Wittschieber1, Jens Köllermann, Thorsten Schlomm, Guido Sauter, Andreas Erbersdobler.   

Abstract

In this study we addressed the question whether nuclear grading in very small samples of prostate cancer would provide additional prognostic information as compared to Gleason grading. Therefore, a tissue microarray (TMA) was constructed comprising a total number of 3,261 prostate cancers. Blinded for all clinical and pathological data, the TMA spots (diameter 0.6 mm) containing cancer were graded with two systems: First, for nuclear features according to a modified Fuhrman grading system, and second, by using a simplified Gleason system. The results were compared with tumour stage, tumour grade and follow-up data. Although nuclear grading could easily be performed on the TMA spots, no correlation was found with tumour stage, grade or PSA recurrence after prostatectomy. However, Gleason grading, even when performed on the small TMA spots, provided significant prognostic information. Correlation with Gleason scores determined in the complete prostatectomy specimens showed moderate agreement in low-grade (score ≤ 6) or intermediate (score = 7) tumours, but poor agreement with high-grade (score ≥ 8) tumours. In conclusion, the Fuhrman grading of prostate cancer does not appear to be of any prognostic importance so the Gleason grading remains the system of choice, even in tumour specimens smaller than 1 mm.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20414754     DOI: 10.1007/s12253-010-9270-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pathol Oncol Res        ISSN: 1219-4956            Impact factor:   3.201


  29 in total

1.  Prediction of prognosis for prostatic adenocarcinoma by combined histological grading and clinical staging.

Authors:  D F Gleason; G T Mellinger
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1974-01       Impact factor: 7.450

2.  Histologic grading of primary prostatic cancer: a new approach to an old problem.

Authors:  J F Gaeta; J E Asirwatham; G Miller; G P Murphy
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1980-05       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  Lack of association of prostate carcinoma nuclear grading with prostate specific antigen recurrence after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  M Zhou; S Hayasaka; J M Taylor; R Shah; T Proverbs-Singh; S Manley; M A Rubin
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 4.  Histologic grading of prostate cancer: a perspective.

Authors:  D F Gleason
Journal:  Hum Pathol       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 3.466

5.  Classification of prostatic carcinomas.

Authors:  D F Gleason
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Rep       Date:  1966-03

Review 6.  Pathological and molecular aspects of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Angelo M DeMarzo; William G Nelson; William B Isaacs; Jonathan I Epstein
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2003-03-15       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Quantitative alterations in nuclear structure predict prostate carcinoma distant metastasis and death in men with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Masood A Khan; Patrick C Walsh; M Craig Miller; Wesley D Bales; Jonathan I Epstein; Leslie A Mangold; Alan W Partin; Robert W Veltri
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2003-12-15       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  Combined histologic grading of prostatic carcinoma.

Authors:  A Böcking; J Kiehn; M Heinzel-Wach
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1982-07-15       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  Prediction of lymphatic metastases by Gleason histologic grading in prostatic cancer.

Authors:  A I Sagalowsky; H Milam; L R Reveley; F G Silva
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1982-11       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  Is tumor volume an independent predictor of progression following radical prostatectomy? A multivariate analysis of 185 clinical stage B adenocarcinomas of the prostate with 5 years of followup.

Authors:  J I Epstein; M Carmichael; A W Partin; P C Walsh
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1993-06       Impact factor: 7.450

View more
  4 in total

1.  Improving the reproducibility of the Gleason scores in small foci of prostate cancer--suggestion of diagnostic criteria for glandular fusion.

Authors:  B Helpap; G Kristiansen; M Beer; J Köllermann; U Oehler; A Pogrebniak; Ch Fellbaum
Journal:  Pathol Oncol Res       Date:  2011-12-17       Impact factor: 3.201

2.  Differential expression of peroxiredoxins in prostate cancer: consistent upregulation of PRDX3 and PRDX4.

Authors:  Anamika Basu; Hiya Banerjee; Heather Rojas; Shannalee R Martinez; Sourav Roy; Zhenyu Jia; Michael B Lilly; Marino De León; Carlos A Casiano
Journal:  Prostate       Date:  2010-10-28       Impact factor: 4.104

3.  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

4.  Anorectal functions after perineal and retropubic radical prostatectomy - a prospective clinical and anal manometric assessment.

Authors:  Huseyin Aydemir; Selami Albayrak; Onder Canguven; Rahim Horuz; Cemal Goktas; Cihangir Cetinel; Adnan Giral
Journal:  Arch Med Sci       Date:  2011-03-08       Impact factor: 3.318

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.