Literature DB >> 20840549

Gleason score concordance on biopsy-confirmed prostate cancer: is pathological re-evaluation necessary prior to radical prostatectomy?

Matthew D Truesdale1, Philippa J Cheetham1, Andrew T Turk1, Samantha Sartori1, Gregory W Hruby1, Eion P Dinneen1, Mitchell C Benson1, Ketan K Badani1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: • Gleason sum from prostate biopsy (bGS) is an important tool in classifying severity of disease, ultimately influencing clinical management. • Commonly, pathology specimens are re-evaluated internally prior to surgery. • We evaluate agreement of bGS with prostatectomy Gleason sum (pGS) and the impact of re-grading on prediction of true underlying tumor architecture.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: • Retrospective analysis of men who underwent robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) by two surgeons from 2005-2009. Initial transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) biopsy demonstrated carcinoma at an outside lab. Specimens were re-evaluated by our GU pathologists prior to surgery. Biopsy data were correlated with pGS. • Kappa (κ) statistics for agreement and linear regression analyses were used for categorical variables. Coefficient of concordance was used for continuous variables.
RESULTS: • 100 patients had 331 positive biopsies. Agreement (κ) for bGS between outside labs and our pathologists was 0.55 (p < 0.001). • Internal read was twice as likely to upgrade vs. downgrade outside bGS (23% vs. 11%). • When re-evaluation resulted in a change in bGS, agreement with pGS was κ= 0.29, vs. κ=-0.04 for agreement of initial (outside) bGS with pGS. • When no change was made to bGS, agreement with pGS was κ= 0.40 (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: • Good reproducibility seen between outside labs and our institution on bGS. Internal pathology re-reads correlated better with pGS than original community bGS. When re-reads result in a change in bGS, there is a marked improvement in prediction of underlying tumor architecture confirming the value of re-evaluating all external biopsies prior to definitive surgery.
© 2010 THE AUTHORS. JOURNAL COMPILATION © 2010 BJU INTERNATIONAL.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20840549     DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09570.x

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


  10 in total

1.  The value of second-opinion pathology diagnoses on prostate biopsies from patients referred for management of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Al B Barqawi; Ruslan Turcanu; Eduard J Gamito; Scott M Lucia; Colin I O'Donnell; E David Crawford; David D La Rosa; Francisco G La Rosa
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Pathol       Date:  2011-06-12

2.  Temporal changes in the pathologic assessment of prostate cancer.

Authors:  M Scott Lucia; Adrie van Bokhoven
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2012-12

Review 3.  [Focal therapy for prostate cancer in Germany - 2014 status].

Authors:  A Roosen; R Ganzer; B Hadaschik; J Köllermann; A Blana; T Henkel; A-B Liehr; D Baumunk; S Machtens; G Salomon; L Sentker; U Witsch; K U Köhrmann; M Schostak
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 0.639

4.  Factors predicting pathological upgrading after prostatectomy in patients with Gleason grade group 1 prostate cancer based on opinion-matched biopsy specimens.

Authors:  Yuki Maruyama; Takuya Sadahira; Motoo Araki; Yosuke Mitsui; Koichiro Wada; Acosta Gonzalez Herik Rodrigo; Kazuaki Munetomo; Yasuyuki Kobayashi; Masami Watanabe; Hiroyuki Yanai; Toyohiko Watanabe; Yasutomo Nasu
Journal:  Mol Clin Oncol       Date:  2020-02-10

5.  Relative Contribution of Sampling and Grading to the Quality of Prostate Biopsy: Results from a Single High-volume Institution.

Authors:  Carlo Andrea Bravi; Emily Vertosick; Amy Tin; Simone Scuderi; Giuseppe Fallara; Giuseppe Rosiello; Elio Mazzone; Marco Bandini; Giorgio Gandaglia; Nicola Fossati; Massimo Freschi; Rodolfo Montironi; Alberto Briganti; Francesco Montorsi; Andrew Vickers
Journal:  Eur Urol Oncol       Date:  2018-11-24

6.  Persistent Homology for the Quantitative Evaluation of Architectural Features in Prostate Cancer Histology.

Authors:  Peter Lawson; Andrew B Sholl; J Quincy Brown; Brittany Terese Fasy; Carola Wenk
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-02-04       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Development of a highly sensitive digital PCR assay to quantify long non-coding RNA MYU in urine samples which exhibited great potential as an alternative diagnostic biomarker for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Di Liu; Huming Yin; Yong Wang; Yang Cao; Jian Yin; Jianping Zhang; Huancai Yin; Xiaojun Zhao
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2021-10

8.  A second opinion pathology review improves the diagnostic concordance between prostate cancer biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens.

Authors:  Takanori Maehara; Takuya Sadahira; Yuki Maruyama; Koichiro Wada; Motoo Araki; Masami Watanabe; Toyohiko Watanabe; Hiroyuki Yanai; Yasutomo Nasu
Journal:  Urol Ann       Date:  2021-03-04

9.  Commentary: Automated Diagnosis and Gleason Grading of Prostate Cancer - Are Artificial Intelligence Systems Ready for Prime Time?

Authors:  Anil V Parwani
Journal:  J Pathol Inform       Date:  2019-12-23

10.  Reassessment of Prostate Biopsy Specimens for Patients Referred for Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy Rarely Influences Surgical Planning.

Authors:  Robert J Hoekstra; Ward J H Goossens; Alexander Beulens; Hilde van Herk; Brigiet M Hoevenaars; Joost de Baaij; Diederik M Somford; J P Michiel Sedelaar; Jean-Paul A van Basten; H J Eric J Vrijhof
Journal:  Eur Urol Open Sci       Date:  2021-04-27
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.