Literature DB >> 22674220

The quantitative Gleason score improves prostate cancer risk assessment.

Adam C Reese1, Janet E Cowan, Jonathan S Brajtbord, Catherine R Harris, Peter R Carroll, Matthew R Cooperberg.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In the current study, the authors propose the quantitative Gleason score (qGS), a modification of the current Gleason grading system for prostate cancer, based on the weighted average of Gleason patterns present in the pathology specimen. They hypothesize that the qGS can improve prostate cancer risk stratification and help prevent the overtreatment of patients with clinically indolent tumors.
METHODS: The qGS was applied to patients in the University of California San Francisco urologic oncology database with tumors determined to have a GS of 7 on prostate biopsy or final pathology after radical prostatectomy (RP). Using multivariable logistic regression, Cox proportional hazards regression, receiver operating characteristic (ROC), and decision curve analyses, the ability of qGS to predict pathological GS and the risk of disease recurrence after RP was assessed.
RESULTS: A total of 225 men were included in the analysis of biopsy specimens and 618 men were included in the assessment of RP specimens. Compared with traditional Gleason scoring, the qGS improved concordance between biopsy and pathological GS on decision curve and ROC analyses (area under the curve ROC curve, 0.79 vs 0.71). On regression analysis, the qGS of biopsy specimens was found to be significantly associated with pathological grade after RP (hazard ratio [HR], 1.78; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.49-2.12) and the qGS of RP specimens was significantly associated with the risk of biochemical disease recurrence after RP (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.04-1.24).
CONCLUSIONS: The qGS, a simple modification of the current Gleason system, appears to improve the correlation between biopsy and pathological GS, as well as the prediction of biochemical disease recurrence after RP. This scoring system may allow more men to pursue active surveillance, thereby avoiding the morbidity of prostate cancer treatment modalities.
Copyright © 2012 American Cancer Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22674220     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.27670

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  14 in total

1.  Whole-lesion apparent diffusion coefficient metrics as a marker of percentage Gleason 4 component within Gleason 7 prostate cancer at radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Michael J Triolo; Jonathan Melamed; Henry Rusinek; Samir S Taneja; Fang-Ming Deng
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2014-02-25       Impact factor: 4.813

2.  Role of active surveillance in the management of localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Allison S Glass; Matthew R Cooperberg; Maxwell V Meng; Peter R Carroll
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2012-12

3.  Evaluating the Outcomes of Active Surveillance in Grade Group 2 Prostate Cancer: Prospective Results from the Canary PASS Cohort.

Authors:  Adrian J Waisman Malaret; Peter Chang; Kehao Zhu; Yingye Zheng; Lisa F Newcomb; Menghan Liu; Jesse K McKenney; James D Brooks; Peter Carroll; Atreya Dash; Christopher P Filson; Martin E Gleave; Michael Liss; Frances M Martin; Todd M Morgan; Peter S Nelson; Daniel W Lin; Andrew A Wagner
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2021-12-02       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 4.  Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Laurence Klotz
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 3.092

5.  The effect of differing Gleason scores at biopsy on the odds of upgrading and the risk of death from prostate cancer.

Authors:  John G Phillips; Ayal A Aizer; Ming-Hui Chen; Danjie Zhang; Michelle S Hirsch; Jerome P Richie; Clare M Tempany; Stephen Williams; John V Hegde; Marian J Loffredo; Anthony V D'Amico
Journal:  Clin Genitourin Cancer       Date:  2014-03-03       Impact factor: 2.872

6.  Guidelines on processing and reporting of prostate biopsies: the 2013 update of the pathology committee of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC).

Authors:  T Van der Kwast; L Bubendorf; C Mazerolles; M R Raspollini; G J Van Leenders; C-G Pihl; P Kujala
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2013-08-06       Impact factor: 4.064

7.  Size-adjusted Quantitative Gleason Score as a Predictor of Biochemical Recurrence after Radical Prostatectomy.

Authors:  Fang-Ming Deng; Nicholas M Donin; Ruth Pe Benito; Jonathan Melamed; Julien Le Nobin; Ming Zhou; Sisi Ma; Jinhua Wang; Herbert Lepor
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2015-10-30       Impact factor: 20.096

8.  Tailoring Intensity of Active Surveillance for Low-Risk Prostate Cancer Based on Individualized Prediction of Risk Stability.

Authors:  Matthew R Cooperberg; Yingye Zheng; Anna V Faino; Lisa F Newcomb; Kehao Zhu; Janet E Cowan; James D Brooks; Atreya Dash; Martin E Gleave; Frances Martin; Todd M Morgan; Peter S Nelson; Ian M Thompson; Andrew A Wagner; Peter R Carroll; Daniel W Lin
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2020-10-08       Impact factor: 31.777

9.  Identification of proteomic biomarkers predicting prostate cancer aggressiveness and lethality despite biopsy-sampling error.

Authors:  M Shipitsin; C Small; S Choudhury; E Giladi; S Friedlander; J Nardone; S Hussain; A D Hurley; C Ernst; Y E Huang; H Chang; T P Nifong; D L Rimm; J Dunyak; M Loda; D M Berman; P Blume-Jensen
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2014-07-17       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  Prostate cancer risk inflation as a consequence of image-targeted biopsy of the prostate: a computer simulation study.

Authors:  Nicola L Robertson; Yipeng Hu; Hashim U Ahmed; Alex Freeman; Dean Barratt; Mark Emberton
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2013-01-03       Impact factor: 20.096

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.