Literature DB >> 23301125

Biochemical recurrence in Gleason score 7 prostate cancer in korean men: significance of the primary Gleason grade.

Yun Kwan Ro1, Sangchul Lee, Chang Wook Jeong, Sung Kyu Hong, Seok Soo Byun, Sang Eun Lee.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of primary Gleason grade in Gleason score (GS) 7 prostate cancer on biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy in Korean men.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed records of 1,026 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital between November 2003 and June 2009. We excluded patients who had received neoadjuvant therapy and had positive resection margins. Finally, 295 and 113 patients with GS 3+4 and GS 4+3, respectively, were included in this study. All patients were followed for at least 2 years.
RESULTS: Of the 408 GS 7 patients, 295 (72.3%) were 3+4 and 113 (27.7%) were 4+3. Mean serum prostate specific antigen level in primary Gleason 3 was 8.99 ng/ml and primary Gleason 4 was 11.11 ng/ml. Patients with GS 4+3 were more likely to have extracapsular extension (30.1% vs. 17.6%, p<0.010) and lymphatic invasion (16.8% vs. 7.1%, p<0.005). After 2 years follow up BCR was detected in a total of 40 patients. In GS 7 with primary Gleason 3, BCR occurred in 15 (5.08%) patients while 20 (17.70%) showed BCR in GS 7 with primary Gleason 4.
CONCLUSIONS: In this study of a large, single center cohort of Korean men with GS 7 prostate cancer a noticeable difference in BCR was seen. Primary Gleason grade 4 have a higher risk of BCR compared to primary Gleason grade 3. This information may be useful when counseling patients on their prognosis and further management options.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biopsy; Prostate; Prostatectomy

Year:  2012        PMID: 23301125      PMCID: PMC3531634          DOI: 10.4111/kju.2012.53.12.826

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Korean J Urol        ISSN: 2005-6737


  21 in total

Review 1.  International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Handling and Staging of Radical Prostatectomy Specimens. Working group 3: extraprostatic extension, lymphovascular invasion and locally advanced disease.

Authors:  Cristina Magi-Galluzzi; Andrew J Evans; Brett Delahunt; Jonathan I Epstein; David F Griffiths; Theo H van der Kwast; Rodolfo Montironi; Thomas M Wheeler; John R Srigley; Lars L Egevad; Peter A Humphrey
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2010-08-27       Impact factor: 7.842

Review 2.  International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Handling and Staging of Radical Prostatectomy Specimens. Working group 4: seminal vesicles and lymph nodes.

Authors:  Daniel M Berney; Thomas M Wheeler; David J Grignon; Jonathan I Epstein; David F Griffiths; Peter A Humphrey; Theo van der Kwast; Rodolfo Montironi; Brett Delahunt; Lars Egevad; John R Srigley
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2010-09-03       Impact factor: 7.842

Review 3.  International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Handling and Staging of Radical Prostatectomy Specimens. Working group 1: specimen handling.

Authors:  Hemamali Samaratunga; Rodolfo Montironi; Lawrence True; Jonathan I Epstein; David F Griffiths; Peter A Humphrey; Theo van der Kwast; Thomas M Wheeler; John R Srigley; Brett Delahunt; Lars Egevad
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2010-09-10       Impact factor: 7.842

4.  Predicting 15-year prostate cancer specific mortality after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Scott E Eggener; Peter T Scardino; Patrick C Walsh; Misop Han; Alan W Partin; Bruce J Trock; Zhaoyong Feng; David P Wood; James A Eastham; Ofer Yossepowitch; Danny M Rabah; Michael W Kattan; Changhong Yu; Eric A Klein; Andrew J Stephenson
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2011-01-15       Impact factor: 7.450

5.  Prognostic significance of Gleason score 3+4 versus Gleason score 4+3 tumor at radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  T Y Chan; A W Partin; P C Walsh; J I Epstein
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2000-11-01       Impact factor: 2.649

6.  Use of Gleason score, prostate specific antigen, seminal vesicle and margin status to predict biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  M L Blute; E J Bergstralh; A Iocca; B Scherer; H Zincke
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  Primary Gleason pattern as a predictor of disease progression in gleason score 7 prostate cancer: a multivariate analysis of 823 men treated with radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  C M Herman; M W Kattan; M Ohori; P T Scardino; T M Wheeler
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 6.394

8.  Prostate cancer specific mortality and Gleason 7 disease differences in prostate cancer outcomes between cases with Gleason 4 + 3 and Gleason 3 + 4 tumors in a population based cohort.

Authors:  Jonathan L Wright; Claudia A Salinas; Daniel W Lin; Suzanne Kolb; Joseph Koopmeiners; Ziding Feng; Janet L Stanford
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Cancer statistics, 2009.

Authors:  Ahmedin Jemal; Rebecca Siegel; Elizabeth Ward; Yongping Hao; Jiaquan Xu; Michael J Thun
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2009-05-27       Impact factor: 508.702

10.  Gleason score and lethal prostate cancer: does 3 + 4 = 4 + 3?

Authors:  Jennifer R Stark; Sven Perner; Meir J Stampfer; Jennifer A Sinnott; Stephen Finn; Anna S Eisenstein; Jing Ma; Michelangelo Fiorentino; Tobias Kurth; Massimo Loda; Edward L Giovannucci; Mark A Rubin; Lorelei A Mucci
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-05-11       Impact factor: 44.544

View more
  9 in total

1.  Global transcriptome analysis of formalin-fixed prostate cancer specimens identifies biomarkers of disease recurrence.

Authors:  Qi Long; Jianpeng Xu; Adeboye O Osunkoya; Soma Sannigrahi; Brent A Johnson; Wei Zhou; Theresa Gillespie; Jong Y Park; Robert K Nam; Linda Sugar; Aleksandra Stanimirovic; Arun K Seth; John A Petros; Carlos S Moreno
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2014-04-08       Impact factor: 12.701

2.  Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase 1 protein expression in normal and neoplastic prostatic tissue.

Authors:  M Salemi; A Galia; F Fraggetta; C La Corte; P Pepe; S La Vignera; G Improta; P Bosco; A E Calogero
Journal:  Eur J Histochem       Date:  2013-04-15       Impact factor: 3.188

3.  Do positive surgical margins predict biochemical recurrence in all patients without adjuvant therapy after radical prostatectomy?

Authors:  Jun Woo Lee; Jae Hyun Ryu; Yun Beom Kim; Seung Ok Yang; Jeong Kee Lee; Tae Young Jung
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2013-08-07

4.  Increased prostate cancer specific mortality following radical prostatectomy in men presenting with voiding symptoms-A whole of population study.

Authors:  Anthony D Ta; Nathan P Papa; Nathan Lawrentschuk; Jeremy L Millar; Rodney Syme; Graham G Giles; Damien M Bolton
Journal:  Prostate Int       Date:  2015-07-17

5.  The role of 3-tesla diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in selecting prostate cancer patients for active surveillance.

Authors:  Chang Wook Jeong; Yong Hyun Park; Sung Ii Hwang; Sangchul Lee; Seong Jin Jeong; Sung Kyu Hong; Seok-Soo Byun; Hak Jong Lee; Sang Eun Lee
Journal:  Prostate Int       Date:  2014-12-30

6.  Impact of positive surgical margin on biochemical recurrence in localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Wonchul Lee; Bumjin Lim; Yoon Soo Kyung; Choung-Soo Kim
Journal:  Prostate Int       Date:  2021-03-09

7.  Oncologic outcomes of patients with Gleason score 7 and tertiary Gleason pattern 5 after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Yi-Hsueh Leng; Won Jun Lee; Seung Ok Yang; Jeong Ki Lee; Tae Young Jung; Yun Beom Kim
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2013-09-10

8.  Charlson comorbidity index is an important prognostic factor for long-term survival outcomes in Korean men with prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Joo Yong Lee; Dae Hun Lee; Nam Hoon Cho; Koon Ho Rha; Young Deuk Choi; Sung Joon Hong; Seung Choul Yang; Kang Su Cho
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 2.759

9.  Prediction of prostate cancer recurrence using quantitative phase imaging: Validation on a general population.

Authors:  Shamira Sridharan; Virgilia Macias; Krishnarao Tangella; Jonathan Melamed; Emily Dube; Max Xiangtian Kong; André Kajdacsy-Balla; Gabriel Popescu
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-09-23       Impact factor: 4.379

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.