Literature DB >> 26325671

Validation of International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grading for prostatic adenocarcinoma in thin core biopsies using TROG 03.04 'RADAR' trial clinical data.

B Delahunt1, L Egevad, J R Srigley, A Steigler, J D Murray, C Atkinson, J Matthews, G Duchesne, N A Spry, D Christie, D Joseph, J Attia, J W Denham.   

Abstract

In 2014 a consensus conference convened by the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) adopted amendments to the criteria for Gleason grading and scoring (GS) for prostatic adenocarcinoma. The meeting defined a modified grading system based on 5 grading categories (grade 1, GS 3+3; grade 2, GS 3+4; grade 3, GS 4+3; grade 4, GS 8; grade 5, GS 9-10). In this study we have evaluated the prognostic significance of ISUP grading in 496 patients enrolled in the TROG 03.04 RADAR Trial. There were 19 grade 1, 118 grade 2, 193 grade 3, 88 grade 4 and 79 grade 5 tumours in the series, with follow-up for a minimum of 6.5 years. On follow-up 76 patients experienced distant progression of disease, 171 prostate specific antigen (PSA) progression and 39 prostate cancer deaths. In contrast to the 2005 modified Gleason system (MGS), the hazards of the distant and PSA progression endpoints, relative to grade 2, were significantly greater for grades 3, 4 and 5 of the 2014 ISUP grading scheme. Comparison of predictive ability utilising Harrell's concordance index, showed 2014 ISUP grading to significantly out-perform 2005 MGS grading for each of the three clinical endpoints.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26325671     DOI: 10.1097/PAT.0000000000000318

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pathology        ISSN: 0031-3025            Impact factor:   5.306


  13 in total

Review 1.  One is the new six: The International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) patient-focused approach to Gleason grading.

Authors:  John R Srigley; Brett Delahunt; Lars Egevad; Hemamali Samaratunga; John Yaxley; Andrew J Evans
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2016 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 1.862

2.  Prognostic value of the new Grade Groups in Prostate Cancer: a multi-institutional European validation study.

Authors:  R Mathieu; M Moschini; B Beyer; K M Gust; T Seisen; A Briganti; P Karakiewicz; C Seitz; L Salomon; A de la Taille; M Rouprêt; M Graefen; S F Shariat
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2017-01-10       Impact factor: 5.554

Review 3.  Histopathology of Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Peter A Humphrey
Journal:  Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med       Date:  2017-10-03       Impact factor: 6.915

4.  Histopathological Study of the Prostate Cancer Growth Patterns in Relation with the Grading Systems.

Authors:  Tudor Cristian Timotei Popescu; Alex Emilian Stepan; Mirela Marinela Florescu; Cristiana Eugenia Simionescu
Journal:  Curr Health Sci J       Date:  2022-03-31

5.  Oncological outcomes in an Australian cohort according to the new prostate cancer grading groupings.

Authors:  K R Beckmann; A D Vincent; M E O'Callaghan; P Cohen; S Chang; M Borg; S M Evans; D M Roder; K L Moretti
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2017-08-10       Impact factor: 4.430

6.  Risk factors for progression to castration-resistant prostate cancer in metastatic prostate cancer patients.

Authors:  Ting-Ting Lin; Ye-Hui Chen; Yu-Peng Wu; Shao-Zhan Chen; Xiao-Dong Li; Yun-Zhi Lin; Shao-Hao Chen; Qing-Shui Zheng; Yong Wei; Ning Xu; Xue-Yi Xue
Journal:  J Cancer       Date:  2019-09-07       Impact factor: 4.207

7.  The current status of renal cell carcinoma and prostate carcinoma grading.

Authors:  Brett Delahunt; Lars Egevad; John Yaxley; Hemamali Samaratunga
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2018 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.541

8.  Predictive efficacy of the 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology Gleason grading system in initially diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer.

Authors:  Guang-Xi Sun; Peng-Fei Shen; Xing-Ming Zhang; Jing Gong; Hao-Jun Gui; Kun-Peng Shu; Jiang-Dong Liu; Jinge Zhao; Yao-Jing Yang; Xue-Qin Chen; Ni Chen; Hao Zeng
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2017 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.285

9.  The validation of the 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grading system for patients with high-risk prostate cancer: a single-center retrospective study.

Authors:  Jiandong Liu; Jinge Zhao; Mengni Zhang; Ni Chen; Guangxi Sun; Yaojing Yang; Xingming Zhang; Junru Chen; Pengfei Shen; Ming Shi; Hao Zeng
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2019-07-12       Impact factor: 3.989

10.  Identification of areas of grading difficulties in prostate cancer and comparison with artificial intelligence assisted grading.

Authors:  Lars Egevad; Daniela Swanberg; Brett Delahunt; Peter Ström; Kimmo Kartasalo; Henrik Olsson; Dan M Berney; David G Bostwick; Andrew J Evans; Peter A Humphrey; Kenneth A Iczkowski; James G Kench; Glen Kristiansen; Katia R M Leite; Jesse K McKenney; Jon Oxley; Chin-Chen Pan; Hemamali Samaratunga; John R Srigley; Hiroyuki Takahashi; Toyonori Tsuzuki; Theo van der Kwast; Murali Varma; Ming Zhou; Mark Clements; Martin Eklund
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2020-06-15       Impact factor: 4.064

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.