Literature DB >> 27313123

Extreme Gleason Upgrading From Biopsy to Radical Prostatectomy: A Population-based Analysis.

Brian R Winters1, Jonathan L Wright2, Sarah K Holt3, Daniel W Lin2, William J Ellis3, Bruce L Dalkin3, George R Schade3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine the risk factors associated with the odds of extreme Gleason upgrading at radical prostatectomy (RP) (defined as a Gleason prognostic group score increase of ≥2), we utilized a large, population-based cancer registry.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiologic, and End Results database was queried (2010-2011) for all patients diagnosed with Gleason 3 + 3 or 3 + 4 on prostate needle biopsy. Available clinicopathologic factors and the odds of upgrading and extreme upgrading at RP were evaluated using multivariate logistic regression.
RESULTS: A total of 12,459 patients were identified, with a median age of 61 (interquartile range: 56-65) and a diagnostic prostate-specific antigen (PSA) of 5.5 ng/mL (interquartile range: 4.3-7.5). Upgrading was observed in 34% of men, including 44% of 7402 patients with Gleason 3 + 3 and 19% of 5057 patients with Gleason 3 + 4 disease. Age, clinical stage, diagnostic PSA, and % prostate needle biopsy cores positive were independently associated with odds of any upgrading at RP. In baseline Gleason 3 + 3 disease, extreme upgrading was observed in 6%, with increasing age, diagnostic PSA, and >50% core positivity associated with increased odds. In baseline Gleason 3 + 4 disease, extreme upgrading was observed in 4%, with diagnostic PSA and palpable disease remaining predictive. Positive surgical margins were significantly higher in patients with extreme upgrading at RP (P < .001).
CONCLUSION: Gleason upgrading at RP is common in this large population-based cohort, including extreme upgrading in a clinically significant portion.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27313123     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2016.04.058

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  5 in total

1.  The effect of Rapid Access Prostate Clinics on the outcomes of Gleason 7 prostate cancer: does earlier diagnosis lead to better outcomes?

Authors:  M P Broe; J C Forde; M S Inder; D J Galvin; D W Mulvin; D M Quinlan
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2017-03-09       Impact factor: 1.568

2.  Gleason Grade Group Concordance between Preoperative Targeted Biopsy and Radical Prostatectomy Histopathologic Analysis: A Comparison Between In-Bore MRI-guided and MRI-Transrectal US Fusion Prostate Biopsies.

Authors:  Daniel N Costa; Qi Cai; Yin Xi; Debora Z Recchimuzzi; Naveen Subramanian; Aditya Bagrodia; Neil M Rofsky; Claus G Roehrborn; Brad Hornberger; Rajal B Shah; Kenneth Goldberg; Alberto Diaz de Leon; Ivan Pedrosa
Journal:  Radiol Imaging Cancer       Date:  2021-03-05

3.  The performance of the new prognostic grade and stage groups in conservatively treated prostate cancer.

Authors:  Cheng Chen; Ye Chen; Lin-Kun Hu; Chang-Chuan Jiang; Ren-Fang Xu; Xiao-Zhou He
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2018 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.285

4.  Prediction of pathologic upgrading in Gleason score 3+4 prostate cancer: Who is a candidate for active surveillance?

Authors:  Duc Minh Pham; Jung Kwon Kim; Sangchul Lee; Sung Kyu Hong; Seok-Soo Byun; Sang Eun Lee
Journal:  Investig Clin Urol       Date:  2020-05-25

5.  Computer aided detection in prostate cancer diagnostics: A promising alternative to biopsy? A retrospective study from 104 lesions with histological ground truth.

Authors:  Anika Thon; Ulf Teichgräber; Cornelia Tennstedt-Schenk; Stathis Hadjidemetriou; Sven Winzler; Ansgar Malich; Ismini Papageorgiou
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-10-12       Impact factor: 3.240

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.