Literature DB >> 30181565

Integrating tertiary Gleason pattern 5 into the ISUP grading system improves prediction of biochemical recurrence in radical prostatectomy patients.

Masashi Kato1, Akihiro Hirakawa2, Yumiko Kobayashi3, Akiyuki Yamamoto1, Ryo Ishida4, Osamu Kamihira5, Tohru Kimura6, Tsuyoshi Majima1, Shohei Ishida1, Yasuhito Funahashi1, Naoto Sassa1, Takashi Fujita1, Yoshihisa Matsukawa1, Tokunori Yamamoto1, Ryohei Hattori7, Momokazu Gotoh1, Toyonori Tsuzuki8.   

Abstract

Although the presence of tertiary Gleason pattern 5 is reportedly related to unfavorable prostate cancer characteristics, few data are available regarding the effects of tertiary Gleason pattern 5 on the new ISUP (International Society of Urological Pathology) grading system in radical prostatectomy patients. In this study, we evaluated the effect of tertiary Gleason pattern 5 on biochemical recurrence following radical prostatectomy in patients with prostate cancer. We retrospectively evaluated 1000 patients with prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy. The ISUP Grades were as follows: Grade 1, 16.3%; Grade 2, 48.1% (with tertiary Gleason pattern 5, 8.0% and without tertiary Gleason pattern 5, 40.1%); Grade 3, 21.9% (with tertiary Gleason pattern 5, 9.1% and without tertiary Gleason pattern 5, 12.8%); Grade 4, 3.9%; and Grade 5, 9.8%. Biochemical recurrence-free survival differed significantly among the five groups (Grade 1-5) (P < 0.0001). Grade 2 with tertiary Gleason pattern 5 had a significantly worse prognosis than Grade 2 without tertiary Gleason pattern 5. Similarly, Grade 3 with tertiary Gleason pattern 5 demonstrated a significantly worse prognosis than Grade 3 without tertiary Gleason pattern 5. When Grade 2 and Grade 3 were divided with or without tertiary Gleason pattern 5, the survival curves differed significantly among Grade 1, Grade 2 without tertiary Gleason pattern 5, Grade 2 with tertiary Gleason pattern 5, Grade 3 without tertiary Gleason pattern 5, Grade 3 with tertiary Gleason pattern 5, and Grade 4 (P < 0.0001) (hazard ratios: 1, 1.14, 1.86, 2.23, 3.53, and 6.30). In a multivariate analysis, integrating tertiary Gleason pattern 5 into the ISUP Grade, PSA, and surgical margin status significantly predicted biochemical recurrence (P < 0.0001). Integrating tertiary Gleason pattern 5 into the ISUP grading system will improve the accuracy of patient outcome prediction following radical prostatectomy in patients with prostate cancer.

Entities:  

Year:  2018        PMID: 30181565     DOI: 10.1038/s41379-018-0121-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mod Pathol        ISSN: 0893-3952            Impact factor:   7.842


  5 in total

1.  Practice patterns related to prostate cancer grading: results of a 2019 Genitourinary Pathology Society clinician survey.

Authors:  Samson W Fine; Kiril Trpkov; Mahul B Amin; Ferran Algaba; Manju Aron; Dilek E Baydar; Antonio Lopez Beltran; Fadi Brimo; John C Cheville; Maurizio Colecchia; Eva Comperat; Tony Costello; Isabela Werneck da Cunha; Warick Delprado; Angelo M DeMarzo; Giovanna A Giannico; Jennifer B Gordetsky; Charles C Guo; Donna E Hansel; Michelle S Hirsch; Jiaoti Huang; Peter A Humphrey; Rafael E Jimenez; Francesca Khani; Max X Kong; Oleksandr N Kryvenko; L Priya Kunju; Priti Lal; Mathieu Latour; Tamara Lotan; Fiona Maclean; Cristina Magi-Galluzzi; Rohit Mehra; Santosh Menon; Hiroshi Miyamoto; Rodolfo Montironi; George J Netto; Jane K Nguyen; Adeboye O Osunkoya; Anil Parwani; Christian P Pavlovich; Brian D Robinson; Mark A Rubin; Rajal B Shah; Jeffrey S So; Hiroyuki Takahashi; Fabio Tavora; Maria S Tretiakova; Lawrence True; Sara E Wobker; Ximing J Yang; Ming Zhou; Debra L Zynger; Jonathan I Epstein
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2020-09-15       Impact factor: 2.954

2.  Quantification of the individual risk of each Gleason pattern, including tertiary Gleason pattern 5, after radical prostatectomy: development of the modified Gleason grade grouping (mGGG) model.

Authors:  Satoru Taguchi; Yukari Uemura; Tetsuya Fujimura; Teppei Morikawa; Akihiro Naito; Taketo Kawai; Motofumi Suzuki; Haruki Kume; Hiroshi Fukuhara
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2020-05-01       Impact factor: 4.430

3.  Automated acquisition of explainable knowledge from unannotated histopathology images.

Authors:  Yoichiro Yamamoto; Toyonori Tsuzuki; Jun Akatsuka; Masao Ueki; Hiromu Morikawa; Yasushi Numata; Taishi Takahara; Takuji Tsuyuki; Kotaro Tsutsumi; Ryuto Nakazawa; Akira Shimizu; Ichiro Maeda; Shinichi Tsuchiya; Hiroyuki Kanno; Yukihiro Kondo; Manabu Fukumoto; Gen Tamiya; Naonori Ueda; Go Kimura
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2019-12-18       Impact factor: 14.919

4.  Alternative prostate cancer grading systems incorporating percent pattern 4/5 (IQ-Gleason) and cribriform architecture (cGrade) improve prediction of outcome after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Neslisah Seyrek; Eva Hollemans; Eleni-Rosalina Andrinopoulou; Susanne Osanto; Rob C M Pelger; Henk G van der Poel; Elise Bekers; Sebastiaan Remmers; Ivo G Schoots; Geert J L H van Leenders
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2022-02-14       Impact factor: 4.535

5.  The 2019 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma.

Authors:  Geert J L H van Leenders; Theodorus H van der Kwast; David J Grignon; Andrew J Evans; Glen Kristiansen; Charlotte F Kweldam; Geert Litjens; Jesse K McKenney; Jonathan Melamed; Nicholas Mottet; Gladell P Paner; Hemamali Samaratunga; Ivo G Schoots; Jeffry P Simko; Toyonori Tsuzuki; Murali Varma; Anne Y Warren; Thomas M Wheeler; Sean R Williamson; Kenneth A Iczkowski
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2020-08       Impact factor: 6.298

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.