Biopsy Gleason score: How does it correlate with the final pathological diagnosis in prostate cancer?

British Journal of Urology

Volumn 79, Issue 4, 1997, Pages 615-617

  Fernandes, E T ^a   Sund Aram, C P ^a   Long, R ^a   Soltani, M ^a   Ercole, C J ^a  

^a REGIONS HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Needle biopsy; Pathological grading; Prostatic neoplasm

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER STAGING; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NEEDLE BIOPSY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; SCORING SYSTEM; TUMOR DIFFERENTIATION;

BIOPSY, NEEDLE; FORECASTING; HUMANS; LYMPH NODE EXCISION; LYMPHATIC METASTASIS; MALE; NEOPLASM STAGING; PROSTATE; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 0031397767     PISSN: 00071331     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.1997.00126.x     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Montie JE. Current prognostic factors for prostate carcinoma. Cancer 1996; 78: 341-4
2. Hutter RVP, Montie JE, Busch C et al. Workgroup 3. Current prognostic factors and their relevance to staging. Cancer 1996; 78; 369-71
3. Epstein JI.The diagnosis and reporting of adenocarcinoma of the prostate in core needle biopsy specimens. Cancer 1996; 78: 350-6
4. Bostwick DG, Myers RP, Oesterling JE. Staging of prostate cancer. Sem Surg Oncol 1994; 10: 60-72
5. Gleason DP, Histologie grading of prostate cancer: a perspective. Hum Pathol 1992; 23: 273-9
6. Catalona W, Stein A, Fair W. Grading errors in prostatic needle biopsies: relation to the accuracy of predicting pelvic lymph node metastasis. / Urol 1982; 127: 919-27
7. Lange P, Narayan P. Understaging and undergrading of prostate cancer. Argument for postoperative radiation as adjuvant therapy. Urology 1983: 21: 113-8
8. Bostwick DG. Gleason grading of prostatic needle biopsies. Correlation with grade in 316 matched prostatectomies. 7 Surg Pathol 1994; 18: 796-803
9. Bostwick DG. Grading prostate cancer. Am }Clin Pathol 1994; 102: S38-56
10. Spires SE, Cibull ML, Wood DP et al. Gleason histologie grading in prostatic carcinoma. Correlation of 18-gauge core biopsy with prostatectomy. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1994; 118: 705-8
11. Narayan P, Gajendran V, Taylor S et al. The role of transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy-based staging, preoperative serum prostate-specific antigen, and biopsy Gleason score in prediction of final pathologic diagnosis in prostate cancer. Urology 1995; 46: 205-12
12. Johstone PA, Riffenburgh R, Saunders EL, Willison FW. Grading inaccuracies in diagnostic biopsies revealing prostatic adenocarcinoma; implications for definitive radiation therapy. Int / Rod Oncol 1995; 32: 479-82
13. Cupp MR, Bostwick DG, Myers RP, Oesterling JE: The volume of prostate cancer in the biopsy specimen cannot reliably predict the quantity of cancer in the radical prostatectomy specimen on an individual basis. / Urol 1995; 153: 1543-8
14. Kojima M, Troncoso P, Babaian RJ. Use of prostate-specific antigen and tumor volume in predicting needle biopsy grading error. Urology 1995; 45: 807-12
15. Algaba F, Epstein JI, Aldape HC et al Workgroup 5. Assessment of prostate carcinoma in core needle biopsy definition of minimal criteria for the diagnosis of cancer in biopsy material. Cancer 1996; 78: 376-81
16. deKernion JB, Huang MY, Kaufman JJ et al. Results of treatment of patients with stage Dl prostatic carcinoma. Urology 1985; 26: 446-51
17. Middleton RG, Smith JA Jr. Radical prostatectomy for stage B2 prostatic cancer. / Urol 1982; 127: 702-3