The value of multiple core biopsies for predicting the Gleason score of prostate cancer

BJU International

Volumn 88, Issue 7, 2001, Pages 716-721

  Egevad, L ^a   Norlen B J ^b   Norberg, M ^b  

^a KAROLINSKA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^b UPPSALA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Biopsy needle; Classification; Human; Male; Methods; Pathology; Prostatectomy; Prostatic neoplasms; Ultrasonography

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER GRADING; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CARCINOMA; PROSTATECTOMY; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY; TUMOR BIOPSY;

ADULT; AGED; BIOPSY, NEEDLE; CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, INTERVENTIONAL;

EID: 0035788604     PISSN: 14644096     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1464-4096.2001.02419.x     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Murphy GP, Whitmore WF Jr. A report of the workshops on the current status of the histologic grading of prostate cancer. Cancer 1979; 44: 1490-4
2. Murphy GP, Busch C, Abrahamsson PA et al. Histopathology of localized prostate cancer. Consensus Conference on Diagnosis and Prognostic Parameters in Localized Prostate Cancer. Stockholm. Sweden, May 12-13, 1993. Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl 1994; 162: 7-42
3. Epstein JI, Pizov G, Walsh PC. Correlation of pathologic findings with progression after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Cancer 1993; 71: 3582-93
4. Epstein JI, Partin AW, Sauvageot J, Walsh PC. Prediction of progression following radical prostatectomy. A multivariate analysis of 721 men with long-term follow-up. Am J Surg Pathol 1996; 20: 286-92
5. Aihara M, Wheeler TM, Ohori M, Scardino PT. Heterogeneity of prostate cancer in radical prostatectomy specimens. Urology 1994; 43: 60-6
6. Ruijter ET, van de Kaa CA, Schalken JA, Debruyne FM, Ruiter DJ. Histological grade heterogeneity in multifocal prostate cancer. Biological and clinical implications. J Pathol 1996; 180: 295-9
7. Carlson GD, Calvanese CB, Kahane H, Epstein JI. Accuracy of biopsy Gleason scores from a large uropathology laboratory: use of a diagnostic protocol to minimize observer variability. Urology 1998; 51: 525-9
8. Cookson MS, Fleshner NE, Soloway SM, Fair WR. Correlation between Gleason score of needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimen: accuracy and clinical implications. J Urol 1997; 157: 559-62
9. Spires SE, Cibull ML, Wood DP Jr, Miller S, Spires SM, Banks ER. Gleason histologic grading in prostatic carcinoma. Correlation of 18-gauge core biopsy with prostatectomy. Arch Pathol Laboratory Med 1994; 118: 705-8
10. Steinberg DM, Sauvageot J, Piantadosi S, Epstein JI. Correlation of prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy Gleason grade in academic and community settings. Am J Surg Pathol 1997; 21: 566-76
11. Djavan B, Kadesky K, Klopukh B, Marberger M, Roehrborn CG. Gleason scores from prostate biopsies obtained with 18-gauge biopsy needles poorly predict Gleason scores of radical prostatectomy specimens. European Urol 1998; 33: 261-70
12. Gregori A, Vieweg J, Dahm P, Paulson DF. Comparison of ultrasound-guided biopsies and prostatectomy specimens: predictive accuracy of Gleason score and tumor site. Urol Int 2001; 66: 66-71
13. Partin AW, Epstein JI, Cho KR, Gittelsohn AM, Walsh PC. Morphometric measurement of tumor volume and per cent of gland involvement as predictors of pathological stage in clinical stage B prostate cancer. J Urol 1989; 141: 341-5
14. Rubin MA, Dunn R, Kambham N, Misick CP, O'Toole KM. Should a Gleason score be assigned to a minute focus of carcinoma on prostate biopsy? Am J Surg Pathol 2000; 24: 1634-40
15. Ruijter E, van Leenders G, Miller G, Debruyne F, van De Kaa C. Errors in histological grading by prostatic needle biopsy specimens: frequency and predisposing factors. J Pathol 2000; 192: 229-33
16. Norberg M, Egevad L, Holmberg L, Sparen P, Norlen BJ, Busch C. The sextant protocol for ultrasound-guided core biopsies of the prostate underestimates the presence of cancer. Urology 1997; 50: 562-6
17. King CR, Long JP. Prostate biopsy grading errors: a sampling problem? Int J Cancer 2000; 90: 326-30
18. de las Morenas A, Siroky MB, Merriam J, Stilmant MM. Prostatic adenocarcinoma: reproducibility and correlation with clinical stages of four grading systems. Human Pathol 1988; 19: 595-7
19. di Loreto C, Fitzpatrick B, Underhill S et al. Correlation between visual clues, objective architectural features, and interobserver agreement in prostate cancer. Am J Clin Pathol 1991; 96: 70-5
20. Cintra ML, Billis A. Histologic grading of prostatic adenocarcinoma: intraobserver reproducibility of the Mostofi, Gleason and Bocking grading systems. Int Urol Nephrol 1991; 23: 449-54
21. Lessells AM, Burnett RA, Howatson SR et al. Observer variability in the histopathological reporting of needle biopsy specimens of the prostate. Human Pathol 1997; 28: 646-9
22. McLean M, Srigley J, Banerjec D, Warde P, Hao Y. Interobserver variation in prostate cancer Gleason scoring: are there implications for the design of clinical trials and treatment strategies? Clin Oncol 1997; 9: 222-5
23. Gleason DF. Histologic grading of prostate cancer: a perspective. Human Pathol 1992; 23: 273-9
24. Kronz JD, Silberman MA, Allsbrook WC, Epstein JI. A web-based tutorial improves practicing pathologists' Gleason grading of images of prostate carcinoma specimens obtained by needle biopsy. Cancer 2000; 89: 1818-23
25. Kronz JD, Silberman MA, Allsbrook WC Jr et al. Pathology residents' use of a Web-based tutorial to improve Gleason grading of prostate carcinoma on needle biopsies. Hum Pathol 2000; 31: 1044-50
26. Egevad L. Reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostate cancer can be improved by the use of reference images. Urology 2001; 57: 291-5
27. 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
28. Chan TY, Partin AW, Walsh PC, Epslein JI. Prognostic significance of Gleason score 3+4 versus Gleason score 4+3 tumor at radical prostatectomy. Urology 2000; 56: 823-7