Comparison of Gleason grade and score between preoperative biopsy and prostatectomy specimens in prostate cancer

International Journal of Urology

Volumn 13, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 555-559

  Tomioka, Susumu ^a   Nakatsu, Hiroomi ^a   Suzuki, Noriyuki ^a   Murakami, Shino ^a   Matsuzaki, Osamu ^b   Shimazaki, Jun ^c  

^a ASAHI GENERAL HOSPITAL   (Japan)

^b KIMITSU CHUO HOSPITAL   (Japan)

^c CHIBA UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

Biopsy; Gleason grade; Gleason score; Prostate cancer; Surgical specimens

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER TISSUE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; GLEASON SCORE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; TUMOR VOLUME;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BIOPSY; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM STAGING; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS;

EID: 33646799813     PISSN: 09198172     EISSN: 14422042     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1442-2042.2006.01346.x     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Rubin MA, Bismar TA, Curtis S, Montie JE. Prostate needle biopsy reporting: how are the surgical members of the Society of Urologic Oncology using pathology reports to guide treatment of prostate cancer patients ? Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 2004 28:946 52.
2. Partin AW, Mangold LA, Lamm DA, Walsh PC, Epstein JI, Pearson JD. Contemporary update of prostate cancer staging nomograms (Partin tables) for new millennium. Urology 2001 58:843 8.
3. Amin MB, Grignon DJ, Humphrey PA, Stigley JR. Gleason Grading of Prostate Cancer. Lippincott Williams, Philadelphia, 2004.
4. Troxel DB. Diagnostic errors in surgical pathology uncovered by a review of malpractice claims. Int. J. Surg. Pathol. 2000 8:161 3.
5. Oesterling JE, Brendler CB, Epstein JI, Kimball AW Walsh PC. Correlation of clinical stage, serum prostatic acid phosphatase and preoperative Gleason grade with final pathological stage in 275 patients with clinically localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate. J. Urol. 1987 138:92 8.
6. Schmid H-P, Oberpenning F, Pummer K. Diagnosis and staging of prostatic carcinoma: what is really necessary? Urol. Int. 1999 63:57 61.
7. Herman CM, Kattan MW, Ohori M, Scardino PT, Wheeler TM. Primary Gleason pattern as a predictor of disease progression in Gleason score 7 prostate cancer - a multivariate analysis of 823 men treated with radical prostatectomy. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 2001 25:657 60.
8. Fukagai T, Namiki T, Namiki H, Carlile RG, Shimada M, Yoshida H. Discrepancies between Gleason scores of needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens. Pathol. Int. 2001 51:364 70.
9. Altay B, Kefi A, Nazli O, Killi R, Semerci B, Akar I. Comparison of Gleason scores from sextant prostate biopsies and radical prostatectomy specimens. Urol. Int. 2001 67:14 18.
10. Montesino SM, Jimenez AJ, Reparaz RB et al. Correlation between Gleason score on prostate biopsies diagnostic of adenocarcinoma and radical prostatectomy specimens. Arch. Esp. Urol. 2004 57:519 23.
11. Arellano L, Castillo O, Metrebian E. Concordance of Gleason histological scoring for prostatic cancer in needle biopsies and the surgical piece obtained during radical prostatectomy. Rev. Med. Chil. 2004 132:971 8.
12. 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.
13. 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.
14. Koksal IT, Ozcan F, Kadioglu TC, Esen T, Kilicaslan I, Tunc M. Discrepancy between Gleason scores of biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens. Eur. Urol. 2000 37:670 4.
15. Tsui KH, Shen BY, Sun GH, Lee SH, Chang PL. Probability based diagnostic biopsy specimens as predictors of tumor grade and stage found. Arch. Androl. 2004 50:333 7.
16. Coard KC, Freeman VL. Gleason grading of prostate cancer: level of concordance between pathologists at the University Hospital of the West Indies. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 2004 122:373 6.
17. Epstein JI, Potter SR. The pathological interpretation and significance of prostate needle biopsy findings: implications and current controversies. J. Urol. 2001 166:402 10.
18. Epstein JI. Gleason score 2-4 adenocarcinoma of the prostate on needle biopsy. A diagnosis that should not be made. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 2000 24:477 8.
19. Pan C-C, Potter SR, Partin AW, Epstein JI. The prognostic significance of tertiary Gleason patterns of high grade in radical prostatectomy specimens. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 2000 24:563 9.
20. Mosse CA, Magi-Galluzzi C, Tsuzuki T, Epstein JI. The prognostic significance of tertiary Gleason pattern 5 in radical prostectomy specimens. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 2004 28:394 8.
21. 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.
22. Mills SE, Fowler JE Jr. Gleason histologic grading of prostatic carcinoma. Correlations between biopsy and prostatectomy specimens. Cancer 1986 57:346 9.
23. Bostwick DG. Gleason grading of prostatic needle biopsies. Correlation with grade in 316 matched prostatectomies. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 1994 18:796 803.
24. Gamett JE, Oyasu R, Grayhack JT. The accuracy of diagnostic biopsy specimens in predicting tumor grades by Gleason's classification of radical prostatectomy specimens. J. Urol. 1984 131:690 3.
25. Spires SE, Cibull ML, Wood DP Miller S, Spires SM, Banks ER. Gleason histologic grading in prostatic carcinoma. Correlation of 18 gauge core biopsy with prostatectomy. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 1994 118:705 8.
26. Poulos CK, Daggy JK, Cheng L. Prostate needle biopsies. Multiple variables are predictive of final tumor Volume in radical prostatectomy specimens. Cancer 2004 101:527 32.
27. Arora R, Koch MO, Eble JN, Ulbright TM, Li L, Cheng L. Heterogeneity of Gleason grade in multifocal adenocarcinoma of the prostate. Cancer 2004 100:2362 6.
28. Paul R, Schoeler S, van Randenborgh H et al. Morbidity of prostatic biopsy for different biopsy strategies: is there a relation to core number and sampling region ? Eur. Urol. 2004 45:450 6.
29. San Francisco IF, DeWolf WC, Rosen S, Upton M, Olumi AF. Extended prostate needle biopsy improves concordance of Gleason grading between prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy. J. Urol. 2003 169:136 40.