Upgrading and Downgrading of Prostate Needle Biopsy Specimens: Risk Factors and Clinical Implications

Urology

Volumn 69, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 495-499

  Freedland, Stephen J ^a,b   Kane, Christopher J ^c,d   Amling, Christopher L ^e,f   Aronson, William J ^g,h   Terris, Martha K ^i,j   Presti Jr , Joseph C ^k,l  

^a DURHAM VA MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c SAN FRANCISCO VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^e Alabama   (United States)

^f NAVAL MEDICAL CENTER SAN DIEGO   (United States)

^g VA GREATER LOS ANGELES HEALTHCARE SYSTEM   (United States)

^h UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

ⁱ VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^j MEDICAL COLLEGE OF GEORGIA   (United States)

^k STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^l VA PALO ALTO HEALTH CARE SYSTEM   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; ARTICLE; BIOCHEMISTRY; CANCER RISK; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA BASE; GLEASON SCORE; HIGH RISK POPULATION; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; NEEDLE BIOPSY; OBESITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; RISK FACTOR;

AGED; BIOPSY, NEEDLE; BODY MASS INDEX; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODELS; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTORS;

EID: 33947194289     PISSN: 00904295     EISSN: 15279995     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2006.10.036     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Bostwick D.G. Gleason grading of prostatic needle biopsies: correlation with grade in 316 matched prostatectomies. Am J Surg Pathol 18 (1994) 796-803
2. Steinberg D.M., Sauvageot J., Piantadosi S., et al. Correlation of prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy Gleason grade in academic and community settings. Am J Surg Pathol 21 (1997) 566-576
3. King C.R., McNeal J.E., Gill H., et al. Extended prostate biopsy scheme improves reliability of Gleason grading: implications for radiotherapy patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 59 (2004) 386-391
4. Ozdamar S.O., Sarikaya S., Yildiz L., et al. Intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility of WHO and Gleason histologic grading systems in prostatic adenocarcinomas. Int Urol Nephrol 28 (1996) 73-77
5. Freedland S.J., Amling C.L., Dorey F., et al. Race as an outcome predictor after radical prostatectomy: results from the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital (SEARCH) database. Urology 60 (2002) 670-674
6. Hall G.S., Kramer C.E., and Epstein J.I. Evaluation of radical prostatectomy specimens: a comparative analysis of sampling methods. Am J Surg Pathol 16 (1992) 315-324
7. King C.R. Patterns of prostate cancer biopsy grading: trends and clinical implications. Int J Cancer 90 (2000) 305-311
8. Sved P.D., Gomez P., Manoharan M., et al. Limitations of biopsy Gleason grade: implications for counseling patients with biopsy Gleason score 6 prostate cancer. J Urol 172 (2004) 98-102
9. Fukagai T., Namiki T., Namiki H., et al. Discrepancies between Gleason scores of needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens. Pathol Int 51 (2001) 364-370
10. Carlson G.D., Calvanese C.B., Kahane H., et al. Accuracy of biopsy Gleason scores from a large uropathology laboratory: use of a diagnostic protocol to minimize observer variability. Urology 51 (1998) 525-529
11. Presti Jr. J.C., Chang J.J., Bhargava V., et al. The optimal systematic prostate biopsy scheme should include 8 rather than 6 biopsies: results of a prospective clinical trial. J Urol 163 (2000) 163-166
12. Makhlouf A.A., Krupski T.L., Kunkle D., et al. The effect of sampling more cores on the predictive accuracy of pathological grade and tumour distribution in the prostate biopsy. BJU Int 93 (2004) 271-274
13. Coogan C.L., Latchamsetty K.C., Greenfield J., et al. Increasing the number of biopsy cores improves the concordance of biopsy Gleason score to prostatectomy Gleason score. BJU Int 96 (2005) 324-327
14. Freedland S.J., Aronson W.J., Kane C.J., et al. Impact of obesity on biochemical control after radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer: a report by the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital database study group. J Clin Oncol 22 (2004) 446-453
15. Amling C.L., Riffenburgh R.H., Sun L., et al. Pathologic variables and recurrence rates as related to obesity and race in men with prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol 22 (2004) 439-445
16. Rodriguez C., Patel A.V., Calle E.E., et al. Body mass index, height, and prostate cancer mortality in two large cohorts of adult men in the United States. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 10 (2001) 345-353
17. Freedland S.J., Platz E.A., Presti Jr. J.C., et al. Obesity, serum prostate specific antigen and prostate size: implications for prostate cancer detection. J Urol 175 (2006) 500-504
18. Albertsen P.C., Hanley J.A., Barrows G.H., et al. Prostate cancer and the Will Rogers phenomenon. J Natl Cancer Inst 97 (2005) 1248-1253
19. D'Amico A.V., Moul J.W., Carroll P.R., et al. Surrogate end point for prostate cancer-specific mortality after radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy. J Natl Cancer Inst 95 (2003) 1376-1383