Improved accuracy for predicting the gleason score of prostate cancer by increasing the number of transrectal biopsy cores

Urologia Internationalis

Volumn 79, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 302-306

  Miyake, Hideaki ^a   Kurahashi, Toshifumi ^a   Takenaka, Atsushi ^a   Hara, Isao ^a   Fujisawa, Masato ^a  

^a KOBE UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (Japan)

Author keywords

Gleason score; Prostate cancer; Radical prostatectomy; Transrectal prostate biopsy

Indexed keywords

ADJUVANT THERAPY; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER PATIENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; RECTUM BIOPSY;

AGE FACTORS; AGED; BIOPSY, NEEDLE; COHORT STUDIES; DISEASE-FREE SURVIVAL; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; NEOPLASM STAGING; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROBABILITY; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK ASSESSMENT; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC; SURVIVAL RATE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TUMOR BURDEN;

EID: 36248959194     PISSN: 00421138     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1159/000109713     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Mazzuccheli R, Scarpelli M, Lopez-Beltran A, Fellegara G, Algaba F: Gleason grading of prostate cancer in needle biopsies or radical prostatectomy specimens: contemporary approach, current clinical significance and sources of pathology discrepancies. BJU Int 2005;95:1146-1152.
2. Aihara M, Wheeler TM, Ohori M, Scardino PT: Heterogeneity of prostate cancer in radical prostatectomy specimens. Urology 1994;43:60-66.
3. Cheng L, Koch MO, Juliar BE, Daggy JK, Foster RS, Bihrle R, Gardner TA: The combined percentage of Gleason patterns 4 and 5 is the best predictor of cancer progression after radical prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:2911-2917.
4. Khan MA, Partin AW, Mangold LA, Epstein JI, Walsh PC: Probability of biochemical recurrence by analysis of pathologic stage, Gleason score, and margin status for localized prostate cancer. Urology 2003;62:866-871.
5. Ohori M, Kattan MW, Koh H, Maru N, Slawin KM, Shariat S, Muramoto M, Reuter VE, Wheeler TM, Scardino PT: Predicting the presence and side of extracapsular extension: a nomogram for staging prostate cancer. J Urol 2004;171:1844-1849.
6. Philip J, Ragavan N, Desouza J, Foster CS, Javle P: Effect of peripheral biopsies in maximizing early prostate cancer detection in 8-, 10- or 12-core biopsy regimens. BJU Int 2004;93:1218-1220.
7. de la Taille A, Antiphon P, Salomon L, Cherfan M, Porcher R, Hoznek A, Saint F, Vordos D, Cicco A, Yiou R, Zafrani ES, Chopin D, Abbou CC: Prospective evaluation of a 21-sample needle biopsy procedure designed to improve the prostate cancer detection rate. Urology 2003;61:1181-1186.
8. Ishimura T, Sakai I, Hara I, Eto H, Miyake H: Clinical outcome of transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy, targeting eight cores, for detecting prostate cancer in Japanese men. Int J Clin Oncol 2004;9:47-50.
9. Miyake H, Sakai I, Ishimura T, Hara I, Eto H: Significance of cancer detection in the anterior lateral horn on systematic prostate biopsy: the effect on pathological findings of radical prostatectomy specimens. BJU Int 2004;93:57-59.
10. Sakai I, Harada K, Hara I, Eto H, Miyake H: Significance of the percentage of prostate needle biopsy cores with cancer as a predictor of disease extension in radical prostatectomy specimens in Japanese men. Int Urol Nephrol 2005;37:305-310.
11. Egevad L, Norlen BJ, Norberg M: The value of multiple core biopsies for predicting the Gleason score of prostate cancer. BJU Int 2001;88:716-721.
12. 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. Eur Urol 1998;33:261-270.
13. Emiliozzi P, Maymone S, Paterno A, Scarpone P, Amini M, Proietti G, Cordahi M, Pansadoro V: Increased accuracy of biopsy Gleason score obtained by extended needle biopsy. J Urol 2004;172:2224-2226.
14. 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;169:136-140.
15. Hodge KK, McNeal JE, Terris MK, Stamey TA: Random systematic versus directed ultrasound guided transrectal core biopsies of the prostate. J Urol 1989;142:71-75.
16. Gleason DF: Histologic grading and clinical staging of prostatic carcinoma; in Tannenbaum M (ed): Urologic Pathology: The Prostate. Philadelphia, Lea & Feibiger, 1977.
17. Partin AW, Mangold LA, Lamm DM, Walsh PC, Epstein JI, Pearson JD: Contemporary update of prostate cancer staging nomograms (Partin Tables) for the new millennium. Urology 2001;58:843-848.
18. Roberts WW, Bergstralh EJ, Blute ML, Slezak JM, Carducci M, Han M, Epstein JI, Eisenberger MA, Walsh PC, Partin AW: Contemporary identification of patients at high risk of early prostate cancer recurrence after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urology 2001;57:1033-1037.
19. Cooperberg MR, Broering JM, Litwin MS, Lubeck DP, Mehta SS, Henning JM, Carroll PR, CapSURE Investigators: The contemporary management of prostate cancer in the United States: lessons from the cancer of the prostate strategic urologic research endeavor (CapSURE), a national disease registry. J Urol 2004;171:1393-1401.
20. King CR: Patterns of prostate cancer biopsy grading trends and clinical implications. Int J Cancer 2000;90:305-311.
21. Mariappan P, Chong WL, Sundram M, Mohamed SR: Increasing prostate biopsy cores based on volume versus the sextant biopsy: a prospective randomized controlled clinical study on cancer detection rates and morbidity. BJU Int 2004;94:307-310.