Trends in Gleason Score: Concordance Between Biopsy and Prostatectomy over 15 Years

Urology

Volumn 72, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 177-182

  Rajinikanth, Ayyathurai ^a   Manoharan, Murugesan ^a   Soloway, Cynthia T ^a   Civantos, Francisco J ^a   Soloway, Mark S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI MILLER SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CONTROLLED STUDY; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; KAPPA STATISTICS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL RECORD REVIEW; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY;

BIOPSY; BIOPSY, NEEDLE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS;

EID: 45849116934     PISSN: 00904295     EISSN: 15279995     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2007.10.022     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Gleason D.F., and Mellinger G.T. Prediction of prognosis for prostatic adenocarcinoma by combined histological grading and clinical staging. J Urol 111 (1974) 58-64
2. Partin A.W., Kattan M.W., Subong E.N., et al. Combination of prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage, and Gleason score to predict pathological stage of localized prostate cancer: a multi-institutional update. JAMA 277 (1997) 1445-1451 [See comment.] [Erratum appears in JAMA 278: 118, 1997]
3. D'Amico A.V., Whittington R., Malkowicz S.B., et al. Pretreatment nomogram for prostate-specific antigen recurrence after radical prostatectomy or external-beam radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 17 (1999) 168-172
4. Klotz L. Active surveillance versus radical treatment for favorable-risk localized prostate cancer. Curr Treat Options Oncol 7 (2006) 355-362
5. Partin A.W., Yoo J., Carter H.B., et al. The use of prostate specific antigen, clinical stage and Gleason score to predict pathological stage in men with localized prostate cancer. J Urol 150 (1993) 110-114
6. Epstein J.I., Allsbrook Jr. W.C., Amin M.B., et al. The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 29 (2005) 1228-1242
7. Gleason D.F. Histologic grading of prostate cancer: a perspective. Hum Pathol 23 (1992) 273-279
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. Cookson M.S., Fleshner N.E., Soloway S.M., et al. Correlation between Gleason score of needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimen: accuracy and clinical implications. J Urol 157 (1997) 559-562
10. Sengupta S., Slezak J.M., Blute M.L., et al. Trends in distribution and prognostic significance of Gleason grades on radical retropubic prostatectomy specimens between 1989 and 2001. Cancer 106 (2006) 2630-2635
11. Gleason D.F. Classification of prostatic carcinomas. Cancer Chemother Rep 50 (1966) 125-128
12. Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Measure 20 (1960) 37-46
13. Melia J., Moseley R., Ball R.Y., et al. A UK-based investigation of inter- and intra-observer reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostatic biopsies. Histopathology 48 (2006) 644-654
14. Mian B.M., Lehr D.J., Moore C.K., et al. Role of prostate biopsy schemes in accurate prediction of Gleason scores. Urology 67 (2006) 379-383
15. Thickman D., Speers W.C., Philpott P.J., et al. Effect of the number of core biopsies of the prostate on predicting Gleason score of prostate cancer. J Urol 156 (1996) 110-113
16. Epstein J.I. Gleason score 2-4 adenocarcinoma of the prostate on needle biopsy: a diagnosis that should not be made. Am J Surg Pathol 24 (2000) 477-478
17. 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
18. San Francisco I.F., DeWolf W.C., Rosen S., et al. Extended prostate needle biopsy improves concordance of Gleason grading between prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy. J Urol 169 (2003) 136-140
19. Ghani K.R., Grigor K., Tulloch D.N., et al. Trends in reporting Gleason score 1991 to 2001: changes in the pathologist's practice. Eur Urol 47 (2005) 196-201
20. Merrill R.M., Feuer E.J., Warren J.L., et al. Role of transurethral resection of the prostate in population-based prostate cancer incidence rates. Am J Epidemiol 150 (1999) 848-860
21. Allsbrook Jr. W.C., Mangold K.A., Johnson M.H., et al. Interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma: urologic pathologists. Hum Pathol 32 (2001) 74-80
22. 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
23. Coard K.C., and Freeman V.L. Gleason grading of prostate cancer: level of concordance between pathologists at the University Hospital of the West Indies. Am J Clin Pathol 122 (2004) 373-376
24. Park H.K., Choe G., Byun S.S., et al. Evaluation of concordance of Gleason score between prostatectomy and biopsies that show more than two different Gleason scores in positive cores. Urology 67 (2006) 110-114
25. Noguchi M., Stamey T.A., McNeal J.E., et al. Relationship between systematic biopsies and histological features of 222 radical prostatectomy specimens: lack of prediction of tumor significance for men with nonpalpable prostate cancer. J Urol 166 (2001) 104-109 discussion 109-110