Grading of invasive cribriform carcinoma on prostate needle biopsy: An interobserver study among experts in genitourinary pathology

American Journal of Surgical Pathology

Volumn 32, Issue 10, 2008, Pages 1532-1539

  Latour, Mathieu ^a   Amin, Mahul B ^b   Billis, Athanase ^c   Egevad, Lars ^d   Grignon, David J ^e   Humphrey, Peter A ^f   Reuter, Victor E ^g   Sakr, Wael A ^h   Srigley, John R ⁱ   Wheeler, Thomas M ^j   Yang, Ximing J ^k   Epstein, Jonathan I ^a  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b CEDARS SINAI MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CAMPINAS   (Brazil)

^d INTERNATIONAL AGENCY FOR RESEARCH ON CANCER   (France)

^e INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^f WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^g MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^h WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

ⁱ CREDIT VALLEY HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^j BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^k NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

Carcinoma of the prostate; Cribriform; Gleason grading; Prostate needle biopsy

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER GRADING; CANCER INVASION; GLEASON SCORE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MALE; NEEDLE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; ADENOCARCINOMA; CANCER STAGING; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATHOLOGY; PREDICTION AND FORECASTING; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; PROSTATE TUMOR; QUESTIONNAIRE; REPRODUCIBILITY; UROLOGY;

ADENOCARCINOMA; BIOPSY, NEEDLE; HUMANS; MALE; NEOPLASM STAGING; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATHOLOGY, SURGICAL; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; QUESTIONNAIRES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; UROLOGY;

EID: 53449095423     PISSN: 01475185     EISSN: 15320979     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/PAS.0b013e318169e8fd     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Amin MB, Schultz DS, Zarbo RJ. Analysis of cribriform morphology in prostatic neoplasia using antibody to high-molecular-weight cytokeratins. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1994;118:260-264.
2. Bailar JC III, Mellinger GT, Gleason DF. Survival rates of patients with prostatic cancer, tumor stage, and differentiation - preliminary report. Cancer Chemother Rep. 1966;50:129-136.
3. Bostwick DG, Amin MB, Dundore P, et al. Architectural patterns of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia. Hum Pathol. 1993; 24:298-310.
4. Cohen RJ, McNeal JE, Baillie T. Patterns of differentiation and proliferation in intraductal carcinoma of the prostate: significance for cancer progression. Prostate. 2000;43:11-19.
5. Cohen RJ, Wheeler TM, Bonkhoff H, et al. A proposal on the identification, histologic reporting, and implications of intraductal prostatic carcinoma. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2007;131:1103-1109.
6. Egevad L, Granfors T, Karlberg L, et al. Prognostic value of the Gleason score in prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2002;89:538-542.
7. Egevad L, Allsbrook WC Jr, Epstein JI. Current practice of Gleason grading among genitourinary pathologists. Hum Pathol. 2005;36: 5-9.
8. Epstein JI, Allsbrook WC Jr, Amin MB, et al. The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2005;29:1228-1242.
9. Gleason DF. Classification of prostatic carcinomas. Cancer Chemother Rep. 1966;50:125-128.
10. Gleason DF, Mellinger GT. Prediction of prognosis for prostatic adenocarcinoma by combined histological grading and clinical staging. J Urol. 1974;111:58-64.
11. Guo CC, Epstein JI. Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate on needle biopsy: histologic features and clinical significance. Mod Pathol. 2006;19:1528-1535.
12. Helpap B, Egevad L. The significance of modified Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma in biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens. Virchows Arch. 2006;449:622-627.
13. Lopez-Beltran A, Mikuz G, Luque RJ, et al. Current practice of Gleason grading of prostate carcinoma. Virchows Arch. 2006;448: 111-118.
14. Martinez-Rodriguez M, Ramos D, Mayordomo E, et al. Analysis of cribriform Gleason grade 3 in prostatic carcinoma. A histopathological and immunohistochemical study of 32 cases. Histopathology. 2007;51:717-719.
15. McNeal JE, Yemoto CE. Spread of adenocarcinoma within prostatic ducts and acini. Morphologic and clinical correlations. Am J Surg Pathol. 1996;20:802-814.
16. Mitchell RE, Shah JB, Desai M, et al. Changes in prognostic significance and predictive accuracy of Gleason grading system throughout PSA era: impact of grade migration in prostate cancer. Urology. 2007;70:706-710.
17. Qian J, Jenkins RB, Bostwick DG. Detection of chromosomal anomalies and c-myc gene amplification in the cribriform pattern of prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and carcinoma by fluorescence in situ hybridization. Mod Pathol. 1997;10: 1113-1119.
18. Rubin MA, de La Taille A, Bagiella E, et al. Cribriform carcinoma of the prostate and cribriform prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia: incidence and clinical implications. Am J Surg Pathol. 1998;22: 840-848.
19. Wilcox G, Soh S, Chakraborty S, et al. Patterns of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia associated with clinically aggressive prostate cancer. Hum Pathol. 1998;29:1119-1123.