Correlation between upgrading of prostate biopsy and biochemical failure and unfavorable pathology after radical prostatectomy

Urologia Internationalis

Volumn 83, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 146-150

  Ozden, Cuneyt ^a,b   Oztekin, Cetin Volkan ^a   Ugurlu, Ozgur ^a   Gokkaya, Serkan ^a   Yaris, Mehmet ^a   Memis, Ali ^a  

^a ANKARA TRAINING AND RESEARCH HOSPITAL   (Turkey)

^b Cevizlidere Mah   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Gleason score; Prostate cancer biopsy; Prostate cancer, prognostic factors; Prostatectomy; Radical prostatectomy

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CANCER RELAPSE; CARCINOGENESIS; CLINICAL EVALUATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY;

BIOPSY; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSTATE; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TREATMENT FAILURE;

EID: 70349276002     PISSN: 00421138     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1159/000230014     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Partin AW, Yoo J, Carter HB, Pearson JD, Chan DW, Epstein JI, Walsh PC: The use of prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage and Gleason score to predict pathological stage in men with localized prostate cancer. J Urol 1993; 150: 110-114. (Pubitemid 23175983)
2. Partin AW, Kattan MW, Subong EN, Walsh PC, Wojno KJ, Oesterling JE, Scardino PT, Pearson JD: Combination of prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage, and Gleason score to predict pathological stage of localized prostate cancer. A multi-institutional update. JAMA 1997; 277: 1445-1451.
3. 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.
4. D'Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, Schultz D, Schnall M, Tomaszewski JE, Wein A: A multivariate analysis of clinical and pathological factors that predict for prostatespecific antigen failure after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Urol 1995; 154: 131-138.
5. Stamey TA, McNeal JE, Yemoto CM, Sigal BM, Johnstone IM: Biological determinants of cancer progression in men with prostate cancer. JAMA 1999; 281: 1395-1400.
6. Zincke H, Bergstralh EJ, Blute ML, Myers RP, Barrett DM, Lieber MM, Martin SK, Oesterling JE: Radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer: Longterm results of 1,143 patients from a single institution. J Clin Oncol 1994; 12: 2254-2263.
7. Stav K, Judith S, Merald H, Leibovici D, Lindner A, Zisman A: Does prostate biopsy Gleason score accurately express the biologic features of prostate cancer? Urol Oncol 2007; 25: 383-386.
8. Chun FK, Briganti A, Shariat SF, Graefen M, Montorsi F, Erbersdobler A, Steuber T, Salonia A, Currlin E, Scattoni V, Friedrich MG, Schlomm T, Haese A, Michl U, Colombo R, Heinzer H, Valiquette L, Rigatti P, Roehrborn CG, Huland H, Karakiewicz PI: Significant upgrading affects a third of men diagnosed with prostate cancer: Predictive nomogram and internal validation. BJU Int 2006; 98: 329-334.
9. 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: 364-370.
10. Fleming ID, Cooper JS, Henson DE: AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. Philadelphia, Raven & Lippincott, 1997.
11. Gleason DF: Histologic grading and staging of prostatic carcinoma; in Tannenbaum M (ed): Urologic Pathology. Philadelphia, Lea & Febiger, 1977, pp 171-187.
12. Gleason DF: Histologic grading of prostate cancer: A perspective. Hum Pathol 1992; 23: 273-279.
13. Kupelian P, Katcher J, Levin H, Zippe C, Klein E: Correlation of clinical and pathologic factors with rising prostate-specific antigen profiles after radical prostatectomy alone for clinically localized prostate cancer. Urology 1996; 48: 249-260.
14. 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: 559-562.
15. 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.
16. Divrik RT, Eroglu A, Sahin A, Zorlu F, Ozen H: Increasing the number of biopsies increases the concordance of Gleason scores of needle biopsies and prostatectomy specimens. Urol Oncol 2007; 25: 376-382.
17. Choo R, Danjoux C, Morton G, Szumacher E, Sugar L, Gardner S, Kim M, Choo CM, Klotz L: How much does Gleason grade of follow-up biopsy differ from that of initial biopsy in untreated, Gleason score 4-7, clinically localized prostate cancer? Prostate 2007; 67: 1614-1620.
18. Freedland SJ, Kane CJ, Amling CL, Aronson WJ, Terris MK, Presti JC Jr, SEARCH Database Study Group: Upgrading and downgrading of prostate needle biopsy specimens: Risk factors and clinical implications. Urology 2007; 69: 495-499.
19. Kulkarni GS, Lockwood G, Evans A, Toi A, Trachtenberg J, Jewett MA, Finelli A, Fleshner NE: Clinical predictors of Gleason score upgrading: Implications for patients considering watchful waiting, active surveillance, or brachytherapy. Cancer 2007; 109: 2432-2438.
20. Donohue JF, Bianco FJ Jr, Kuroiwa K, Vickers AJ, Wheeler TM, Scardino PT, Reuter VA, Eastham JA: Poorly differentiated prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy: Long-term outcome and incidence of pathological downgrading. J Urol 2006; 176: 991-995.
21. Chun FK, Steuber T, Erbersdobler A, Currlin E, Walz J, Schlomm T, Haese A, Heinzer H, McCormack M, Huland H, Graefen M, Karakiewicz PI: Development and internal validation of a nomogram predicting the probability of prostate cancer Gleason sum upgrading between biopsy and radical prostatectomy pathology. Eur Urol 2006; 49: 820-826.