Underestimation of Gleason score at prostate biopsy reflects sampling error in lower volume tumours

BJU International

Volumn 109, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 660-664

  Corcoran, Niall M ^a,b,d   Hovens, Chris M ^b,d   Hong, Matthew K H ^b,d   Pedersen, John ^c   Casey, Rowan G ^a   Connolly, Stephen ^b,d   Peters, Justin ^b,d   Harewood, Laurence ^b,d   Gleave, Martin E ^a   Goldenberg, S Larry ^a   Costello, Anthony J ^b,d  

^a VANCOUVER GENERAL HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

^c Tissupath Pty Ltd   (Australia)

^d Australian Prostate Cancer Research Centre at Epworth   (Australia)

Author keywords

biopsy; Gleason score; prostate cancer; tumour volume

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER GRADING; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; GLEASON SCORE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; ORGAN WEIGHT; PATIENT ASSESSMENT; PATIENT IDENTIFICATION; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; SAMPLING ERROR; TISSUE SECTION; TUMOR BIOPSY; TUMOR VOLUME;

ADULT; AGED; BIOPSY; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM GRADING; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SELECTION BIAS; TUMOR BURDEN;

EID: 84857355241     PISSN: 14644096     EISSN: 1464410X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10543.x     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Katz MS, Efstathiou JA, D'Amico AV, et al,. The CaP Calculator: an online decision support tool for clinically localized prostate cancer. BJU Int 2010; 105: 1417-22
2. Niall M, Corcoran MKHH, Casey RG, et al,. Upgrade in Gleason score between prostate biopsies and pathology following radical prostatectomy significantly impacts upon the risk of biochemical recurrence. BJU Int 2011; [Epub ahead of print]; doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10119.x
3. Cohen MS, Hanley RS, Kurteva T, et al,. Comparing the Gleason prostate biopsy and Gleason prostatectomy grading system: the Lahey Clinic Medical Center experience and an international meta-analysis. Eur Urol 2008; 54: 371-81
4. Steinberg DM, Sauvageot J, Piantadosi S, Epstein JI,. Correlation of prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy Gleason grade in academic and community settings. Am J Surg Pathol 1997; 21: 566-76 (Pubitemid 27213072)
5. Hong M, Namdarian B, Corcoran NM, et al,. Prostate tumour volume is an independent predictor of early biochemical recurrence in a high risk radical prostatectomy subgroup. Pathology 2011; 43: 138-42
6. Nguyen PL, Schultz D, Renshaw AA, et al,. The impact of pathology review on treatment recommendations for patients with adenocarcinoma of the prostate. Urol Oncol 2004; 22: 295-9 (Pubitemid 38993306)
7. Kvale R, Moller B, Wahlqvist R, et al,. Concordance between Gleason scores of needle biopsies and radical prostatectomy specimens: a population-based study. BJU Int 2009; 103: 1647-54
8. Wolters T, Roobol MJ, van Leeuwen PJ, et al,. Should pathologists routinely report prostate tumour volume? The prognostic value of tumour volume in prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2010; 57: 821-9
9. Moussa AS, Kattan MW, Berglund R, Yu C, Fareed K, Jones JS,. A nomogram for predicting upgrading in patients with low- and intermediate-grade prostate cancer in the era of extended prostate sampling. BJU Int 2010; 105: 352-8
10. Capitanio U, Karakiewicz PI, Valiquette L, et al,. Biopsy core number represents one of foremost predictors of clinically significant Gleason sum upgrading in patients with low-risk prostate cancer. Urology 2009; 73: 1087-91
11. Magheli A, Hinz S, Hege C, et al,. Prostate specific antigen density to predict prostate cancer upgrading in a contemporary radical prostatectomy series: a single center experience. J Urol 2010; 183: 126-31
12. Elabbady AA, Khedr MM,. Extended 12-core prostate biopsy increases both the detection of prostate cancer and the accuracy of Gleason score. Eur Urol 2006; 49: 49-53 (Pubitemid 41789953)
13. Singh H, Canto EI, Shariat SF, et al,. Improved detection of clinically significant, curable prostate cancer with systematic 12-core biopsy. J Urol 2004; 171: 1089-92 (Pubitemid 38327533)
14. Numao N, Kawakami S, Yokoyama M, et al,. Improved accuracy in predicting the presence of Gleason pattern 4/5 prostate cancer by three-dimensional 26-core systematic biopsy. Eur Urol 2007; 52: 1663-8
15. Jambor I, Borra R, Kemppainen J, et al,. Functional imaging of localized prostate cancer aggressiveness using 11C-acetate PET/CT and 1H-MR spectroscopy. J Nucl Med 2010; 51: 1676-83
16. Ukimura O, Hirahara N, Fujihara A, et al,. Technique for a hybrid system of real-time transrectal ultrasound with preoperative magnetic resonance imaging in the guidance of targeted prostate biopsy. Int J Urol 2010; 17: 890-3