Impact on the clinical outcome of prostate cancer by the 2005 international society of urological pathology modified gleason grading system

American Journal of Surgical Pathology

Volumn 36, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 838-843

  Dong, Fei ^a   Wang, Chaofu ^a,b   Brad Farris, A ^a,c   Wu, Shulin ^a   Lee, Hang ^a   Olumi, Aria F ^a   Scott McDougal, W ^a   Young, Robert H ^a   Wu, Chin Lee ^a  

^a MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b FUDAN UNIVERSITY SHANGHAI CANCER CENTER   (China)

^c EMORY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Classification; Gleason score; Grading; Prognosis; Prostate cancer

Indexed keywords

ADENOCARCINOMA; ADULT; AGED; CANCER GRADING; CONFERENCE PAPER; DISEASE FREE SURVIVAL; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MORTALITY; PATHOLOGY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATE TUMOR; PROSTATECTOMY; SURVIVAL RATE; UNITED STATES;

ADENOCARCINOMA; ADULT; AGED; BOSTON; DISEASE-FREE SURVIVAL; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM GRADING; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; SURVIVAL RATE;

EID: 84862095697     PISSN: 01475185     EISSN: 15320979     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/PAS.0b013e3182486faf     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (21)

1. Albertsen PC, Hanley JA, Barrows GH, et al. Prostate cancer and the Will Rogers phenomenon. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97: 1248-1253. (Pubitemid 41535365)
2. Allsbrook WC, Mangold KA, Johnson MH, et al. Interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma: general pathologist. Hum Pathol. 2001;32:81-88. (Pubitemid 32150632)
3. Bailar JC, Mellinger GT, Gleason DF. Survival rates of patients with prostatic cancer, tumor stage, and differentiation-preliminary report. Cancer Chemother Rep. 1966;50:129-136.
4. Billis A, Guimaraes MS, Freitas LL, et al. The impact of the 2005 international society of urological pathology consensus conference on standard Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma in needle biopsies. J Urol. 2008;180:548-552.
5. Chism DB, Hanlon AL, Troncoso P, et al. The Gleason score shift: score four and seven years ago. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;56:1241-1247. (Pubitemid 36842874)
6. Cooperberg MR, Lubeck DP, Mehta SS, et al. Time trends in clinical risk stratification for prostate cancer: implications for outcomes (data from CaPSURE). J Urol. 2003;170:S21-S25.
7. Dong F, Reuther AM, Magi-Galluzzi C, et al. Pathologic stage migration has slowed in the late PSA era. Urology. 2007;70:839-842. (Pubitemid 350192620)
8. Eggener SE, Scardino PT, Walsh PC, et al. Predicting 15-year prostate cancer specific mortality after radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2011;185:869-875.
9. Epstein JI. An update of the Gleason grading system. J Urol. 2010;183:433-440.
10. Epstein JI, Allsbrook WC, 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. (Pubitemid 41232997)
11. Epstein JI, Pizov G, Walsh PC. Correlation of pathologic findings with progression after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Cancer. 1993;71:3582-3593. (Pubitemid 23152669)
12. Falzarano SM, Magi-Galluzzi C. Prostate cancer staging and grading at radical prostatectomy over time. Adv Anat Pathol. 2011;18:159-164.
13. Fromont G, Validire P, Prapotnich D, et al. Pathologic reassessment of prostate cancer surgical specimens before molecular retrospective studies. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17:836-840.
14. Gleason DF. Classification of prostatic carcinomas. Cancer Chemother Rep. 1966;50:125-128.
15. Gleason DF. The Veteran's Administration Cooperative Urologic Research Group: histologic grading and clinical staging of prostatic carcinoma. In: Tannenbaum M, ed. Urologic Pathology: The Prostate. Philadelphia: Lea and Febiger; 1977:171-198.
16. Gleason DF, Mellinger GT. Prediction of prognosis for prostatic adenocarcinoma by combined histological grading and clinical staging. J Urol. 1974;111:58-64.
17. 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. (Pubitemid 44832632)
18. Kattan MW, Wheeler TM, Scardino PT. Postoperative nomogram for disease recurrence after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:1499-1507. (Pubitemid 29220858)
19. Kupelian PA, Katcher J, Levin HS, et al. Stage T1-2 prostate cancer: a multivariate analysis of factors affecting biochemical and clinical failures after radical prostatectomy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997;37:1043-1052. (Pubitemid 27230028)
20. Partin AW, Yoo J, Carter HB, 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. 1993;150: 110-114. (Pubitemid 23175983)
21. Uemura H, Hoshino K, Sasaki T, et al. Usefulness of the 2005 International Society of Urologic Pathology Gleason grading system in prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens. BJU Int. 2009;103:1190-1194.