The quantitative Gleason score improves prostate cancer risk assessment

Cancer

Volumn 118, Issue 24, 2012, Pages 6046-6054

  Reese, Adam C ^a,b   Cowan, Janet E ^a   Brajtbord, Jonathan S ^a   Harris, Catherine R ^a   Carroll, Peter R ^a   Cooperberg, Matthew R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b DEPARTMENT OF PATHOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

biopsy; local neoplasm recurrence; pathology; prostatectomy; prostatic neoplasms

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER GRADING; CANCER RECURRENCE; CANCER RISK; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DISEASE SURVEILLANCE; GLEASON SCORE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; QUANTITATIVE STUDY; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RISK ASSESSMENT; SCORING SYSTEM; UNITED STATES;

AGED; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM GRADING; NEOPLASM STAGING; PROGNOSIS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; PROSTATE; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RISK ASSESSMENT; ROC CURVE; SAN FRANCISCO;

EID: 84870657820     PISSN: 0008543X     EISSN: 10970142     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.27670     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Gleason DF,. Classification of prostatic carcinomas. Cancer Chemother Rep. 1966; 50: 125-128.
2. Mellinger GT, Gleason D, Bailar J, 3rd,. The histology and prognosis of prostatic cancer. J Urol. 1967; 97: 331-337.
3. D'Amico AV, Chen MH, Renshaw AA, Loffredo B, Kantoff PW,. Risk of prostate cancer recurrence in men treated with radiation alone or in conjunction with combined or less than combined androgen suppression therapy. J Clin Oncol. 2008; 26: 2979-2983.
4. Grossfeld GD, Latini DM, Lubeck DP, Mehta SS, Carroll PR,. Predicting recurrence after radical prostatectomy for patients with high risk prostate cancer. J Urol. 2003; 169: 157-163.
5. Rasiah KK, Stricker PD, Haynes AM, et al. Prognostic significance of Gleason pattern in patients with Gleason score 7 prostate carcinoma. Cancer. 2003; 98: 2560-2565.
6. Cooperberg MR, Pasta DJ, Elkin EP, et al. The University of California, San Francisco Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment score: a straightforward and reliable preoperative predictor of disease recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2005; 173: 1938-1942.
7. Stephenson AJ, Scardino PT, Eastham JA, et al. Postoperative nomogram predicting the 10-year probability of prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol. 2005; 23: 7005-7012.
8. Rubin MA, Bismar TA, Curtis S, Montie JE,. Prostate needle biopsy reporting: how are the surgical members of the Society of Urologic Oncology using pathology reports to guide treatment of prostate cancer patients ? Am J Surg Pathol. 2004; 28: 946-952.
9. Park HK, Choe G, Byun SS, Lee HW, Lee SE, Lee E,. Evaluation of concordance of Gleason score between prostatectomy and biopsies that show more than two different Gleason scores in positive cores. Urology. 2006; 67: 110-114.
10. Stark JR, Perner S, Stampfer MJ, et al. Gleason score and lethal prostate cancer: does 3 + 4 = 4 + 3 ? J Clin Oncol. 2009; 27: 3459-3464.
11. Epstein JI, Allsbrook WC Jr, Amin MB, Egevad LL,; ISUP Grading Committee. The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2005; 29: 1228-1242.
12. Vickers AJ, Elkin EB,. Decision curve analysis: a novel method for evaluating prediction models. Med Decis Making. 2006; 26: 565-574.
13. Rubin MA, Mucci NR, Manley S, et al. Predictors of Gleason pattern 4/5 prostate cancer on prostatectomy specimens: can high grade tumor be predicted preoperatively ? J Urol. 2001; 165: 114-118.
14. Epstein JI,. An update of the Gleason grading system. J Urol. 2010; 183: 433-440.
15. Ghani KR, Grigor K, Tulloch DN, Bollina PR, McNeill SA,. Trends in reporting Gleason score 1991 to 2001: changes in the pathologist's practice. Eur Urol. 2005; 47: 196-201.
16. Albertsen PC, Hanley JA, Barrows GH, et al. Prostate cancer and the Will Rogers phenomenon. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005; 97: 1248-1253.
17. Berney DM,. The case for modifying the Gleason grading system. BJU Int. 2007; 100: 725-726.
18. Trock BJ, Guo CC, Gonzalgo ML, Magheli A, Loeb S, Epstein JI,. Tertiary Gleason patterns and biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy: proposal for a modified Gleason scoring system. J Urol. 2009; 182: 1364-1370.
19. Dall'Era MA, Cooperberg MR, Chan JM, et al. Active surveillance for early-stage prostate cancer: review of the current literature. Cancer. 2008; 112: 1650-1659.
20. D'Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, et al. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA. 1998; 280: 969-974.
21. Cooperberg MR, Cowan JE, Hilton JF, et al. Outcomes of active surveillance for men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2011; 29: 228-234.
22. Cagiannos I, Karakiewicz P, Eastham JA, et al. A preoperative nomogram identifying decreased risk of positive pelvic lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer. J Urol. 2003; 170: 1798-1803.
23. Wong WW, Vora SA, Schild SE, et al. Radiation dose escalation for localized prostate cancer: intensity-modulated radiotherapy versus permanent transperineal brachytherapy. Cancer. 2009; 115: 5596-5606.
24. Kuban D, Pollack A, Huang E, et al. Hazards of dose escalation in prostate cancer radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003; 57: 1260-1268.
25. Loeb S, Partin AW, Schaeffer EM,. Complications of pelvic lymphadenectomy: do the risks outweigh the benefits ? Rev Urol. 2010; 12: 20-24.
26. 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.
27. Cheng L, Koch MO, Juliar BE, et al. The combined percentage of Gleason patterns 4 and 5 is the best predictor of cancer progression after radical prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol. 2005; 23: 2911-2917.
28. Sim HG, Telesca D, Culp SH, et al. Tertiary Gleason pattern 5 in Gleason 7 prostate cancer predicts pathological stage and biochemical recurrence. J Urol. 2008; 179: 1775-1779.