Importance and determinants of Gleason score undergrading on biopsy sample of prostate cancer in a population-based study

BMC Urology

Volumn 13, Issue , 2013, Pages

  Rapiti, Elisabetta ^a   Schaffar, Robin ^a   Iselin, Christophe ^b   Miralbell, Raymond ^b   Pelte, Marie Françoise ^b   Weber, Damien ^b   Zanetti, Roberto ^c   Neyroud Caspar, Isabelle ^a   Bouchardy, Christine ^a  

^a GENEVA CANCER REGISTRY   (Switzerland)

^b GENEVA UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS   (Switzerland)

^c CPO   (Italy)

Author keywords

Biopsy; Biopsy undergrading; Gleason score; Population based study; Prostate cancer; Prostatectomy

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER PATIENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATIONAL STUDY; DISEASE SEVERITY; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; KAPPA STATISTICS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NEEDLE BIOPSY; POPULATION RESEARCH; PREDICTION; PRIVATE HOSPITAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATE VOLUME; PROSTATECTOMY; PUBLIC HOSPITAL; SOCIAL STATUS; THERAPY DELAY;

ADENOCARCINOMA; AGE FACTORS; AGED; BIOPSY, LARGE-CORE NEEDLE; COHORT STUDIES; DIAGNOSTIC ERRORS; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM GRADING; NEOPLASM STAGING; PROSTATE; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; SWITZERLAND;

EID: 84875919202     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14712490     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2490-13-19     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer: summary of NICE guidance. Graham J, Baker M, Macbeth F, Titshall V, BMJ 2008 336 610 612 10.1136/bmj.39498.525706.AD 18340076
2. Effect of the number of core biopsies of the prostate on predicting Gleason score of prostate cancer. Thickman D, Speers WC, Philpott PJ, Shapiro H, J Urol 1996 156 110 113 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)65956-1 8648769
3. Upgrading the Gleason score in extended prostate biopsy: implications for treatment choice. Moreira Leite KR, Camara-Lopes LH, Dall'oglio MF, Cury J, Antunes AA, Sanudo A, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009 73 353 356 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.04.039 18774658
4. Prognostic significance of Gleason score discrepancies between needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy. Muntener M, Epstein JI, Hernandez DJ, Gonzalgo ML, Mangold L, Humphreys E, Eur Urol 2008 53 767 775 10.1016/j.eururo.2007.11. 016 18060681
5. Prostate cancers scored as Gleason 6 on prostate biopsy are frequently Gleason 7 tumors at radical prostatectomy: implication on outcome. Pinthus JH, Witkos M, Fleshner NE, Sweet J, Evans A, Jewett MA, J Urol 2006 176 979 984 10.1016/j.juro.2006.04.102 16890675
6. Is biopsy Gleason score independently associated with biochemical progression following radical prostatectomy after adjusting for pathological Gleason score? Fitzsimons NJ, Presti JC Jr, Kane CJ, Terris MK, Aronson WJ, Amling CL, J Urol 2006 176 2453 2458 10.1016/j.juro.2006.08.014 17085127
7. Under staging and under grading in a contemporary series of patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: results from the Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor database. Grossfeld GD, Chang JJ, Broering JM, Li JP, Lubeck DP, Flanders SC, J Urol 2001 165 851 856 10.1016/S0022- 5347(05)66543-3 11176485
8. Trends in Gleason score: concordance between biopsy and prostatectomy over 15 years. Rajinikanth A, Manoharan M, Soloway CT, Civantos FJ, Soloway MS, Urology 2008 72 177 182 10.1016/j.urology.2007.10.022 18279938
9. Significant discrepancies between diagnostic and pathologic Gleason sums in prostate cancer: the predictive role of age and prostate-specific antigen. Isariyawongse BK, Sun L, Banez LL, Robertson C, Polascik TJ, Maloney K, Urology 2008 72 882 886 10.1016/j.urology.2008.02.021 18384857
10. The effect of the number of biopsy cores on the concordance between prostate biopsy and prostatectomy Gleason score: a prostate volume-controlled study. Antunes AA, Leite KR, Dall'oglio MF, Cury J, Srougi M, Arch Pathol Lab Med 2008 132 989 992 18517284
11. Clinical predictors of upgrading to Gleason grade 4 or 5 disease at radical prostatectomy: potential implications for patient selection for radiation and androgen suppression therapy. D'Amico AV, Renshaw AA, Arsenault L, Schultz D, Richie JP, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999 45 841 846 10.1016/S0360-3016(99)00260-6 10571187
12. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Heidenreich A, Aus G, Bolla M, Joniau S, Matveev VB, Schmid HP, Eur Urol 2008 53 68 80 10.1016/j.eururo.2007.09.002 17920184
13. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. part 1: screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised disease. Heidenreich A, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, Mason M, Matveev V, Eur Urol 2011 59 61 71 10.1016/j.eururo.2010.10. 039 21056534
14. Switzerland, Geneva. Bouchardy C, Cancer Incidence in Five Continents Vol. IX Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer, Curado MP, Edwards B, Shin HR, Storm H, Ferlay J, Heanue M, 2007 369 370
15. Clinical biostatistics. LIV. The biostatistics of concordance. Kramer MS, Feinstein AR, Clin Pharmacol Ther 1981 29 111 123 10.1038/clpt.1981.18 7460469
16. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Landis JR, Koch GG, Biometrics 1977 33 159 174 10.2307/2529310 843571
17. Concordance between Gleason scores of needle biopsies and radical prostatectomy specimens: a population-based study. Kvale R, Moller B, Wahlqvist R, Fossa SD, Berner A, Busch C, BJU Int 2009 103 1647 1654 10.1111/j.1464-410X. 2008.08255.x 19154461
18. Morbidity of prostate biopsy after simplified versus complex preparation protocols: assessment of risk factors. Zaytoun OM, Anil T, Moussa AS, Jianbo L, Fareed K, Jones JS, Urology 2011 77 910 914 10.1016/j.urology.2010.12.033 21316093
19. Comparison of digital rectal examination and serum prostate specific antigen in the early detection of prostate cancer: results of a multicenter clinical trial of 6,630 men. Catalona WJ, Richie JP, Ahmann FR, Hudson MA, Scardino PT, Flanigan RC, J Urol 1994 151 1283 1290 7512659
20. The pathological features and prognosis of prostate cancer detectable with current diagnostic tests. Ohori M, Wheeler TM, Dunn JK, Stamey TA, Scardino PT, J Urol 1994 152 1714 1720 7523718
21. De-differentiation with time in prostate cancer and the influence of treatment on the course of the disease. Cumming JA, Ritchie AW, Goodman CM, McIntyre MA, Chisholm GD, Br J Urol 1990 65 271 274 10.1111/j.1464-410X.1990. tb14725.x 2337747
22. Dedifferentiation in the metastatic progression of prostate carcinoma. Cheng L, Slezak J, Bergstralh EJ, Cheville JC, Sweat S, Zincke H, Cancer 1999 86 657 663 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19990815)86:4<657::AID-CNCR15>3.0.CO;2-9 10440694
23. Update on the Gleason grading system for prostate cancer: results of an international consensus conference of urologic pathologists. Epstein JI, Allsbrook WC Jr, Amin MB, Egevad LL, Adv Anat Pathol 2006 13 57 59 10.1097/01.pap.0000202017.78917.18 16462155
24. Interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading: evaluation using prostate cancer tissue microarrays. Burchardt M, Engers R, Muller M, Burchardt T, Willers R, Epstein JI, J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2008 134 1071 1078 10.1007/s00432-008-0388-0 18392850
25. The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma. Epstein JI, Allsbrook WC Jr, Amin MB, Egevad LL, Am J Surg Pathol 2005 29 1228 1242 10.1097/01.pas. 0000173646.99337.b1 16096414
26. The impact of the 2005 international society of urological pathology consensus conference on standard Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma in needle biopsies. Billis A, Guimaraes MS, Freitas LL, Meirelles L, Magna LA, Ferreira U, J Urol 2008 180 548 552 10.1016/j.juro.2008.04.018 18550106
27. The significance of modified Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma in biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens. Helpap B, Egevad L, Virchows Arch 2006 449 622 627 10.1007/s00428-006-0310-6 17091254
28. Implications of the International Society of Urological Pathology modified Gleason grading system. Egevad L, Mazzucchelli R, Montironi R, Arch Pathol Lab Med 2012 136 426 434 10.5858/arpa.2011-0495-RA 22458905
29. Prostate-specific antigen kinetics in clinical decision-making during active surveillance for early prostate cancer-a review. van den Bergh RC, Roemeling S, Roobol MJ, Wolters T, Schroder FH, Bangma CH, Eur Urol 2008 54 505 516 10.1016/j.eururo.2008.06.040 18585845