Factors associated with downgrading in patients with high grade prostate cancer

Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations

Volumn 31, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 442-447

  Whitson, Jared M ^a   Porten, Sima P ^a   Cowan, Janet E ^a   Simko, Jeff P ^b,c   Cooperberg, Matthew R ^a,c   Carroll, Peter R ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Biopsy; Gleason score; Prostatic neoplasms; Tumor staging

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER TISSUE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; DATA BASE; DISEASE SEVERITY; DISEASE SURVEILLANCE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; RISK FACTOR;

AGED; BIOPSY, NEEDLE; DECISION MAKING; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM GRADING; NEOPLASM STAGING; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTORS;

EID: 84876697948     PISSN: 10781439     EISSN: 18732496     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2011.02.010     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Jemal A., Siegel R., Xu J., et al. Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 2010, 60:277-300.
2. Albertsen P.C., Fryback D.G., Storer B.E., et al. The impact of co-morbidity on life expectancy among men with localized prostate cancer. J Urol 1996, 156:127-132.
3. D'Amico A.V., Whittington R., Malkowicz S.B., 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.
4. Partin A.W., Mangold L.A., Lamm D.M., et al. Contemporary update of prostate cancer staging nomograms (Partin Tables) for the new millennium. Urology 2001, 58:843-848.
5. Cooperberg M.R., Lubeck D.P., Mehta S.S., et al. Time trends in clinical risk stratification for prostate cancer: Implications for outcomes (data from CaPSURE). J Urol 2003, 170:S21-S25. Discussion S6-7.
6. Divrik R.T., Eroglu A., Sahin A., et al. Increasing the number of biopsies increases the concordance of Gleason scores of needle biopsies and prostatectomy specimens. Urol Oncol 2007, 25:376-382.
7. Koksal I.T., Ozcan F., Kadioglu T.C., et al. Discrepancy between Gleason scores of biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens. Eur Urol 2000, 37:670-674.
8. San Francisco I.F., DeWolf W.C., Rosen S., et al. Extended prostate needle biopsy improves concordance of Gleason grading between prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2003, 169:136-140.
9. Stephenson A.J., Scardino P.T., Eastham J.A., et al. Preoperative nomogram predicting the 10-year probability of prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006, 98:715-717.
10. Stamey T.A. Making the most out of six systematic sextant biopsies. Urology 1995, 45:2-12.
11. Stamey T.A., McNeal J.E., Yemoto C.M., et al. Biological determinants of cancer progression in men with prostate cancer. JAMA 1999, 281:1395-1400.
12. Rubin M.A., Mucci N.R., 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.
13. Glaessgen A., Busch C., Norberg M., et al. Prediction of percent Gleason grade 4/5 by multiple core biopsies. Scand J Urol Nephrol 2006, 40:465-471.
14. Yang X.J., Lecksell K., Potter S.R., et al. Significance of small foci of Gleason score 7 or greater prostate cancer on needle biopsy. Urology 1999, 54:528-532.
15. Scattoni V., Raber M., Abdollah F., et al. Biopsy schemes with the fewest cores for detecting 95% of the prostate cancers detected by a 24-core biopsy. Eur Urol 2010, 57:1-8.
16. Epstein J.I., Allsbrook W.C., Amin M.B., et al. Update on the Gleason grading system for prostate cancer: Results of an international consensus conference of urologic pathologists. Adv Anat Pathol 2006, 13:57-59.
17. Chun F.K., Suardi N., Capitanio U., et al. Assessment of pathological prostate cancer characteristics in men with favorable biopsy features on predominantly sextant biopsy. Eur Urol 2009, 55:617. 28-6.
18. Fine S.W., Epstein J.I. A contemporary study correlating prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy Gleason score. J Urol 2008, 179:1335-1338. Discussion 8-9.
19. D'Amico A.V., Wu Y., Chen M.H., et al. Pathologic findings and prostate specific antigen outcome after radical prostatectomy for patients diagnosed on the basis of a single microscopic focus of prostate carcinoma with a Gleason score ≤7. Cancer 2000, 89:1810-1817.
20. Holmboe E.S., Concato J. Treatment decisions for localized prostate cancer: Asking men what's important. J Gen Intern Med 2000, 15:694-701.
21. Fowler F.J., McNaughton Collins M., Albertsen P.C., et al. Comparison of recommendations by urologists and radiation oncologists for treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 2000, 283:3217-3222.
22. Gorin M.A., Soloway C.T., Eldefrawy A., et al. Factors that influence patient enrollment in active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer. Urology 2011, 77:588-591.
23. Carroll P.R., Whitson J.M., Cooperberg M.R. Serum prostate-specific antigen for the early detection of prostate cancer: Always, never, or only sometimes?. J Clin Oncol 2011, 29:345-347.
24. Cooperberg M.R., Cowan J.E., Hilton J.F., et al. Outcomes of active surveillance for men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2011, 29:228-234.
25. Loeb S., Partin A.W., Schaeffer E.M. Complications of pelvic lymphadenectomy: Do the risks outweigh the benefits?. Rev Urol 2010, 12:20-24.
26. Zapatero A., Valcárcel F., Calvo F.A., et al. Risk-adapted androgen deprivation and escalated three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer: Does radiation dose influence outcome of patients treated with adjuvant androgen deprivation?. A GICOR study. J Clin Oncol 2005, 23:6561-6568.
27. Kuroiwa K., Shiraishi T., Naito S. Gleason score correlation between biopsy and prostatectomy specimens and prediction of high-grade Gleason patterns: Significance of Central Pathologic Review. Urology 2011, 77:407-411.
28. Oyama T., Allsbrook W.C., Kurokawa K., et al. A comparison of interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma in Japan and the United States. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2005, 129:1004-1010.
29. Muntener M., Epstein J.I., Hernandez D.J., et al. Prognostic significance of Gleason score discrepancies between needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2008, 53:767-775. Discussion 75-6.
30. Albertsen P.C., Hanley J.A., Barrows G.H., et al. Prostate cancer and the Will Rogers phenomenon. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005, 97:1248-1253.