Concordance between prostate needle biopsy and surgical histopathology in a primarily African-American population

International Journal of Surgical Pathology

Volumn 22, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 414-419

  Agarwal, Manuj ^a,b   Schwartz, David ^a,b   Weiss, Jeffrey ^a,b   Chen, Shan Chin ^a,b   Chhabra, Arpit ^a,b   Rotman, Marvin ^a,b   Schreiber, David ^a,b  

^a DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS   (United States)

^b SUNY DOWNSTATE MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

concordance; prostate biopsy; radical prostatectomy

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

AFRICAN AMERICAN; ARTICLE; GLEASON SCORE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MALE; NEEDLE BIOPSY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; ADENOCARCINOMA; ADULT; AGED; CANCER GRADING; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; PROSTATE; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; UNITED STATES; VERY ELDERLY;

ADENOCARCINOMA; ADULT; AFRICAN AMERICANS; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BIOPSY, NEEDLE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM GRADING; PROSTATE; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84904716940     PISSN: 10668969     EISSN: 19402465     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1066896913513834     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Gleason DF, Mellinger GT. Prediction of prognosis for prostatic adenocarcinoma by combined histological grading and clinical staging. J Urol. 1974 ; 111: 58
2. Partin AW, Kattan MW, Subong EN, et al. Combination of prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage, and Gleason score to predict pathological stage of localized prostate cancer. JAMA. 1997 ; 277: 1445-1451 (Pubitemid 27208886)
3. Epstein JI. An update of the Gleason grading system. J Urol. 2010 ; 183: 433-440
4. King CR. Patterns of prostate cancer biopsy grading: trends and clinical implications. Int J Cancer. 2000 ; 90: 305-311 (Pubitemid 32049292)
5. Freedland SJ, Kane CJ, Amling CL, Aronson WJ, Terris MK, Presti JC. Upgrading and downgrading of prostate needle biopsy specimens: risk factors and clinical implications. Urology. 2007 ; 69: 495-499 (Pubitemid 46428381)
6. Chun FKH, Briganti A, Shariat SF, et al. Significant upgrading affects a third of men diagnosed with prostate cancer: predictive nomogram and internal validation. BJU Int. 2006 ; 98: 329-334
7. Rajinikanth A, Manoharan M, Soloway CT, Civantos FJ, Soloway MS. Trends in Gleason score: concordance between biopsy and prostatectomy over 15 years. Urology. 2008 ; 72: 177-182
8. Cheng I, Witte JS, McClure LA, et al. Socioeconomic status and prostate cancer incidence and mortality rates among the diverse population of California. Cancer Causes Control. 2009 ; 20: 1431-1440
9. Hoffman RM, Gilliland FD, Eley JW, et al. Racial and ethnic differences in advanced-stage prostate cancer: the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001 ; 93: 388-395 (Pubitemid 32229383)
10. Altman DG Practical Statistics for Medical Research. London, UK: Chapman & Hall/CRC ; 1990 :
11. Gleason DF. Histologic grading of prostate cancer: a perspective. Hum Pathol. 1992 ; 23: 273-279
12. Cookson MS, Fleshner NE, Soloway SM, Fair WR. Correlation between Gleason score of needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimen: accuracy and clinical implications. J Urol. 1997 ; 157: 559-562 (Pubitemid 27026838)
13. Garnett JE, Oyasu R, Grayhack JT. The accuracy of diagnostic biopsy specimens in predicting tumor grades by Gleason's classification of radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol. 1984 ; 131: 690-693 (Pubitemid 14109619)
14. Mills SE, Fowler JE. Gleason histologic grading of prostatic carcinoma: correlations between biopsy and prostatectomy specimens. Cancer. 1986 ; 57: 346-349 (Pubitemid 16212041)
15. Spires SE, Cibull ML, Wood DP, Miller S, Spires SM, Banks ER. Gleason histologic grading in prostatic carcinoma: correlation of 18-gauge core biopsy with prostatectomy. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1994 ; 118: 705
16. 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: 566-576 (Pubitemid 27213072)
17. Bostwick DG, Shan A, Qian J, et al. Independent origin of multiple foci of prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia. Cancer. 1998 ; 83: 1995-2002
18. D'Amico AV, Renshaw AA, Arsenault L, Schultz D, Richie JP. 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. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999 ; 45: 841-846 (Pubitemid 29525444)
19. Gofrit ON, Zorn KC, Taxy JB, et al. Predicting the risk of patients with biopsy Gleason score 6 to harbor a higher grade cancer. J Urol. 2007 ; 178: 1925-1928 (Pubitemid 47538623)
20. 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: 1087-1091
21. Dong F, Jones JS, Stephenson AJ, Magi-Galluzzi C, Reuther AM, Klein EA. Prostate cancer volume at biopsy predicts clinically significant upgrading. J Urol. 2008 ; 179: 896-900
22. Djavan B, Susani M, Bursa B, Basharkhah A, Simak R, Marberger M. Predictability and significance of multifocal prostate cancer in the radical prostatectomy specimen. Tech Urol. 1999 ; 5: 139-142 (Pubitemid 29501407)
23. Arora R, Koch MO, Eble JN, Ulbright TM, Li L, Cheng L. Heterogeneity of Gleason grade in multifocal adenocarcinoma of the prostate. Cancer. 2004 ; 100: 2362-2366 (Pubitemid 38657883)
24. King CR, McNeal JE, Gill H, Presti JC. Extended prostate biopsy scheme improves reliability of Gleason grading: implications for radiotherapy patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004 ; 59: 386-391 (Pubitemid 38622590)
25. Kvåle R, Møller B, Wahlqvist R, et al. Concordance between Gleason scores of needle biopsies and radical prostatectomy specimens: a populationbased study. BJU Int. 2009 ; 103: 1647-1654
26. Rapiti E, Schaffar R, Iselin C, et al. Importance and determinants of Gleason score undergrading on biopsy sample of prostate cancer in a population-based study. BMC Urol. 2013 ; 13: 1-6
27. Dong F, Jones JS, Stephenson AJ, Magi-Galluzzi C, Reuther AM, Klein EA. Prostate cancer volume at biopsy predicts clinically significant upgrading. J Urol. 2008 ; 179: 896-900
28. D'Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, et al. A multivariate analysis of clinical and pathological factors that predict for prostate specific antigen failure after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Urol. 1995 ; 154: 131-138
29. National Comprehensive Cancer Network Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Prostate cancer. http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician-gls/pdf/ prostate.pdf. Accessed August 21, 2013.
30. Truong M, Slezak JA, Lin CP, et al. Development and multi-institutional validation of an upgrading risk tool for Gleason 6 prostate cancer. Cancer. 2013 ;:
31. Vellekoop A, Loeb S, Folkvaljon Y, Stattin P. Population-based study of predictors for adverse pathology for active surveillance for Gleason 6 prostate cancer. J Urol. 2013 ;:
32. Kahl P, Wolf S, Adam A, et al. Saturation biopsy improves preoperative Gleason scoring of prostate cancer. Pathol Res Pract. 2009 ; 205: 259-264
33. Linder BJ, Frank I, Umbreit EC, et al. Standard and saturation transrectal prostate biopsy techniques are equally accurate among prostate cancer active surveillance candidates. Int J Urol. 2013 ; 20: 860-864