Cribriform morphology predicts upstaging after radical prostatectomy in patients with Gleason score 3 + 4 = 7 prostate cancer at transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided needle biopsy

Virchows Archiv

Volumn 467, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 437-442

  Keefe, Daniel T ^a   Schieda, Nicola ^a   El Hallani, Soufiane ^a   Breau, Rodney H ^a   Morash, Chris ^a   Robertson, Susan J ^a   Mai, Kien T ^a   Belanger, Eric C ^a   Flood, Trevor A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Active surveillance; Prostate; Prostate cancer; TRUS guided needle biopsy

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; ARTICLE; BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATABASE; CANCER GRADING; CANCER SURGERY; CLINICAL FEATURE; DENSITY; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; IMAGE GUIDED BIOPSY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MORPHOLOGY; NEEDLE BIOPSY; NUCLEAR SIZE; PATHOLOGIST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; PROTEIN BLOOD LEVEL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY; AGED; CANCER STAGING; INTERVENTIONAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RECTUM;

AGED; BIOPSY, NEEDLE; HUMANS; IMAGE-GUIDED BIOPSY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM GRADING; NEOPLASM STAGING; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RECTUM; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, INTERVENTIONAL;

EID: 84944514516     PISSN: 09456317     EISSN: 14322307     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00428-015-1809-5     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Siegel R, Ma J, Zou Z, Jemal A (2014) Cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin 64:9–29. doi:10.3322/caac.21208
2. Ploussard G, Epstein JI, Montironi R, Carroll PR, Wirth M, Grimm MO, Bjartell AS, Montorsi F, Freedland SJ, Erbersdobler A, van der Kwast TH (2011) The contemporary concept of significant versus insignificant prostate cancer. Eur Urol 60:291–303. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2011.05.006
3. Dall’Era MA, Albertsen PC, Bangma C, Carroll PR, Carter HB, Cooperberg MR, Freedland SJ, Klotz LH, Parker C, Soloway MS (2012) Active surveillance for prostate cancer: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol 62:976–983. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2012.05.072
4. Stattin P, Holmberg E, Johansson JE, Holmberg L, Adolfsson J, Hugosson J (2010) Outcomes in localized prostate cancer: National Prostate Cancer Register of Sweden follow-up study. J Natl Cancer Inst 102:950–958. doi:10.1093/jnci/djq154
5. van den Bergh RC, Roemeling S, Roobol MJ, Roobol W, Schroder FH, Bangma CH (2007) Prospective validation of active surveillance in prostate cancer: the PRIAS study. Eur Urol 52:1560–1563. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2007.05.011
6. van As NJ, Norman AR, Thomas K, Khoo VS, Thompson A, Huddart RA, Horwich A, Dearnaley DP, Parker CC (2008) Predicting the probability of deferred radical treatment for localised prostate cancer managed by active surveillance. Eur Urol 54:1297–1305. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2008.02.039
7. Klotz L, Zhang L, Lam A, Nam R, Mamedov A, Loblaw A (2010) Clinical results of long-term follow-up of a large, active surveillance cohort with localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 28:126–131. doi:10.1200/jco.2009.24.2180
8. van den Bergh RC, Roemeling S, Roobol MJ, Aus G, Hugosson J, Rannikko AS, Tammela TL, Bangma CH, Schroder FH (2009) Gleason score 7 screen-detected prostate cancers initially managed expectantly: outcomes in 50 men. BJU Int 103:1472–1477. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2008.08281.x
9. Epstein JI, Feng Z, Trock BJ, Pierorazio PM (2012) Upgrading and downgrading of prostate cancer from biopsy to radical prostatectomy: incidence and predictive factors using the modified Gleason grading system and factoring in tertiary grades. Eur Urol 61:1019–1024. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2012.01.050
10. Huang CC, Kong MX, Zhou M, Rosenkrantz AB, Taneja SS, Melamed J, Deng FM (2014) Gleason score 3 + 4 = 7 prostate cancer with minimal quantity of Gleason pattern 4 on needle biopsy is associated with low-risk tumor in radical prostatectomy specimen. Am J Surg Pathol 38:1096–1101. doi:10.1097/pas.0000000000000235
11. Epstein JI (2010) An update of the Gleason grading system. J Urol 183:433–440. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2009.10.046
12. Iczkowski KA, Torkko KC, Kotnis GR, Wilson RS, Huang W, Wheeler TM, Abeyta AM, La Rosa FG, Cook S, Werahera PN, Lucia MS (2011) Digital quantification of five high-grade prostate cancer patterns, including the cribriform pattern, and their association with adverse outcome. Am J Clin Pathol 136:98–107. doi:10.1309/ajcpz7wbu9yxsjpe
13. Kryvenko ON, Gupta NS, Virani N, Schultz D, Gomez J, Amin A, Lane Z, Epstein JI (2013) Gleason score 7 adenocarcinoma of the prostate with lymph node metastases: analysis of 184 radical prostatectomy specimens. Arch Pathol Lab Med 137:610–617. doi:10.5858/arpa.2012-0128-OA
14. Moussa AS, Li J, Soriano M, Klein EA, Dong F, Jones JS (2009) Prostate biopsy clinical and pathological variables that predict significant grading changes in patients with intermediate and high grade prostate cancer. BJU Int 103:43–48. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2008.08059.x
15. Tilki D, Schlenker B, John M, Buchner A, Stanislaus P, Gratzke C, Karl A, Tan GY, Ergun S, Tewari AK, Stief CG, Seitz M, Reich O (2011) Clinical and pathologic predictors of Gleason sum upgrading in patients after radical prostatectomy: results from a single institution series. Urol Oncol 29:508–514. doi:10.1016/j.urolonc.2009.07.003
16. Dinh KT, Mahal BA, Ziehr DR, Muralidhar V, Chen YW, Viswanathan VB, Nezolosky MD, Beard CJ, Choueiri TK, Martin NE, Orio PF, Sweeney CJ, Trinh QD, Nguyen PL (2015) Incidence and predictors of upgrading and upstaging among 10,000 contemporary patients with low-risk prostate cancer. J Urol. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2015.02.015
17. Bul M, Zhu X, Valdagni R, Pickles T, Kakehi Y, Rannikko A, Bjartell A, van der Schoot DK, Cornel EB, Conti GN, Boeve ER, Staerman F, Vis-Maters JJ, Vergunst H, Jaspars JJ, Strolin P, van Muilekom E, Schroder FH, Bangma CH, Roobol MJ (2013) Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer worldwide: the PRIAS study. Eur Urol 63:597–603. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2012.11.005
18. Latour M, Amin MB, Billis A, Egevad L, Grignon DJ, Humphrey PA, Reuter VE, Sakr WA, Srigley JR, Wheeler TM, Yang XJ, Epstein JI (2008) Grading of invasive cribriform carcinoma on prostate needle biopsy: an interobserver study among experts in genitourinary pathology. Am J Surg Pathol 32:1532–1539. doi:10.1097/PAS.0b013e318169e8fd
19. Epstein JI, Allsbrook WC Jr, Amin MB, Egevad LL (2005) The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 29:1228–1242
20. Kweldam CF, Wildhagen MF, Steyerberg EW, Bangma CH, van der Kwast TH, van Leenders GJ (2015) Cribriform growth is highly predictive for postoperative metastasis and disease-specific death in Gleason score 7 prostate cancer. Mod Pathol 28:457–464. doi:10.1038/modpathol.2014.116
21. Dong F, Yang P, Wang C, Wu S, Xiao Y, McDougal WS, Young RH, Wu CL (2013) Architectural heterogeneity and cribriform pattern predict adverse clinical outcome for Gleason grade 4 prostatic adenocarcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 37:1855–1861. doi:10.1097/PAS.0b013e3182a02169
22. Khan MA, Walsh PC, Miller MC, Bales WD, Epstein JI, Mangold LA, Partin AW, Veltri RW (2003) Quantitative alterations in nuclear structure predict prostate carcinoma distant metastasis and death in men with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Cancer 98:2583–2591. doi:10.1002/cncr.11852
23. Makarov DV, Marlow C, Epstein JI, Miller MC, Landis P, Partin AW, Carter HB, Veltri RW (2008) Using nuclear morphometry to predict the need for treatment among men with low grade, low stage prostate cancer enrolled in a program of expectant management with curative intent. Prostate 68:183–189. doi:10.1002/pros.20679
24. Partin AW, Steinberg GD, Pitcock RV, Wu L, Piantadosi S, Coffey DS, Epstein JI (1992) Use of nuclear morphometry, Gleason histologic scoring, clinical stage, and age to predict disease-free survival among patients with prostate cancer. Cancer 70:161–168
25. Veltri RW, Isharwal S, Miller MC, Epstein JI, Partin AW (2010) Nuclear roundness variance predicts prostate cancer progression, metastasis, and death: a prospective evaluation with up to 25 years of follow-up after radical prostatectomy. Prostate 70:1333–1339. doi:10.1002/pros.21168
26. Wittschieber D, Kollermann J, Schlomm T, Sauter G, Erbersdobler A (2010) Nuclear grading versus Gleason grading in small samples containing prostate cancer: a tissue microarray study. Pathol Oncol Res 16:479–484. doi:10.1007/s12253-010-9270-x