Top

Published in:

01-04-2009 | Original Article

Prediction of Gleason score upgrading in low-risk prostate cancers diagnosed via multi (≥12)-core prostate biopsy

Published in: World Journal of Urology | Issue 2/2009

Abstract

Objectives

A paucity of data exists on actual pathology of the contemporary patients strictly categorized as having low-risk prostate cancer. We tried to identify useful preoperative predictors of Gleason score upgrading in patients who underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) for low-risk prostate cancer diagnosed via multi-core prostate biopsy.

Methods

A total of 203 patients who underwent radical RRP for low-risk prostate cancer, as defined by D’Amico et al.'s classification (clinical stage ≤T2a, biopsy Gleason sum ≤6, and PSA ≤10 ng/ml), detected via multi (≥12)-core prostate biopsy were enrolled. We reviewed patients preoperative and pathological data.

Results

Among all subjects, 81 (39.9%) were upgraded to Gleason score ≥7 after RRP, whereas no downgrading was observed. In multivariate analysis, only preoperative PSA level (P = 0.024) and number of positive cores (P = 0.027) were observed to be independent predictors of Gleason score upgrading following RRP. Also, Gleason core upgrading was observed to be significantly associated with extraprostatic extension of tumor (P < 0.001) and positive surgical margin (P = 0.002).

Conclusions

A significant proportion of patients with low-risk prostate cancer as defined by D’Amico et al.’s classification diagnosed via multi-core prostate biopsy in contemporary period may have Gleason score upgrading following RRP. For patients with low-risk prostate cancer, preoperative PSA level and number of positive cores may be useful predictors of Gleason score upgrading, which was observed to significantly associated with other adverse pathologic features.

D’Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB et al (1998) Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 280:969–974. doi:10.1001/jama.280.11.969 PubMedCrossRef

Cooperberg MR, Lubeck DP, Meng MV, Mehta SS, Carroll PR (2004) The changing face of low-risk prostate cancer: trends in clinical presentation and primary management. J Clin Oncol 22:2141–2149. doi:10.1200/JCO.2004.10.062 PubMedCrossRef

Eggener SE, Scardino PT, Carroll PR et al (2007) Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer: a critical appraisal of rationale and modalities. J Urol 178:2260–2267. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2007.08.072 PubMedCrossRef

Gleason DF (1992) Histologic grading of prostate cancer: a perspective. Hum Pathol 23:273–279. doi:10.1016/0046-8177(92)90108-F PubMedCrossRef

Cookson MS, Fleshner NE, Soloway SM, Fair WR (1997) Correlation between Gleason score of needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimen: accuracy and clinical implications. J Urol 157:559–562. doi:10.1016/S0022-5347(01)65201-7 PubMedCrossRef

Bostwick DG (1994) Gleason grading of prostatic needle biopsies. Correlation with grade in 316 matched prostatectomies. Am J Surg Pathol 18:796–803PubMedCrossRef

Chun FK, Briganti A, Graefen M et al (2007) Development and external validation of an extended 10-core biopsy nomogram. Eur Urol 52:436–444. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2006.08.039 PubMedCrossRef

Kulkarni GS, Lockwood G, Evans A et al (2007) Clinical predictors of Gleason score upgrading: implications for patients considering watchful waiting, active surveillance, or brachytherapy. Cancer 109:2432–2438. doi:10.1002/cncr.22712 PubMedCrossRef

Gofrit ON, Zorn KC, Taxy JB et al (2007) Predicting the risk of patients with biopsy Gleason score 6 to harbor a higher grade cancer. J Urol 178:1925–1928. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2007.07.049 PubMedCrossRef

10.

Dong F, Jones JS, Stephenson AJ, Magi-Galluzzi C, Reuther AM, Klein EA (2008) Prostate cancer volume at biopsy predicts clinically significant upgrading. J Urol 179:896–900. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2007.10.060 PubMedCrossRef

11.

Turley RS, Hamilton RJ, Terris MK et al (2008) Small transrectal ultrasound volume predicts clinically significant Gleason score upgrading after radical prostatectomy: results from the SEARCH database. J Urol 179:523–527. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2007.09.078 PubMedCrossRef

12.

Expert Consultation WHO (2004) Appropriate body-mass index for Asian populations and its implications for policy and intervention strategies. Lancet 363:157–163. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(03)15268-3 CrossRef

13.

D’Amico AV, Renshaw AA, Arsenault L, Schultz D, Richie JP (1999) 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 45:841–846. doi:10.1016/S0360-3016(99)00260-6 PubMed

14.

King CR, Patel DA, Terris MK (2005) Prostate biopsy volume indices do not predict for significant Gleason upgrading. Am J Clin Oncol 28:125–129. doi:10.1097/01.coc.0000143848.24158.c3 PubMedCrossRef

15.

Chun FK, Briganti A, Shariat SF et al (2006) Significant upgrading affects a third of men diagnosed with prostate cancer: predictive nomogram and internal validation. BJU Int 98:329–334. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06262.x PubMedCrossRef

16.

Mian BM, Lehr DJ, Moore CK et al (2006) Role of prostate biopsy schemes in accurate prediction of Gleason scores. Urology 67:379–383. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2005.08.018 PubMedCrossRef

17.

King CR, McNeal JE, Gill H, Presti JC Jr (2004) Extended prostate biopsy scheme improves reliability of Gleason grading: implications for radiotherapy patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 59:386–391. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2003.10.014 PubMed

18.

Pinthus JH, Witkos M, Fleshner NE et al (2006) Prostate cancers scored as Gleason 6 on prostate biopsy are frequently Gleason 7 tumors at radical prostatectomy: implication on outcome. J Urol 176:979–984. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2006.04.102 PubMedCrossRef

19.

Freedland SJ, Kane CJ, Amling CL, Aronson WJ, Terris MK, Presti JC Jr (2007) Upgrading and downgrading of prostate needle biopsy specimens: risk factors and clinical implications. Urology 69:495–499. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2006.10.036 PubMedCrossRef

Title: Prediction of Gleason score upgrading in low-risk prostate cancers diagnosed via multi (≥12)-core prostate biopsy
Publication date: 01-04-2009
Published in: World Journal of Urology / Issue 2/2009
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Electronic ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-008-0343-3

ACC 2024 Congress

Springer Medicine

Prediction of Gleason score upgrading in low-risk prostate cancers diagnosed via multi (≥12)-core prostate biopsy

Abstract

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

ACC 2024 Congress

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 2/2009

Multimodality therapy in penile cancer: when and which treatments?

Collecting system involvement by renal tumor: are CT measurements reliable enough?

The evaluation and treatment of acute epididymitis in a large university based population: are CDC guidelines being followed?

Penile cancer: epidemiology, pathogenesis and prevention

17β-Estradiol affects the proliferation and apoptosis of rat bladder neck smooth muscle cells by modulating cell cycle transition and related proteins

Penile preserving surgery and surgical strategies to maximize penile form and function in penile cancer: recommendations from the United Kingdom experience