Gleason grading of prostate cancer in needle biopsies or radical prostatectomy specimens: contemporary approach, current clinical significance and sources of pathology discrepancies

被引:87
作者
Montironi, R [1 ]
Mazzuccheli, R
Scarpelli, M
Lopez-Beltran, A
Fellegara, G
Algaba, F
机构
[1] Polytech Univ Marche Reg Ancona, Sch Med, Inst Pathol Anat & Histopathol, Azienda Osp Umberto 1, I-60020 Ancona, Italy
[2] Reina Sofia Univ Hosp, Dept Pathol, Cordoba, Spain
[3] Univ Cordoba, Sch Med, Cordoba, Spain
[4] Univ Parma, Dept Pathol, I-43100 Parma, Italy
[5] Univ Parma, Med Lab, Sect Pathol Anat & Histol, I-43100 Parma, Italy
[6] Univ Autonoma Barcelona, Sect Pathol, Fdn Puigvert, E-08193 Barcelona, Spain
[7] Univ Autonoma Barcelona, Sch Med, Dept Morphol, E-08193 Barcelona, Spain
关键词
prostate cancer; Gleason score; biopsy; radical prostatectomy;
D O I
10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05540.x
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
The Gleason grading system is a powerful tool to prognosticate and aid in the treatment of men with prostate cancer. The needle biopsy Gleason score correlates with virtually all other pathological variables, including tumour volume and margin status in radical prostatectomy specimens, serum prostate-specific antigen levels and many molecular markers. The Gleason score assigned to the tumour at radical prostatectomy is the most powerful predictor of progression after radical prostatectomy. However, there are significant deficiencies in the practice of this grading system. Not only are there problems among practising pathologists but also a relative lack of interobserver reproducibility among experts.
引用
收藏
页码:1146 / 1152
页数:7
相关论文
共 55 条
  • [1] HETEROGENEITY OF PROSTATE-CANCER IN RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY SPECIMENS
    AIHARA, M
    WHEELER, TM
    OHORI, M
    SCARDINO, PT
    [J]. UROLOGY, 1994, 43 (01) : 60 - 66
  • [2] Algaba Arrea F, 2004, Actas Urol Esp, V28, P21
  • [3] Interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma: Urologic pathologists
    Allsbrook, WC
    Mangold, KA
    Johnson, MH
    Lane, RB
    Lane, CG
    Amin, MB
    Bostwick, DG
    Humphrey, PA
    Jones, EC
    Reuter, VE
    Sakr, W
    Sesterhenn, IA
    Troncoso, P
    Wheeler, TM
    Epstein, JI
    [J]. HUMAN PATHOLOGY, 2001, 32 (01) : 74 - 80
  • [4] Amin M.B., 2004, GLEASON GRADING PROS
  • [5] AMIN MB, 2005, IN PRESS SCAND J URO
  • [6] [Anonymous], J UROL PATHOL
  • [7] Comparison of accuracy between the Partin tables of 1997 and 2001 to predict final pathological stage in clinically localized prostate cancer
    Augustin, H
    Eggert, T
    Wenske, S
    Karakiewicz, PI
    Palisaar, J
    Daghofer, F
    Huland, H
    Graefen, M
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2004, 171 (01) : 177 - 181
  • [8] Babaian RJ, 2001, CANCER, V91, P1414
  • [9] Bostwick DG, 2000, ARCH PATHOL LAB MED, V124, P995
  • [10] Prognostic significance of Gleason score 3+4 versus Gleason score 4+3 tumor at radical prostatectomy
    Chan, TY
    Partin, AW
    Walsh, PC
    Epstein, JI
    [J]. UROLOGY, 2000, 56 (05) : 823 - 827