The prognostic significance of tertiary Gleason pattern 5 in radical prostatectomy specimens

被引:82
|
作者
Mosse, CA [1 ]
Magi-Galluzzi, C [1 ]
Tsuzuki, T [1 ]
Epstein, JI [1 ]
机构
[1] Johns Hopkins Univ Hosp, Dept Pathol, Baltimore, MD 21287 USA
关键词
prostate cancer; Gleason score; pathologic stage; margins;
D O I
10.1097/00000478-200403000-00014
中图分类号
R36 [病理学];
学科分类号
100104 ;
摘要
In the Gleason grading system for prostatic cancer only the two most prevalent patterns are reported, although a third (tertiary) pattern grade may be present. We compared the pathologic stage of 227 radical prostatectomies with tertiary pattern 5 to the pathologic stage of 604 radical prostatectomies lacking a tertiary component. Gleason score 3 + 4 tumors with a tertiary pattern of 5 were more likely to present with higher stage disease than those Gleason score 3 + 4 tumors without a tertiary component (P = 0.012) and at a stage similar to Gleason score 3 + 5 tumors. Gleason score 4 + 3 tumors with a tertiary pattern of 5 were less likely to be organ-confined than Gleason score 4 + 3 tumors (P = 0.02) and less likely to have lymph node metastases than Gleason score 4 + 4 tumors (P = 0.027). However, Gleason score 4 + 4 with a tertiary pattern of 5 were indistinguishable from Gleason score 4 + 4 tumors. The relative effects of a tertiary pattern of 5 were greatest when the primary and secondary stages were low but become obscured by the already aggressive nature of advanced primary and secondary patterns. Therefore, except for very high-grade tumors, tertiary scoring of prostatic adenocarcinoma at radical prostatectomy should be reported as it has prognostic significance.
引用
收藏
页码:394 / 398
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Significance of tertiary Gleason pattern 5 in patients with Gleason score 7 after radical prostatectomy: a retrospective cohort study
    Li, Jiakun
    Guo, Yaochuan
    Qiu, Shi
    He, Mingjing
    Jin, Kun
    Zheng, Xiaonan
    Tu, Xiang
    Liao, Xinyang
    Yang, Lu
    Wei, Qiang
    ONCOTARGETS AND THERAPY, 2019, 12 : 7157 - 7164
  • [2] Prognostic significance of the presence of tertiary Gleason grade 5 in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy specimens in Japanese patients with clinically localized prostate cancer
    Kamoda, Naohiro
    Ohori, Makoto
    Hirasawa, Yosuke
    Inoue, Rie
    Hashimoto, Takeshi
    Satake, Naoya
    Gondo, Tatsuo
    Nakagami, Yoshihiro
    Nagao, Toshitaka
    Ohno, Yoshio
    JAPANESE JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2019, 49 (03) : 276 - 280
  • [3] Tertiary Gleason Pattern 5 and Oncological Outcomes after Radical Prostatectomy
    Hashine, Katsuyoshi
    Yuasa, Akihito
    Shinomori, Kensuke
    Shirato, Akitomi
    Ninomiya, Iku
    Teramoto, Norihiro
    JAPANESE JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2011, 41 (04) : 571 - 576
  • [4] Integrating Tertiary Gleason 5 Patterns into Quantitative Gleason Grading in Prostate Biopsies and Prostatectomy Specimens
    Sauter, Guido
    Clauditz, Till
    Steurer, Stefan
    Wittmer, Corinna
    Buescheck, Franziska
    Krech, Till
    Lutz, Florian
    Lennartz, Maximilian
    Harms, Luisa
    Lawrenz, Lisa
    Moeller-Koop, Christina
    Simon, Ronald
    Jacobsen, Frank
    Wilczak, Waldemar
    Minner, Sarah
    Tsourlakis, Maria Christina
    Chirico, Viktoria
    Weidemann, Soeren
    Haese, Alexander
    Steuber, Thomas
    Salomon, Georg
    Matiu, Michael
    Vettorazzi, Eik
    Michl, Uwe
    Budaeus, Lars
    Tilki, Derya
    Thederan, Imke
    Pehrke, Dirk
    Beyer, Burkhard
    Fraune, Christoph
    Goebel, Cosima
    Heinrich, Marie
    Juhnke, Manuela
    Moeller, Katharina
    Bawahab, Ahmed Abdulwahab Abdullah
    Uhlig, Ria
    Huland, Hartwig
    Heinzer, Hans
    Graefen, Markus
    Schlomm, Thorsten
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2018, 73 (05) : 674 - 683
  • [5] Tertiary Gleason pattern in radical prostatectomy specimens is associated with worse outcomes than the next higher Gleason score group in localized prostate cancer
    Oezsoy, Mehmet
    D'Andrea, David
    Moschini, Marco
    Foerster, Beat
    Abufaraj, Mohammad
    Mathieu, Romain
    Briganti, Alberto
    Karakiewicz, Pierre I.
    Roupret, Morgan
    Seitz, Christian
    Czech, Anna Katarzyna
    Susani, Martin
    Shariat, Shahrokh F.
    UROLOGIC ONCOLOGY-SEMINARS AND ORIGINAL INVESTIGATIONS, 2018, 36 (04) : 158.e1 - 158.e6
  • [6] Aggressive Cancer Behavior of Latent Gleason Pattern 5 in Prostatectomy Specimens
    Fujimura, Tetsuya
    Fukuhara, Hiroshi
    Yamada, Yuta
    Taguchi, Satoru
    Sugihara, Toru
    Niimi, Aya
    Nakamura, Masaki
    Nakagawa, Tohru
    Igawa, Yasuhiko
    Homma, Yukio
    Kume, Haruki
    ANTICANCER RESEARCH, 2018, 38 (11) : 6529 - 6535
  • [7] Trends in distribution and prognostic significance of Gleason grades on radical retropubic prostatectomy specimens between 1989 and 2001
    Sengupta, Shomik
    Slezak, Jeffrey M.
    Blute, Michael L.
    Leibovich, Bradley C.
    Sebo, Thomas J.
    Myers, Robert P.
    Cheville, John C.
    Bergstralh, Eric J.
    Zincke, Horst
    CANCER, 2006, 106 (12) : 2630 - 2635
  • [8] Quantification of the individual risk of each Gleason pattern, including tertiary Gleason pattern 5, after radical prostatectomy: development of the modified Gleason grade grouping (mGGG) model
    Satoru Taguchi
    Yukari Uemura
    Tetsuya Fujimura
    Teppei Morikawa
    Akihiro Naito
    Taketo Kawai
    Motofumi Suzuki
    Haruki Kume
    Hiroshi Fukuhara
    BMC Cancer, 20
  • [9] Quantification of the individual risk of each Gleason pattern, including tertiary Gleason pattern 5, after radical prostatectomy: development of the modified Gleason grade grouping (mGGG) model
    Taguchi, Satoru
    Uemura, Yukari
    Fujimura, Tetsuya
    Morikawa, Teppei
    Naito, Akihiro
    Kawai, Taketo
    Suzuki, Motofumi
    Kume, Haruki
    Fukuhara, Hiroshi
    BMC CANCER, 2020, 20 (01)
  • [10] Prognostic significance of Gleason score discrepancies between needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy
    Muentener, Michael
    Epstein, Jonathan I.
    Hernandez, David J.
    Gonzalgo, Mark L.
    Mangold, Leslie
    Humphreys, Elizabeth
    Walsh, Patrick C.
    Partin, Alan W.
    Nielsen, Mattheiv E.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2008, 53 (04) : 767 - 776