Men with High Prostate Specific Antigen Have Risk of Gleason Upgrading after Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

被引:0
作者
Wang, Xiaochuan [1 ]
Zhang, Yu [1 ]
Ji, Zhengguo [1 ]
Yang, Peiqian [1 ]
Tian, Ye [1 ]
机构
[1] Capital Med Univ, Beijing Friendship Hosp, Dept Urol, 95 Yongan Rd, Beijing 100050, Peoples R China
关键词
gleason score; meta-analysis; needle biopsy; prostate cancer; prostate specific antigen; systematic review; RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY; BIOCHEMICAL RECURRENCE; ACTIVE SURVEILLANCE; GRADING SYSTEM; BIOPSY; CANCER; SCORE; SPECIMENS; NUMBER; CORES;
D O I
10.22037/uj.v16i7.6127
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
Purpose: To examine the correlation between prostate specific antigen (PSA) and the risk of Gleason sum upgrading (GSU) from biopsy Gleason sum (bGS) to prostatectomy Gleason sum (pGS). Materials and Methods: Five electronic databases (Web of Science, Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, SCOPUS and the Cochrane Library) were searched from inception until March 2020. Studies were included if they focused on the relationship between PSA and GSU analyzed in multivariable analysis. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were utilized. Quality of included studies was appraised utilizing the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS) for case-control studies. The publication bias was evaluated by funnel plot and Egger's test. Results: Our search yielded 19 studies with high quality including 42193 patients. GSU was found in 28.2% of patients. Higher PSA level was associated with a significant increased risk of GSU (pooled OR = 1.14, 95% CI: 1.10-1.18; P < .05; = 92%). For the definition of upgrading from bGS <= 6 to pGS >= 7, the odds of upgrading with higher PSA level as opposed to lower PSA level was 1.12 (95% CI: 1.11-1.14; P < .05; 1 2 = 13%), while the odds of upgrading with other definitions were 1.11 (95% CI: 1.05-1.18; P < .05; I-2 - 89%). Conclusion: Patients with high level of serum PSA are at high risk of undergoing pathologic upgrading at prosta-tectomy. Combined with other risk factors, PSA prompts risk reclassification and improve confidence of urologists in management decisions for optimal therapy. Nevertheless, further robust studies are necessitated to confirm these results.
引用
收藏
页码:477 / 484
页数:8
相关论文
共 34 条
  • [1] 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
  • [2] Incidence, Gleason Score and Ethnicity Pattern of Prostate Cancer in the Multi-ethnicity Country of Iran During 2008-2010
    Basiri, Abbas
    Eshrati, Babak
    Zarehoroki, Ali
    Golshan, Shabnam
    Shakhssalim, Nasser
    Khoshdel, Alireza
    Kashi, Amir H.
    [J]. UROLOGY JOURNAL, 2020, 17 (06) : 602 - 606
  • [3] Updated Nomogram Predicting Lymph Node Invasion in Patients with Prostate Cancer Undergoing Extended Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection: The Essential Importance of Percentage of Positive Cores
    Briganti, Alberto
    Larcher, Alessandro
    Abdollah, Firas
    Capitanio, Umberto
    Gallina, Andrea
    Suardi, Nazareno
    Bianchi, Marco
    Sun, Maxine
    Freschi, Massimo
    Salonia, Andrea
    Karakiewicz, Pierre I.
    Rigatti, Patrizio
    Montorsi, Francesco
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2012, 61 (03) : 480 - 487
  • [4] Pathological upgrading in prostate cancer treated with surgery in the United Kingdom: trends and risk factors from the British Association of Urological Surgeons Radical Prostatectomy Registry
    Bullock, Nicholas
    Simpkin, Andrew
    Fowler, Sarah
    Varma, Murali
    Kynaston, Howard
    Narahari, Krishna
    [J]. BMC UROLOGY, 2019, 19 (01)
  • [5] Development and internal validation of a nomogram predicting the probability of prostate cancer Gleason sum upgrading between biopsy and radical prostatectomy pathology
    Chun, FKH
    Steuber, T
    Erbersdobler, A
    Currlin, E
    Walz, J
    Schlomm, T
    Haese, A
    Heinzer, H
    McCormack, M
    Huland, H
    Graefen, M
    Karakiewicz, PI
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2006, 49 (05) : 820 - 826
  • [6] Comparing the Gleason prostate biopsy and Gleason prostatectomy grading system: The Lahey Clinic Medical Center experience and an international meta-analysis
    Cohen, Michael S.
    Hanley, Robert S.
    Kurteva, Teodora
    Ruthazer, Robin
    Silverman, Mark L.
    Sorcini, Andrea
    Hamawy, Karim
    Roth, Robert A.
    Tuerk, Ingolf
    Libertino, John A.
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2008, 54 (02) : 371 - 381
  • [7] Increasing the number of biopsy cores improves the concordance of biopsy Gleason score to prostatectomy Gleason score
    Coogan, CL
    Latchamsetty, KC
    Greenfield, J
    Corman, JM
    Lynch, B
    Porter, CR
    [J]. BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2005, 96 (03) : 324 - 327
  • [8] Upgrade in Gleason score between prostate biopsies and pathology following radical prostatectomy significantly impacts upon the risk of biochemical recurrence
    Corcoran, Niall M.
    Hong, Matthew K. H.
    Casey, Rowan G.
    Hurtado-Coll, Antonio
    Peters, Justin
    Harewood, Laurence
    Goldenberg, S. Larry
    Hovens, Chris M.
    Costello, Anthony J.
    Gleave, Martin E.
    [J]. BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2011, 108 (8B) : E202 - E210
  • [9] Accuracy of prostate biopsies for predicting Gleason score in radical prostatectomy specimens: nationwide trends 2000-2012
    Danneman, Daniela
    Drevin, Linda
    Delahunt, Brett
    Samaratunga, Hemamali
    Robinson, David
    Bratt, Ola
    Loeb, Stacy
    Stattin, Par
    Egevad, Lars
    [J]. BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2017, 119 (01) : 50 - 56
  • [10] Gleason and Fuhrman no longer make the grade
    Delahunt, Brett
    Egevad, Lars
    Samaratunga, Hemamali
    Martignoni, Guido
    Nacey, John N.
    Srigley, John R.
    [J]. HISTOPATHOLOGY, 2016, 68 (04) : 475 - 481