Clinical factors stratifying the risk of tumor upgrading to high-grade disease in low-risk prostate cancer

被引:21
作者
Porcaro, Antonio B. [1 ]
Siracusano, Salvatore [1 ]
de Luyk, Nicola [1 ]
Corsi, Paolo [1 ]
Sebben, Marco [1 ]
Tafuri, Alessandro [1 ]
Processali, Tania [1 ]
Cerasuolo, Mattia [1 ]
Mattevi, Daniele [1 ]
Inverardi, Davide [1 ]
Cerruto, Maria A. [1 ]
Brunelli, Matteo [2 ]
Artibani, Walter [1 ]
机构
[1] Azienda Osped Univ Integrata, Osped Policlin, Univ Hosp, Ulog Clin, Verona, Italy
[2] Azienda Osped Univ Integrata, Osped Policlin, Univ Hosp, Dept Pathol, Verona, Italy
来源
TUMORI JOURNAL | 2018年 / 104卷 / 02期
关键词
Gleason score system; Prostate cancer; Tumor grade; Tumor upgrading; RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY; ACTIVE SURVEILLANCE; MEN; DISCREPANCIES; RADIATION; BIOPSY; PSA;
D O I
10.5301/tj.5000580
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose: To identify clinical factors stratifying the risk of tumor upgrading to increasing patterns of the tumor grading system in low-risk prostate cancer (PCa). Methods: We evaluated the records of 438 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy. Associations between clinical factors and tumor upgrading were assessed by the univariate and multivariate multinomial logistic regression model. Results: Low-risk PCa included 170 cases (38.8%) and tumor upgrading was detected in 111 patients (65.3%): 72 (42.4%) had pathology Gleason pattern (pGP) 3 + 4, 27 (15.9%) pGP 4 + 3, and 12 (7.1%) pGP 4 + 4. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and proportion of positive cores (P+) were independent predictors of upgrading to high-risk disease. These factors also stratified the risk of tumor upgrading to the increasing patterns of the tumor grading system. The model allowed the identification of pGP 4 + 4. The main difference between high-risk PCa and other upgraded tumors related to PSA load (odds ratio 2.4) that associated with high volume disease in the specimen. Conclusions: Low-risk PCa is a heterogeneous population with significant rates of tumor upgrading. Significant clinical predictors stratifying the risk of tumor upgrading to increasing patterns of the grading system included PSA and P+. These factors allowed the identification of the subset hiding high-grade disease requiring further investigations before delivering active treatments.
引用
收藏
页码:111 / 115
页数:5
相关论文
共 26 条
[1]   Contemporary Grading for Prostate Cancer: Implications for Patient Care [J].
Brimo, Fadi ;
Montironi, Rodolfo ;
Egevad, Lars ;
Erbersdobler, Andreas ;
Lin, Daniel W. ;
Nelson, Joel B. ;
Rubin, Mark A. ;
van der Kwast, Theo ;
Amin, Mahul ;
Epstein, Jonathan I. .
EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2013, 63 (05) :892-901
[2]  
Caster JM, 2015, PHYS, V92, P244
[3]   Significant upgrading affects a third of men diagnosed with prostate cancer: predictive nomogram and internal validation [J].
Chun, Felix K. -H. ;
Briganti, Alberto ;
Shariat, Shahrokh F. ;
Graefen, Markus ;
Montorsi, Francesco ;
Erbersdobler, Andreas ;
Steuber, Thomas ;
Salonia, Andrea ;
Currlin, Eike ;
Scattoni, Vincenzo ;
Friedrich, Martin G. ;
Schlomm, Thorsten ;
Haese, Alexander ;
Michl, Uwe ;
Colombo, Renzo ;
Heinzer, Hans ;
Friedrich, Martin G. ;
Schlomm, Thorsten ;
Haese, Alexander ;
Michl, Uwe ;
Colombo, Renzo ;
Heinzer, Hans ;
Valiquette, Luc ;
Rigatti, Patrizio ;
Roehrborn, Claus G. ;
Huland, Hartwig ;
Karakiewicz, Pierre I. .
BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2006, 98 (02) :329-334
[4]   Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer [J].
D'Amico, AV ;
Whittington, R ;
Malkowicz, SB ;
Schultz, D ;
Blank, K ;
Broderick, GA ;
Tomaszewski, JE ;
Renshaw, AA ;
Kaplan, I ;
Beard, CJ ;
Wein, A .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1998, 280 (11) :969-974
[5]   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 [J].
D'Amico, AV ;
Renshaw, AA ;
Arsenault, L ;
Schultz, D ;
Richie, JP .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 1999, 45 (04) :841-846
[6]  
Dahabreh IJ, 2012, ANN INTERN MED, V156, P582, DOI [10.7326/0003-4819-156-8-201204170-00009, 10.7326/0003-4819-156-8-201204170-00397]
[7]   The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma [J].
Epstein, JI ;
Allsbrook, WC ;
Amin, MB ;
Egevad, LL ;
Bastacky, S ;
Beltrán, AL ;
Berner, A ;
Billis, A ;
Boccon-Gibod, L ;
Cheng, L ;
Civantos, F ;
Cohen, C ;
Cohen, MB ;
Datta, M ;
Davis, C ;
Delahunt, B ;
Delprado, W ;
Eble, JN ;
Foster, CS ;
Furusato, M ;
Gaudin, PB ;
Grignon, DJ ;
Humphrey, PA ;
Iczkowski, KA ;
Jones, EC ;
Lucia, S ;
McCue, PA ;
Nazeer, T ;
Oliva, E ;
Pan, CC ;
Pizov, G ;
Reuter, V ;
Samaratunga, H ;
Sebo, T ;
Sesterhenn, I ;
Shevchuk, M ;
Srigley, JR ;
Suzigan, S ;
Takahashi, H ;
Tamboli, P ;
Tan, PH ;
Têtu, B ;
Tickoo, S ;
Tomaszewski, JE ;
Troncoso, P ;
Tsuzuki, T ;
True, LD ;
van der Kwast, T ;
Wheeler, TM ;
Wojno, KJ .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGICAL PATHOLOGY, 2005, 29 (09) :1228-1242
[8]   A Contemporary Prostate Cancer Grading System: A Validated Alternative to the Gleason Score [J].
Epstein, Jonathan I. ;
Zelefsky, Michael J. ;
Sjoberg, Daniel D. ;
Nelson, Joel B. ;
Egevad, Lars ;
Magi-Galluzzi, Cristina ;
Vickers, Andrew J. ;
Parwani, Anil V. ;
Reuter, Victor E. ;
Fine, Samson W. ;
Eastham, James A. ;
Wiklund, Peter ;
Han, Misop ;
Reddy, Chandana A. ;
Ciezki, Jay P. ;
Nyberg, Tommy ;
Klein, Eric A. .
EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2016, 69 (03) :428-435
[9]   Expectant Management for Men With Early Stage Prostate Cancer [J].
Filson, Christopher P. ;
Marks, Leonard S. ;
Litwin, Mark S. .
CA-A CANCER JOURNAL FOR CLINICIANS, 2015, 65 (04) :264-282
[10]   Discrepancies between Gleason scores of needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens [J].
Fukagai, T ;
Namiki, T ;
Namiki, H ;
Carlile, RG ;
Shimada, M ;
Yoshida, H .
PATHOLOGY INTERNATIONAL, 2001, 51 (05) :364-370