Gleason grading and prognostic factors in carcinoma of the prostate

被引:342
|
作者
Humphrey, PA [1 ]
机构
[1] Washington Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Pathol & Immunol, Sch Med, St Louis, MO 63110 USA
关键词
prostate; cancer; Gleason grade; prognosis;
D O I
10.1038/modpathol.3800054
中图分类号
R36 [病理学];
学科分类号
100104 ;
摘要
Gleason grade of adenocarcinoma of the prostate is an established prognostic indicator that has stood the test of time. The Gleason grading method was devised in the 1960s and 1970s by Dr Donald F Gleason and members of the Veterans Administration Cooperative Urological Research Group. This grading system is based entirely on the histologic pattern of arrangement of carcinoma cells in H&E-stained sections. Five basic grade patterns are used to generate a histologic score, which can range from 2 to 10. These patterns are illustrated in a standard drawing that can be employed as a guide for recognition of the specific Gleason grades. Increasing Gleason grade is directly related to a number of histopathologic end points, including tumor size, margin status, and pathologic stage. Indeed, models have been developed that allow for pretreatment prediction of pathologic stage based upon needle biopsy Gleason grade, total serum prostate-specific antigen level, and clinical stage. Gleason grade has been linked to a number of clinical end points, including clinical stage, progression to metastatic disease, and survival. Gleason grade is often incorporated into nomograms used to predict response to a specific therapy, such as radiotherapy or surgery. Needle biopsy Gleason grade is routinely used to plan patient management and is also often one of the criteria for eligibility for clinical trials testing new therapies. Gleason grade should be routinely reported for adenocarcinoma of the prostate in all types of tissue samples. Experimental approaches that could be of importance in the future include determination of percentage of high-grade Gleason pattern 4 or 5, and utilization of markers discovered by gene expression profiling or by genetic testing for DNA abnormalities. Such markers would be of prognostic usefulness if they provided added value beyond the established indicators of Gleason grade, serum prostate-specific antigen, and stage. Currently, established prognostic factors for prostatic carcinoma recommended for routine reporting are TNM stage, surgical margin status, serum prostate-specific antigen, and Gleason grade.
引用
收藏
页码:292 / 306
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Current practice of Gleason grading of prostate carcinoma
    Antonio Lopez-Beltran
    Gregor Mikuz
    Rafael J. Luque
    Roberta Mazzucchelli
    Rodolfo Montironi
    Virchows Archiv, 2006, 448 : 111 - 118
  • [2] Current practice of Gleason grading of prostate carcinoma
    Lopez-Beltran, A
    Mikuz, G
    Luque, R
    Mazzucchelli, R
    Montironi, R
    VIRCHOWS ARCHIV, 2006, 448 (02) : 111 - 118
  • [3] Does finasteride compromise the prognostic value of Gleason grading in men with prostate cancer?
    Terris, MK
    NATURE CLINICAL PRACTICE UROLOGY, 2005, 2 (09): : 422 - 423
  • [4] Prognostic Utility of the Gleason Grading System Revisions and Histopathological Factors Beyond Gleason Grade
    Zelic, Renata
    Giunchi, Francesca
    Fridfeldt, Jonna
    Carlsson, Jessica
    Davidsson, Sabina
    Lianas, Luca
    Mascia, Cecilia
    Zugna, Daniela
    Molinaro, Luca
    Vincent, Per Henrik
    Zanetti, Gianluigi
    Andren, Ove
    Richiardi, Lorenzo
    Akre, Olof
    Fiorentino, Michelangelo
    Pettersson, Andreas
    CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2022, 14 : 59 - 70
  • [5] Prognostic significance of gleason pattern in patients with gleason score 7 prostate carcinoma
    Rasiah, KK
    Stricker, PD
    Haynes, AM
    Delprado, W
    Turner, JJ
    Golovsky, D
    Brenner, PC
    Kooner, R
    O'Neill, GF
    Grygiel, JJ
    Sutherland, RL
    Henshall, SM
    CANCER, 2003, 98 (12) : 2560 - 2565
  • [6] Proposal of Gleason-like grading system of canine prostate carcinoma in veterinary pathology practice
    Palmieri, Chiara
    Grieco, Valeria
    RESEARCH IN VETERINARY SCIENCE, 2015, 103 : 11 - 15
  • [7] Interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading in prostate biopsy samples
    Bori Rita
    Salamon Ferenc
    Moczar Csaba
    Cserni Gabor
    ORVOSI HETILAP, 2013, 154 (31) : 1219 - 1225
  • [8] Correlation of modified gleason grading of prostate carcinoma with age, serum prostate specific antigen and tumor extent in needle biopsy specimens
    Helpap, Burkhard
    Egevad, Lars
    ANALYTICAL AND QUANTITATIVE CYTOLOGY AND HISTOLOGY, 2008, 30 (03): : 133 - 138
  • [9] 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
  • [10] Clinical Utility of Quantitative Gleason Grading in Prostate Biopsies and Prostatectomy Specimens
    Sauter, Guido
    Steurer, Stefan
    Clauditz, Till Sebastian
    Krech, Till
    Wittmer, Corinna
    Lutz, Florian
    Lennartz, Maximilian
    Janssen, Tim
    Hakimi, Nayira
    Simon, Ronald
    von Petersdorff-Campen, Mareike
    Jacobsen, Frank
    von Loga, Katharina
    Wilczak, Waldemar
    Minner, Sarah
    Tsourlakis, Maria Christina
    Chirico, Viktoria
    Haese, Alexander
    Heinzer, Hans
    Beyer, Burkhard
    Graefen, Markus
    Michl, Uwe
    Salomon, Georg
    Steuber, Thomas
    Budaeus, Lars Henrik
    Hekeler, Elena
    Malsy-Mink, Julia
    Kutzera, Sven
    Fraune, Christoph
    Goebel, Cosima
    Huland, Hartwig
    Schlomm, Thorsten
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2016, 69 (04) : 592 - 598