Predictive value of primary Gleason pattern 4 in patients with Gleason score 7 tumours treated with radical prostatectomy

被引:36
作者
Khoddami, SM
Shariat, SF
Lotan, Y
Saboorian, H
McConnell, JD
Sagalowsky, AI
Roehrborn, CG
Koeneman, KS
机构
[1] Univ Minnesota, Dept Urol Surg, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA
[2] Univ Texas, SW Med Ctr, Dept Urol, Dallas, TX USA
[3] Univ Texas, SW Med Ctr, Dept Pathol, Dallas, TX USA
关键词
prostatic neoplasms; Gleason score; progression; radical prostatectomy;
D O I
10.1111/j.1464-410X.2004.04898.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
Objective To examine whether Gleason score (GS) 3+4 and 4+3 cancers at radical prostatectomy behave differently and whether this behaviour is independently associated with prostate cancer outcome. Patients From July 1994 to December 2002 309 consecutive men who had a radical retropubic prostatectomy for clinically localized disease had final GS 7 tumours in their prostatectomy specimen. Statistical analyses, including multivariate logistic regression, were used to evaluate the association between variables, i.e. standard preoperative features, stage, PSA progression, standard pathological variables, metastasis and death. Results In all, 215 patients (70%) had a final GS of 3+4 and 94 (30%) of 4+3. A final GS of 4+3 was associated with clinical stage T2 disease (P=0.024), a higher biopsy GS (P<0.001), seminal vesicle involvement (P<0.001), positive surgical margins (P=0.036), lymphovascular invasion (P=0.018), metastases to regional lymph nodes (P=0.008), higher preoperative serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) (P=0.042), and percentage positive biopsy cores (P=0.006). In univariate analysis, patients with GS 4+3 had a significantly higher risk of biochemical progression than those with GS 3+4 (P=0.002). The 5-year actuarial risk of biochemical progression was 17% and 35% for GS 3+4 and 4+3, respectively (P=0.0016). In a standard postoperative multivariate analysis, only preoperative PSA and metastases to regional lymph nodes were associated with PSA progression (P<0.001 and 0.002, respectively). However, patients with final GS 4+3 had a shorter PSA doubling time after progression than those with GS 3+4 (P=0.009). Conclusions Tumours with a final GS of 4+3 are more aggressive than GS 3+4 tumours. Recognising the distinction in GS 7 between predominant 4 vs 3 scores after radical prostatectomy should improve the ability of clinicians to counsel patients. The GS 4 pattern deserves further molecular study.
引用
收藏
页码:42 / 46
页数:5
相关论文
共 21 条
[1]  
AUGUSTIN H, 2003, J CANC RES CLIN ONCO
[2]   Prognostic significance of Gleason score 3+4 versus Gleason score 4+3 tumor at radical prostatectomy [J].
Chan, TY ;
Partin, AW ;
Walsh, PC ;
Epstein, JI .
UROLOGY, 2000, 56 (05) :823-827
[3]   Surrogate end point for prostate cancer-specific mortality after radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy [J].
D'Amico, AV ;
Moul, JW ;
Carroll, PR ;
Sun, L ;
Lubeck, D ;
Chen, MH .
JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2003, 95 (18) :1376-1383
[4]   Biochemical (prostate specific antigen) recurrence probability following radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer [J].
Han, M ;
Partin, AW ;
Zahurak, M ;
Piantadosi, S ;
Epstein, JI ;
Walsh, PC .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2003, 169 (02) :517-523
[5]   A neural network predicts progression for men with Gleason score 3+4 versus 4+3 tumors after radical prostatectomy [J].
Han, M ;
Snow, PB ;
Epstein, JI ;
Chan, TY ;
Jones, KA ;
Walsh, PC ;
Partin, AW .
UROLOGY, 2000, 56 (06) :994-999
[6]   Long-term biochemical disease-free and cancer-specific survival following anatomic radical retropubic prostatectomy - The 15-year Johns Hopkins experience [J].
Han, M ;
Partin, AW ;
Pound, CR ;
Epstein, JI ;
Walsh, PC .
UROLOGIC CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2001, 28 (03) :555-+
[7]  
HENSON DE, 1994, ARCH PATHOL LAB MED, V118, P779
[8]  
KHODDAMI SM, 2003, J UROL
[9]   Prognostic factors for survival of patients with pathological Gleason score 7 prostate cancer: Differences in outcome between primary Gleason grades 3 and 4 [J].
Lau, WK ;
Blute, ML ;
Bostwick, DG ;
Weaver, AL ;
Sebo, TJ ;
Zincke, H .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2001, 166 (05) :1692-1697
[10]  
MCNEAL JE, 1986, LANCET, V1, P60