Comparison of Gleason Scores in Specimens of Transrectal Prostate Needle Biopsy and Radical Prostatectomy

被引:0
|
作者
Tuygun, Can [1 ]
Demirel, Fuat [1 ]
Yigitbasi, Orhan [1 ]
Bozkurt, Halil [1 ]
Bakirtas, Hasan [1 ]
Imamoglu, Abdurrahim [1 ]
机构
[1] Diskapi Yildirim Beyazit Egitim & Arastirma Hasta, Urol Klin 1 2 & 4, Ankara, Turkey
来源
UHOD-ULUSLARARASI HEMATOLOJI-ONKOLOJI DERGISI | 2009年 / 19卷 / 03期
关键词
Needle biopsy; Radical prostatectomy; Gleason score; CANCER; ADENOCARCINOMA; CARCINOMA; ACCURACY; GRADE; DIAGNOSIS; VOLUME;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Comparison of Gleason Scores in Specimens of Transrectal Prostate Needle Biopsy and Radical Prostatectomy We investigated the correlation between biopsy and prostatectomy specimens, and evaluated the accuracy of treatment decision regarding to biopsy results in patients who have candidate to active-surveillance for localized prostate cancer (PC). Gleason score (GS) of the 118 patients who had undergone radical prostatectomy for PC after biopsy, were evaluated. Patients were cathegorized as low, intermediate and high-risk-PC regarding to rectal examination, serum PSA level and biopsy GS. Then, patients were reevaluated with prostatectomy GS (secondary-evaluation). Correlation and discorrelation in GS were determined in 52 and 66 (55.93%) patients, respectively. At biopsy, lower and higher grading was observed in 48 and 18 patients, respectively. Of 63 patients with low-risk-PC at primary-evaluation, 16 (25.39%) had intermediate-risk-PC at second-evaluation. Discorrelation was found in the rate of 56%, and it was more observed as low grading at biopsy. Finally, it should be considered that patients who will perform active-surveillance may be confronted with risk of undertreatment, with the assumption that 25% of patients with low-risk-PC may have actually intermediate-risk PC.
引用
收藏
页码:129 / 133
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] 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
  • [32] 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
  • [33] Gleason Score and Laterality Concordance between Prostate Biopsy and Prostatectomy Specimens
    Nepple, Kenneth G.
    Wahls, Terry L.
    Hillis, Stephen L.
    Joudi, Fadi N.
    INTERNATIONAL BRAZ J UROL, 2009, 35 (05): : 559 - 564
  • [34] Comparison between needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy samples in assessing Gleason score and modified Gleason score in prostatic adenocarcinomas
    Dogan Gun, Banu
    Bektas, Sibel
    Bahadir, Burak
    Mungan, Aydin
    Ozdamar, Sukru Oguz
    TURKISH JOURNAL OF PATHOLOGY, 2007, 23 (01) : 21 - 26
  • [35] Downgrading of biopsy based Gleason score in prostatectomy specimens
    Treurniet, Kilian M.
    Trudel, Dominique
    Sykes, Jenna
    Evans, Andrew J.
    Finelli, Antonio
    Van der Kwast, Theodorus H.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PATHOLOGY, 2014, 67 (04) : 313 - 318
  • [36] Impact of Gleason pattern up gradation after radical prostatectomy for carcinoma prostate patients with low biopsy score (≤ 6)
    Kulkarni, Jagdeesh N.
    Valsangkar, Rohan S.
    Jadhav, Yogesh R.
    Singh, Dayal Partap
    JOURNAL OF CANCER RESEARCH AND THERAPEUTICS, 2011, 7 (04) : 459 - 462
  • [37] The transverse and vertical distribution of prostate cancer in biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens
    Mai, Zhipeng
    Zhou, Zhien
    Yan, Weigang
    Xiao, Yu
    Zhou, Yi
    Liang, Zhiyong
    Ji, Zhigang
    Li, Hanzhong
    BMC CANCER, 2018, 18
  • [38] The prevalence and risk factors of upgrading of Gleason grade group between transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsy and prostatectomy specimens
    Promsen, Worapong
    Siriboonrid, Satit
    Binsri, Nattapong
    Kanjanatarayon, Sarayut
    Wiriyabanditkul, Weerayut
    Jiraanankul, Vittaya
    UROLOGY ANNALS, 2023, 15 (01) : 18 - 21
  • [39] Histopathological concordance between prostate biopsies and radical prostatectomy specimens-implications of transrectal and transperineal biopsy approaches
    Hagens, M. J.
    Ribbert, L. L. A.
    Jager, A.
    Veerman, H.
    Barwari, K.
    Boodt, B.
    de Bruijn, R. E.
    Claessen, A.
    Leter, M. R.
    van der Noort, V.
    Smeenge, M.
    Roeleveld, T. A.
    Rynja, S. P.
    Schaaf, M.
    Weltings, S.
    Vis, A. N.
    Bekers, E.
    van Leeuwen, P. J.
    van der Poel, H. G.
    PROSTATE CANCER AND PROSTATIC DISEASES, 2024, 27 (02) : 312 - 317
  • [40] Discrepancies in Gleason score between needle core biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens with correlation between clinical and pathological staging
    Singh, Vikram
    Sharma, Kartik
    Singh, Mahendra
    Tripathi, Shashank Shekhar
    Bhirud, Deepak Prakash
    Jena, Rahul
    Navriya, Shiv Charan
    Choudhary, Gautam Ram
    Sandhu, Arjun Singh
    UROLOGIA JOURNAL, 2024, 91 (03) : 518 - 524