增加穿刺活检针数提高前列腺癌分级准确性的临床研究

目的 探讨增加穿刺活检针数能否提高前列腺癌穿刺标本Gieason评分准确性.方法 接受根治性前列腺切除的前列腺癌患者86例.平均年龄63(55～72)岁.术前PSA值平均16.8(1.6～57.2)ng/ml,前列腺体积平均39.4(18.1～114.1)ml.患者术前均未接受新辅助内分泌治疗,按经直肠前列腺穿刺针数分为2组.A组46例行标准6针系统穿刺,B组40例行13针系统穿刺.统计学比较分析2组穿刺标本与根治术标本Gleason评分符合情况及影响因素. 结果 A组穿刺标本与根治术标本Gleason评分相符16例(34.8%),B组为26例(65.O%),B组评分符合率明显高于A组(P＜0.05).当穿刺标本Gleason评分≤6时,B组评分相符11例(68.8%),明显高于A组5例(25.0%),差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).多因素Logistic回归分析结果提示前列腺穿刺活检针数及活检阳性率是影响穿刺标本与根治术标本Gieason评分符合率的主要相关因素(P＜0.05).结论 增加穿刺针数能够提高经直肠前列腺穿刺标本Gleason评分预测前列腺癌分级的准确性.     

穿刺标本Gleason评分预测前列腺癌病理分级准确性的研究

目的 分析前列腺癌患者穿刺标本与根治术标本Gleason评分的相关性,探讨影响穿刺标本Gleason评分准确性的可能因素.方法 回顾性分析86例接受根治性前列腺切除术的前列腺癌患者资料,比较穿刺标本与根治术标本Gleason评分的符合情况,应用二分类Logistic回归分析筛选影响穿刺标本Gleason评分准确性的可能因素.结果 86例患者穿刺标本平均Gleason评分为6.1,根治术标本平均Gleason评分为6.5,穿刺标本与根治术标本Gleason评分相比,评分相符42例(48.8%),评分偏低32例(37.2%),评分偏高1 2例(14.0%),差异具有统计学意义(P＜0.05),偏差与患者年龄、血清PSA、前列腺体积、临床分期无显著相关性(P＞0.05),与穿刺针数(OR=2.905)及穿刺阳性率(OR=4.225)有显著相关(P＜0.05).结论 穿刺针数与穿刺阳性针数百分比是影响穿刺标本Gleason评分准确性的可能因素,增加前列腺穿刺活检针数将可能有助于提高穿刺标本预测前列腺癌病理分级的准确性.     

Extended 12-core prostate biopsy increases both the detection of prostate cancer and the accuracy of Gleason score

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of extended 12-core prostate biopsy in improving the detection rate of prostate cancer and increasing the accuracy of Gleason score. METHODS: This study included 113 patients who underwent TRUS-guided lateral sextant biopsy (group I) and 176 patients who underwent extended 12-core biopsy (group II). Inclusion criteria for prostate biopsy were elevated serum PSA levels (>3.0 ng/ml) and/or suspicious digital rectal examination (DRE). RESULTS: Clinical characteristics were similar in both groups. Cancer was detected in 28 (24.8%) and 64 (36.4%) patients in group I and II respectively, chi2=4.26, p=0.039. Among patients with cancer in group I, 14 were treated by radical prostatectomy (RP). The median Gleason sum was 6 (range 3-8) and 7 (range 5-9) for needle and prostatectomy specimens respectively. There was an agreement between the biopsy and prostatectomy Gleason sum in 7 (50%) patients while the biopsy Gleason sum was lower in 7 (50%) cases. Among patients with cancer in group II, 27 were treated by RP. The median and the range of Gleason sum was the same for needle and prostatectomy specimen (median 6, range 4-9). There was an agreement between the biopsy and prostatectomy specimen in 23 (85.2%) patients while the biopsy sum was lower than prostatectomy in 4 (14.8%) patients. The agreement between the biopsy and prostatectomy specimen was significantly higher in group II (82.5%) than group I (50%), Fisher's Exact Test, p=0.026. CONCLUSION: Extended 12-core prostate biopsy significantly increases both the detection rate of prostate cancer and the accuracy of biopsy Gleason score.     

Gleason score and tumor laterality in radical prostatectomy and transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate: a comparative study

We aimed to compare Gleason score and tumor laterality between transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate (TRUSBX) and radical prostatectomy (RP). Some factors that could cause a discrepancy in results between these two procedures were also evaluated. Among the 318 cases reviewed, 191 cases were selected for inclusion in this comparative study. We divided the patients into two groups using the Gleason score: an intermediate/high-grade group (≥7) and a low-grade group (<6). Exploratory analyses were conducted for comparisons between groups. We also performed comparisons between TRUSBX and RP for tumor laterality. TRUSBX overestimated 6% and underestimated 24% cases in comparison with RP for Gleason score, and overestimated 2.6% and underestimated 46% cases compared with RP for tumor laterality. Biopsy specimens were slightly smaller in TRUSBX cases with underestimated tumor laterality (P < 0.05), and no relationship between the biopsy specimen size and underestimated Gleason score in TRUSBX was found. Prostatic volume showed no statistical correlation with the likelihood of under or overestimation (P > 0.05). Thus, our study showed that TRUSBX has a high likelihood of underestimating both the Gleason score and tumor laterality in prostate cancer (PCa). The size of the fragment appears to be an important factor influencing the likelihood of laterality underestimation and Gleason score overestimation via TRUSBX. Due to the high likelihood of underestimation of the Gleason score and tumor laterality by 12-core prostate biopsy, we conclude that this type of biopsy should not be used alone to guide therapy in PCa.     

Improved accuracy in predicting the presence of Gleason pattern 4/5 prostate cancer by three-dimensional 26-core systematic biopsy

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether three-dimensional 26-core (3D26) prostate biopsy improves the accuracy in predicting the presence of Gleason pattern 4/5 cancer compared with extended transrectal 12-core (TR12) or transperineal 14-core (TP14) biopsy schemes. METHODS: We studied 143 consecutive men in whom prostate cancer was diagnosed by the 3D26 biopsy and who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) without neoadjuvant treatment. All histologic grading was reevaluated by a single pathologist according to the 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading. Cancer grade was categorized into high grade (Gleason pattern 4/5 cancer present) and non-high grade (absent) in both biopsy and RP specimens. Since TR12 and TP14 biopsy schemes represent subsets of the 3D26 biopsy, we could compare these schemes directly in an identical patient cohort. RESULTS: There was a grade agreement between 3D26 biopsy and RP in 132 (92.3%) cancers. Grade concordance between biopsy and RP was significantly better in 3D26 biopsy than in TR12 (83.5%, p=0.025) biopsy. Risk of underestimation of cancer grade by 3D26 biopsy (26.5%) was significantly lower than that by TP14 (51.4%, p=0.034). Grade concordance between 3D26 biopsy and RP was not according to clinical variables including prostate volume, clinical stage, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and PSA density. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that the 3D26 biopsy can accurately predict the presence of Gleason pattern 4/5 cancer on RP specimens with a high concordance rate of 92.3%, a value significantly higher than that between extended TR12 biopsy and RP specimens.     

Extended prostate needle biopsy improves concordance of Gleason grading between prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy

PURPOSE: We examined the concordance of Gleason scores in prostate needle biopsy specimens and the corresponding radical retropubic prostatectomy specimens in a cohort of patients grouped according to the number of cores obtained during diagnostic needle biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed clinical and pathological data on a cohort of 466 men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer by needle biopsies who underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy between January 1, 1990 and July 31, 2001. Two study groups were identified, including 126 patients diagnosed with prostate cancer by extended needle biopsies (10 or more cores) and 340 diagnosed with cancer by nonextended needle biopsies (9 or fewer cores). Mean age was 60 years and median prostate specific antigen was 5.8 ng./ml. The median number of cores in the extended and nonextended biopsy groups was 12 and 6, respectively. The concordance of Gleason score in the needle biopsy and prostatectomy specimens was compared and correlated with the number of cores on needle biopsy. RESULTS: In the whole cohort 311 patients (67%) had identical Gleason scores on the needle biopsy and prostatectomy specimens, while 53 (11%) were over graded and 102 (22%) were under graded on needle biopsy. In patients who underwent extended needle biopsies the accuracy rate for Gleason scoring was 76% with 10% over and 14% under graded. The highest accuracy rates were in patients with 13, 14 and 16 cores (89%, 87% and 100%, respectively). No patients in the extended needle biopsy group had a discrepancy of more than 2 Gleason units in grade in the biopsy and surgical specimens. In those who underwent nonextended needle biopsies the accuracy rate for Gleason scoring was 63% with 12% over and 25% under graded. There were significantly different rates of accuracy (p = 0.008) and under grading (p = 0.01) in the 2 needle biopsy groups. Patients with a needle biopsy Gleason score of less than 7 had significantly higher concordance with the prostatectomy Gleason score when extended biopsies were done compared with nonextended biopsies (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Prostate cancer grading by extended needle biopsy is a better predictor of the final Gleason score than nonextended needle biopsy, as determined by radical prostatectomy histological evaluation. Therefore, extended prostate needle biopsy provides better guidance to determine the appropriate treatment in patients with prostate cancer.     

Twelve prostate biopsies detect significant cancer volumes (> 0.5 mL)

OBJECTIVES: To compare, in a retrospective study, pathological specimens of prostate cancer detected in additional areas of a 12-core biopsy with tumours detected using traditional sextant biopsy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study included 27 patients who had undergone radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer. Prostatectomy specimens of cancers detected using standard sextant biopsies were compared with those detected using six additional core biopsies. The RP specimens were analysed for cancer volume, Gleason score, tumour grade (Mostofi) and pathological stage. RESULTS: Of the 27 patients, six (29%) had cancer detected in the extra six biopsy cores which would have otherwise have been undetected using sextant biopsy. Only two insignificant cancers were detected. The mean Gleason score was 6.1 for cancer detected by the sextant or 12-core method (P = 0.907); the mean grade (Mostofi) was 2.1 and 2. 33, respectively (P = 0.29). The final tumour stage in the 21 patients undergoing sextant biopsy was pT2 in 13 and pT3 in eight, compared with six pT2 tumours in the six patients diagnosed using extra biopsies. The mean (median, range) tumour volume was 5.7 (3.5, 0.312-23.75) mL for cancers detected on sextant biopsy and 1.99 (1. 85, 0.4-3.6) mL in the six cancers detected using extra cores (P = 0. 0138). CONCLUSION: The detection of prostate cancer was increased using extra biopsy cores. There was a significant difference in tumour volume but not in Gleason score, Mostofi grade or final pathological tumour stage between tumours diagnosed using 12 cores and those detected on sextant biopsy.     

Comparison of contrast enhanced color Doppler targeted biopsy to conventional systematic biopsy: impact on Gleason score

PURPOSE: Prostate cancer grading with Gleason score is an important prognostic factor. This prospective randomized study compares ultrasound systematic biopsy vs contrast enhanced color Doppler targeted biopsy for the impact on Gleason score findings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined 690 men (mean age 56 years, range 41 to 77) with a serum total prostate specific antigen of 1.25 ng/ml or greater, a free-to-total prostate specific antigen ratio less than 18% and/or a suspicious digital rectal examination. Contrast enhanced color Doppler targeted biopsies with a limited number of cores (5 or less) were performed in hypervascular areas of the peripheral zone during administration of the ultrasound contrast agent Sonovuetrade mark (Bracco, Milano, Italy). Ten systematic biopsies were obtained in a standard spatial distribution. Cancer detection rates and Gleason score were compared. RESULTS: Prostate cancer was identified in 221 of 690 subjects (32%) with a mean prostate specific antigen of 4.6 ng/ml (range 1.4 to 35.0). Prostate cancer was detected in 180 of 690 subjects (26%) with contrast enhanced color Doppler targeted biopsy and in 166 of 690 patients (24%) with systematic ultrasound biopsy. The Gleason score of all 180 cancers detected on contrast enhanced color Doppler targeted biopsy was 6 or higher (mean 6.8). The Gleason score of all 166 cancers detected on systematic biopsy ranged from 4 to 6 and mean Gleason score was 5.4. Contrast enhanced color Doppler targeted biopsy detected significantly higher Gleason scores compared to systematic biopsy (Wilcoxon rank sum test p <0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Contrast enhanced color Doppler targeted biopsy detected cancers with higher Gleason scores and more cancer than systematic biopsy. Therefore, contrast enhanced color Doppler seems to be helpful in the grading of prostate cancer, which is important for defining prognosis and deciding treatment.     

Predictors for clinically relevant Gleason score upgrade in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy

Study Type – Diagnostic (exploratory cohort) Level of Evidence 2b What’s known on the subject? and What does the study add? Clinically relevant GSU in the prostatectomy specimen is a common phenomenon. Clinically relevant GSU occurs in one of three patients with clinically ‘very’ low‐risk PCa, and a low number of biopsy cores is the key negative predictor.

OBJECTIVE

? To evaluate clinical predictors for Gleason score upgrade (GSU) in radical prostatectomy (RP) specimen, especially in patients with ‘very’ low risk PCA (T1c and biopsy Gleason score ≤6 and PSA <10 ng/ml and ≤2 positive biopsy cores and PSA density <0.15).

Patients and Methods

? 402 consecutive patients undergoing RP between 2004 and 2006, including a subgroup of 62 patients with ‘very’ low risk PCA, were examined. ? Patients were categorized for clinically relevant GSU (defined as upgrade into a higher PCA risk category). ? Parameters including number of biopsy cores obtained, positive biopsy cores, prostate weight, PSA, DRE and pathology department were evaluated for their role as predictors. ? Furthermore, GSU in RP specimen was analyzed for its impact on pT‐stage.

RESULTS

? Clinically relevant GSU occurred in 38.1% in the whole cohort and in 32.3% in the ‘very’ low risk PCA subgroup. Gleason score downgrade (GSD) occurred in 4.7%. ? Number of biopsy cores obtained and prostate weight were independent negative predictors of GSU in all 402 patients (P = 0.02 and P = 0.03, respectively). ? In the ‘very’ low risk group, only number of biopsy cores obtained revealed as an independent negative predictor of GSU (P = 0.02). ? PSA, DRE, number of positive cores or pathology department were not associated to GSU. ? In the ‘very’ low risk group, GSU was related with extracapsular tumor extension (P = 0.05).

Conclusions

? Clinically relevant GSU in RP specimen is still a challenging problem. ? Increasing the number of biopsy cores lower this risk significantly. GSD is rare and thus of minor importance for treatment decisions.     

How accurately does prostate biopsy Gleason score predict pathologic findings and disease free survival?

OBJECTIVE: Due to the significant impact on prognosis by subgrouping of prostatectomy Gleason scores < 7, 7, and > 7, we undertook this study to answer whether the biopsy Gleason score was as predictive of disease free survival and assess the correlation with the prostatectomy Gleason score in a modern prostatectomy series. METHODS: An analysis of 1,031 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer was performed. All data was prospectively collected. The Gleason score was categorized into 3 different groups (< 7, 7, and > 7) for biopsy and prostatectomy specimens. Disease free survival was then analyzed for each group. Discrepancies between scores and outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: Accurate correlation was noted in 54.8, 66.8, and 47.4% of Gleason scores < 7, 7, and > 7, respectively. Overall accuracy was 58.3%. Both, biopsy and prostatectomy Gleason score correlated significantly with disease free survival (P = 0.001), furthermore the classification (Gleason scores < 7, 7 and > 7) was highly significant (P = 0.001). Patients with prostatectomy Gleason < 7 tumors had significant survival advantage over those with biopsy Gleason < 7, (P = 0.001). However, disease free survival was superior for patients with biopsy Gleason > 7 than those with prostatectomy Gleason > 7, (P = 0.02). The overall disease free survival was similar among the patients with Gleason score of 7 (P = 0.12). CONCLUSIONS: It appears that biopsy Gleason score, although oftentimes not correlating strongly with the prostatectomy Gleason score, is an important prognostic factor in prostate cancer. There are significant differences in disease free survival between biopsy and prostatectomy Gleason score categories.     

Gleason grade remains an important prognostic predictor in men diagnosed with prostate cancer while on finasteride therapy

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate men treated with finasteride for lower urinary tract symptoms, who subsequently were diagnosed with prostate cancer and had a radical prostatectomy (RP) at our institution, to determine if finasteride therapy prevented accurate Gleason grade assignment and prediction of biochemical recurrence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between May 1996 and July 2003, 45 men were identified who had RP and had previously been treated with finasteride for > or = 6 months before the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Clinical and pathological information was gathered from a RP database. Serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, duration of finasteride therapy, biopsy Gleason grade, clinical stage, RP Gleason grade and pathological stage were reviewed. Freedom from recurrence was predicted using validated nomograms before and after RP, and compared against actuarial 5-year freedom from recurrence using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS The mean duration of finasteride therapy before diagnosis was 23.6 months, the mean serum PSA (doubled to account for finasteride use) 11.02 ng/mL and mean biopsy Gleason score 6. When comparing the biopsy and RP specimen Gleason score, it was downgraded by 1 point in six men, upgraded by 1 point in eight, and upgraded by 2 points in one. The Gleason score was constant in 30 patients. The nomograms predicted freedom from recurrence in 83% and 85%, respectively; the 5-year actuarial freedom from recurrence was 86%. CONCLUSION: Finasteride does not appear to compromise the assignment of Gleason grade for use in prediction tools before or after RP in men undergoing prostate biopsy or RP. The actuarial 5-year freedom from recurrence was similar to that predicted by the validated nomograms. Gleason grade remains an important prognostic predictor in men treated with finasteride and undergoing RP for clinically localized prostate cancer.     

Underestimation of Gleason score at prostate biopsy reflects sampling error in lower volume tumours

Study Type – Diagnostic (case series) Level of Evidence 4 What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? The Gleason score of prostate cancer is frequently underestimated at the time of diagnostic biopsy, although the contribution of sampling error to its incidence is unknown. We show that under‐graded tumours are significantly smaller that tumours concordant for the higher grade, indicating that incomplete tumour sampling plays a significant role in Gleason score assignment error.

OBJECTIVE

• ? To determine the influence of tumour and prostate gland volumes on the underestimation of prostate cancer Gleason score in diagnostic core biopsies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

• ? Patients undergoing radical prostatectomy with matched diagnostic biopsies were identified from a prospectively recorded database.
• ? Tumour volumes were measured in serial whole‐mount sections with image analysis software as part of routine histological assessment.
• ? Differences in various metrics of tumour and prostate volume between upgraded tumours and tumours concordant for the lower or higher grade were analysed.

RESULTS

• ? In all, 684 consecutive patients with Gleason score 6 or 7 prostate cancer on diagnostic biopsy were identified.
• ? Of 298 patients diagnosed with Gleason 6 tumour on biopsy, 201 (67.4%) were upgraded to Gleason 7 or higher on final pathology. Similarly, of 262 patients diagnosed with Gleason 3 + 4 = 7 prostate cancer on initial biopsy, 60 (22.9%) were upgraded to Gleason score 4 + 3 = 7 or higher.
• ? Tumours upgraded from Gleason 6 to 7 had a significantly lower index tumour volume (1.73 vs 2 mL, P= 0.029), higher calculated prostate volume (41.6 vs 39 mL, P= 0.017) and lower relative percentage of tumour to benign glandular tissue (4.3% vs 5.9%, P= 0.001) than tumours concordant for the higher grade.
• ? Similarly, tumours that were Gleason score 3 + 4 on biopsy and upgraded on final pathology to 4 + 3 were significantly smaller as measured by both total tumour volume (2.3 vs 3.3 mL, P= 0.005) and index tumour volume (2.2 vs 3, P= 0.027) and occupied a smaller percentage of the gland volume (6.3% vs 8.9%, P= 0.017) compared with tumours concordant for the higher grade.
• ? On multivariate analysis, lower prostate weight (hazard ratio 0.97, 95% confidence interval 0.96–0.99, P < 0.001) and larger total tumour volume (hazard ratio 1.87, 95% confidence interval 1.4–2.6, P < 0.001) independently predicted an upgrade in Gleason score from 6 to 7. In tumours upgraded from biopsy Gleason 3 + 4, only higher index tumour volume (hazard ratio 3.1, 95% confidence interval 1.01–9.3, P= 0.048) was a significant predictor of upgrading on multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

• ? Under‐graded tumours are significantly smaller than tumours concordant for the higher grade, indicating that incomplete tumour sampling plays a significant role in Gleason score assignment error.
• ? Surrogate measures of tumour volume may predict those at greatest risk of Gleason score upgrade.

     

The probability of Gleason score upgrading between biopsy and radical prostatectomy can be accurately predicted

The objective of this study was to test the external validity of a previously developed nomogram for the prediction of Gleason score upgrading (GSU) between biopsy and radical prostatectomy (RP). The study population consisted of 973 assessable patients treated with RP at a tertiary care institution. The accuracy of the nomogram was quantified with the receiver operating characteristics curve-derived area under the curve. The performance characteristics (predicted vs observed rate of GSU) were tested within a calibration plot. Overall, GSU was recorded in 39.8% ( n  = 387) of patients at RP. Of patients with GSU, 70 (18.1%), 23 (5.9%) and 32 (8.3%), respectively, had extracapsular extension, seminal vesicle invasion and lymph node invasion. The accuracy of the nomogram was 74.9% (confidence interval 72.1–77.6%). The model tended to underestimate the observed rate of GSU and the discordance between the predicted and observed rate of GSU ranged from −7 to +10%. The current tool represents the most accurate method of predicting GSU between biopsy and RP. Nonetheless it is not perfect and its performance characteristics should be known prior to its use in clinical decision-making.     

Limitations of biopsy Gleason grade: implications for counseling patients with biopsy Gleason score 6 prostate cancer

PURPOSE: We examined the implications of underestimating Gleason score by prostate biopsy in patients with biopsy Gleason 6 prostate cancer with respect to adverse pathological findings and biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed clinical and pathological data on a cohort of 531 patients with Gleason score 6 on prostate biopsy who underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy between June 1992 and January 2002. Patients were excluded if they received neoadjuvant androgen deprivation. Concordance between biopsy and radical prostatectomy Gleason score was examined. A comparison was made with respect to final radical prostatectomy specimen pathology and the risk of biochemical recurrence between cases that remained Gleason 6 and those with a final grade of 7 or greater. RESULTS: A total of 451 patients were included in the analysis. Mean followup was 55.1 months (range 12 to 123.4). Of the patients 184 (41%) had a Gleason score of 7 or greater after a review of the entire prostate, while 37 (8%) had a score of less than 6 and 230 remained with Gleason 6. Patients who were under graded were more likely to have extraprostatic extension (22% vs 4%, p <0.01), seminal vesicle invasion (9% vs 2%, p <0.01) and biochemical recurrence (10% vs 3%, p <0.01) compared to those who remained with Gleason score 6. CONCLUSIONS: Gleason grade on needle biopsy is an inexact predictor of the final grade following radical prostatectomy. Patients with biopsy Gleason score 6 who are under graded are at significantly higher risk for adverse pathological features and biochemical recurrence than patients who remain with Gleason score 6 or less on final pathology findings.     

Concordance between Gleason scores of needle biopsies and radical prostatectomy specimens: a population‐based study

OBJECTIVE

To study the concordance between the Gleason scores of needle biopsies and radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens in a population‐based registry, to clarify whether the concordance depends on the annual number of RP specimens assessed in the pathology unit, and to identify preoperative clinical factors that predict upgrading from a Gleason score of ≤6 in the biopsy to ≥7 in the RP specimen.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Through the Cancer Registry of Norway, we identified 1116 patients with available Gleason scores from biopsy and RP specimens. Concordance was evaluated using the κ coefficient, and predictors of concordance were assessed in univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

The Gleason scores were identical in biopsy and RP specimens in 591 of the 1116 (53%) patients. The biopsy‐based Gleason score more often under‐graded (38%) than over‐graded (9%) the RP‐based Gleason score. Pathology units that examined >40 RP specimens annually had a higher concordance between the Gleason score in the biopsy and RP specimen than did lower‐volume units. The rate of upgrading from a Gleason score of ≤6 in the biopsy to ≥7 in the RP specimen increased with increasing preoperative prostate‐specific antigen serum levels, and with increasing intervals between biopsy and RP.

CONCLUSIONS

The concordance in Gleason score between biopsy and RP was highest among the pathology departments that regularly evaluated RP specimens. Careful consideration of clinical factors and biopsy grading might improve the identification of patients considered as suitable for active surveillance.     

血清tPSA、PSAD及Gleason评分在前列腺癌分期中的应用价值

目的:探讨血清前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)系列及穿刺组织活检Gleason评分在前列腺癌病理分期的预测价值。方法:回顾性分析我院1999～2008年病理证实为前列腺腺癌的124例患者资料,将该124例患者根据术后病理、骨扫描和CT或MRI结果分为A、B两组。骨扫描、CT、MRI或术后证实为有周围浸润或远处转移者归为A组;无周围浸润且无远处转移者归为B组。比较两组之间以上各指标的差异。通过多因素回归分析筛选前列腺癌病理分期的影响因子。运用工作特征曲线(ROC曲线)比较各指标的预测价值。结果:tPSA、穿刺活检Gleason评分值A组明显高于B组(P<0.05);多元Logistic回归分析中,仅tPSA进入模型,被认为是最主要的预测因子。ROC曲线对前列腺病理分期预测效力比较:联合分析tPSA与穿刺活检Gleason评分预测效果明显高于其他指标,工作特征曲线下面积(AUC)从大到小依次为Gleason评分+tPSA>tPSA>PSAD+tPSA+Gleason评分。结论:tPSA依然是临床上对前列腺癌病理分期较好的预测因素;联合穿刺组织活检Gleason评分,可以提高预测准确度,对指导临床治疗和预后有重要意义。     

Prostate saturation biopsy in the reevaluation of microfocal prostate cancer

PURPOSE: We evaluated the ability of an extended, 32-core repeat transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsy protocol to improve the characterization of low volume, well differentiated disease in men with a diagnosis of potentially insignificant microfocal prostate cancer, as defined by 1 single focus positive core of 10 with less than 5 mm of Gleason score 6 or less tumor on primary biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 35 consecutive patients, who were 62 to 75 years old, had a median serum prostate specific antigen of 8 ng/ml (range 0.5 to 14) and a diagnosis of minimal prostate cancer, and were willing to consider observation with delayed treatment at progression, were offered repeat saturation prostate biopsy with a median of 32 cores (range 18 to 36) under local anesthesia. This biopsy was to determine whether more extensive prostate sampling would confirm or disprove the initial diagnosis of microfocal, well differentiated prostate cancer. RESULTS: The procedure was aborted in 1 patient because of massive rectal hemorrhage. Another patient had acute prostatitis with gram-negative sepsis. Of 34 evaluable biopsy sets 11 (32%) were negative for cancer, suggesting that tumor detected at the primary biopsy was probably of low volume and amenable to observation with delayed treatment. Of the biopsies 23 (68%) were positive, 17 were at multiple sites and 7 were upgraded to Gleason score 7 or greater. These patients were then considered to have significant tumors and were offered active treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This study is to our knowledge the first to describe the clinical use of prostate saturation biopsies for re-evaluating potentially insignificant prostate cancer. Of patients with minimal disease on standard 10-core biopsy, results show that this technique may be helpful for distinguishing the 30% who probably have minimal disease based on negative repeat saturation biopsy from the 70% who almost certainly have a significant tumor, as characterized by multiple positive cores, with or without an increased Gleason score. The latter patients should be offered active therapy.     

Importance of peripheral biopsies in maximising the detection of early prostate cancer in repeat 12-core biopsy protocols

OBJECTIVE: To assess cancer-detection rates in repeat 12-core biopsy protocols, as extended multicore prostate biopsy protocols have become standard when investigating men with a raised prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, but repeat prostate biopsy protocols are still developing. PATIENTS AND METHODS: During a 4.5-year period, 241 of 590 patients with persistently high age-specific PSA levels of 2.6-10 ng/mL and an initial benign biopsy were invited for repeat transrectal ultrasonography-guided 12-core prostatic biopsy. The protocol for repeat biopsy was identical to the first biopsy, and included a periprostatic nerve block. The first six biopsies were obtained from the periphery of the gland directed more laterally at the base, mid-zone and apices. The remainder were parasagittal sextant biopsies. Pathological findings were analysed on an individual core basis. RESULTS: The mean age of the 241 men was 63.4 years; cancer was diagnosed in 40 (16.6%) on repeat biopsy. Men with cancer were older and had a higher median PSA level. The median Gleason score was 6, with a median of two cores positive for cancer. Maximum cancer detection rates were from peripheral apices (37.5%), basal biopsies had the lowest detection rates (23.8% and 16.3%), and parasagittal biopsies missed 35% of detected cancers. Patients with cancer also had significantly lower prostate volumes and higher PSA densities (both P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: A low cancer yield from both peripheral basal and parasagittal basal specimens on repeat biopsy indicates adequate sampling at initial biopsy. The maximum cancer yield in the peripheral mid-zones and apical zones suggests the necessity for concentrated sampling of these zones in repeat biopsy protocols.     

Comparison of Gleason scores from sextant prostate biopsies and radical prostatectomy specimens.

OBJECTIVES: We compared the Gleason scores obtained from sextant prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens in patients with localized prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sixty-one patients having a clinical diagnosis of localized prostate cancer underwent needle biopsy under transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) and RP. Grading and staging were assigned based on Gleason scores and the TNM system, respectively. RESULTS: Mean patient age was 65.5 +/- 13.43 years and mean PSA level was 14.69 +/- 3.95. Mean Gleason score for prostate biopsy and RP specimen were 5.85 +/- 0.7 and 6.34 +/- 1.44, respectively. With respect to clinical stage, there were 20 patients in stage 1 and 41 patients in stage 2 prostate cancer. Comparing the Gleason scores, the biopsy score was lower in 26 (42.26%) and higher than RP specimens in 7 (11.84%) cases, and there was agreement between the biopsy and RP specimens in 28 (45.9%) patients. The difference between the two Gleason scores was +/- 1 for 18 patients (29.5%) and +/- 2 or more for 17 patients (27.86%). CONCLUSION: In our study, high Gleason score biopsies with elevated PSA level (>10 ng/ml) were risk factors for extraprostatic extension, and we demonstrated that Gleason scores were significantly correlated with seminal vesicle and lymph node invasion (p < 0.05). The Gleason scores of biopsy and RP specimens agreed with 45.9% of TRUS-guided sextant prostate biopsies, and this ratio was 91.1% in moderately differentiated tumors Copyright 2001 S. Karger AG, Basel     

Outcome after radical prostatectomy with a pretreatment prostate biopsy Gleason score of >/=8

OBJECTIVE: To determine the outcome and predictors of recurrence in patients with a pretreatment prostate biopsy Gleason score (GS) of >/= 8 and treated with radical prostatectomy (RP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 1048 consecutive patients who underwent RP by one surgeon (M.S.S.); patients who had a pretreatment biopsy GS of >/= 8 were identified. Information was recorded on patient age, initial prostate specific antigen (PSA) level, clinical stage, biopsy GS, pathology GS, extraprostatic extension (EPE), tumour volume, surgical margin status, seminal vesicle invasion (SVI), and lymph node involvement. The results were assessed statistically using the Kaplan-Meier method, univariate log-rank tests and multivariate analysis using Cox's proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: In all, 123 patients met the initial selection criteria; 44 were excluded from further analyses (five salvage RP, 23 < 1 year follow-up and 16 adjuvant treatment). Thus 79 patients were included in the uni- and multivariate analyses; 25 (31%) patients had a GS of /= 8. The mean follow-up was 55 months, the age of the patients 63 years and the mean (sd) initial PSA level 13 (12) ng/mL. The overall biochemical failure rate was 38% (41% if the final GS was >/= 8 and 32% if it was /= 8 in the RP specimen, 20% (11/54) were organ-confined; two patients (2.5%) in this group developed local recurrence. If the final GS was /= 20 ng/mL, EPE, SVI, a positive surgical margin and tumour volume. Cox's proportional regression indicated that a PSA of >/= 20 ng/mL (hazard ratio 7.9, 95% confidence interval 2.6-24.2, P < 0.001), the presence of EPE (4.2, 1.6-10.9, P = 0.004) and a positive surgical margin (3.8, 1.5-9.7, P = 0.005) were significant independent predictors in a multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: RP is a reasonable treatment option for patients with a prostate biopsy GS of >/=8 and clinical stage T1-2. These patients have a high chance of remaining disease-free if their PSA level is /= 8 should be counselled about the potential differences between the biopsy and the RP specimen GS.