Prognostic significance of Gleason score discrepancies between needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy

OBJECTIVES: Discordance between the Gleason score (GS) on needle biopsy (NB) and the GS of the radical prostatectomy (RP) specimen is a common finding. The objective of this study was to evaluate the prognostic significance of these discrepancies with respect to outcomes following RP. METHODS: In the study, 6625 men treated by RP were categorized as having NB=RP (68.8%), NBRP (6.2%) GS, and stratified for analyses into RP GS groups. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to analyze differences in biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS), and multivariate Cox analyses were performed to estimate the independent relative risk of progression associated with GS discrepancies. RESULTS: Across multiple RP GS strata (3+4, 7, 8, 8-10), patients with a lower NB GS experienced significantly better BRFS than patients with equal NB and RP GS (all p<0.05). NBRP GS had poorer BRFS than patients with NB=RP GS across multiple RP GS strata (< or =3+3, 3+4, 7; all p<0.05). NB>RP GS was independently associated with worse (pooled HR, 1.91, p<0.001) BRFS probabilities, within and across RP GS strata. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that the GS of the NB adds additional prognostic value to the RP GS in a consistent manner that may be applicable to strategies of risk stratification and patient counseling after surgery.     

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.     

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.     

Discrepancy between Gleason scores of biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens

OBJECTIVE: The grade of the prostate cancer is an important factor in defining prognosis and deciding on treatment. In this study, we compared the Gleason score determined by 18-gauge core needle biopsies with both the Gleason score and pathological staging of the radical prostatectomy specimens. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between July 1992 and September 1998, we performed 144 radical retropubic prostatectomies for clinically localized prostatic carcinoma, after a negative frozen section in bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy in all cases. Ten patients with pathologic stage T1a and T1b were excluded. The final study group consisted of 134 patients, all of whom had been diagnosed with adenocarcinoma by transrectal needle biopsies with an 18-gauge automated spring-loaded biopsy gun. No patients received neoadjuvant therapy, including androgen deprivation and radiation therapy. All patients had a designated Gleason score on the needle biopsy and prostatectomy specimens. RESULTS: We found that grading error was greatest with well-differentiated (Gleason score 2-4) tumors, The accuracy was 15% for Gleason score 2-4 on needle biopsy. Of the 113 evaluable patients with Gleason score 5-7 on needle biopsy, 110 (97%) were graded correctly. All of the Gleason score 8-10 on needle biopsy was graded correctly. But only 1 patient in our series had Gleason score 8 on needle biopsy. Twenty-seven (25%) of 110 patients with a biopsy grade of Gleason score <7 had the cancer upgraded to 7. Of patients with both Gleason score <7 in the needle biopsy and Gleason score 7 in the prostatectomy specimen, only 3 (11%) had tumor confined to the prostate. CONCLUSION: The potential for grading error is greatest with well-differentiated tumors and of patients with both Gleason scores <7 in the needle biopsy and Gleason score 7 in the prostatectomy specimen, only 11% had tumor confined to the prostate. This effects treatment policy, especially for watchful waiting criteria.     

前列腺癌根治术后Gleason评分升级与术前多参数MRI PI-RADS评分的关系

目的探讨前列腺癌根治术后Gleason评分升级与术前多参数MRI(mpMRI)前列腺影像报告数据系统(PIRADS)评分的关系。方法回顾性分析198例前列腺癌根治术后患者的资料。根据PI-RADS评分分为低分(1~2分),中分(3分),高分(≥4分)3组。通过单因素和多因素Logistic回归分析探讨PI-RADS评分与Gleason评分的关系。结果单因素分析显示,前列腺特异性抗原密度、前列腺体积、术前穿刺病理Gleason评分、精囊侵犯、穿刺阳性针数、PI-RADS评分是术后Gleason评分升级的影响因子(P均0.05)。多因素分析显示,前列腺体积(P0.01)与术前PI-RADS评分(P0.01)是前列腺癌根治术后Gleason评分升级的独立预测因素。术前PI-RADS评分低分组及中分组术前与术后Gleason评分差异无统计学意义(P均0.05);而高分组术后Gleason评分高于术前,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论术前Gleason评分较低(≤6分)而PI-RADS评分较高(≥4分)的小体积前列腺癌患者,术后Gleason评分升级的可能大。     

Additional elastography-targeted biopsy improves the agreement between biopsy Gleason grade and Gleason grade at radical prostatectomy

Purpose

To assess whether real-time elastography-targeted biopsy (RTE-bx) may help to correctly assign Gleason grade at radical prostatectomy (RP) and to compare discriminant properties of systematic biopsy alone (sbx) versus combination with RTE-bx (comb-bx) to distinguish between postoperatively favorable (Gleason 3 + 3, pT2, Nx/0) and postoperatively unfavorable (Gleason ≥4 + 4) prostate cancer (PCa) at RP.

Patients and methods

Overall, 259 patients diagnosed with PCa at systematic biopsy in combination with RTE-bx underwent RP between 2008 and 2011. Gleason Score derived from sbx versus comb-bx was compared to the gold-standard RP, and discriminant properties were assessed. Specificity gains were examined for sbx versus comb-bx when the endpoint consisted of postoperatively favorable PCa at RP. Sensitivity gains were examined, when analyses focused on postoperatively unfavorable PCa.

Results

Comb-bx resulted in higher correct overall Gleason assignment (68.3 vs. 56.7 %, p = 0.008) than sbx. Similarly, lower rates of undergrading (21.2 vs. 36.3 %, p < 0.001) were recorded. Specificity gains with comb-bx were 10 % (92 vs. 82 %, p = 0.004) for postoperatively favorable PCa. Comb-bx resulted in 31 % sensitivity gains relative to sbx (94 vs. 63 %, p = 0.03), when postoperatively unfavorable PCa was the endpoint.

Conclusion

The agreement between biopsy and pathology Gleason Score was significantly higher for comb-bx than sbx. Additionally, comb-bx reduced the rate of false positives in the diagnosis of favorable PCa. Rates of correctly classified unfavorable PCa at RP were also higher for comb-bx. Those data indicate that comb-bx is useful in clinical practice.

     

Increasing the number of biopsy cores improves the concordance of biopsy Gleason score to prostatectomy Gleason score

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate taking more biopsy cores for predicting the radical prostatectomy (RP) Gleason score compared with the biopsy Gleason score, as although random sextant biopsies are the standard for a tissue diagnosis of prostate cancer, and taking more biopsies increases the detection rate, it is uncertain whether taking more cores improves the prediction of the RP Gleason score. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analysed retrospectively 404 patients from three centres (Seattle 162, Washington 107 and Chicago 135) who had RP for prostate cancer. Six, eight or 10 biopsies were taken based on the physician's preference and the patient's characteristics. RESULTS: Before RP, 158 (39%) patients had six, 65 (16%) had eight and 181 (45%) had 10 biopsy cores taken. The accuracy of the Gleason sum of the three groups was 65/158 (41%), 26/65 (40%) and 104/181 (57.5%), respectively (P < 0.004, 10-core vs six-core). However, when comparing the Gleason score separately (i.e. 4 + 3 is not equal to 3 + 4), the accuracy of the three groups was 48/158 (30%), 20/65 (31%), and 95/181 (52.5%), respectively (P < 0.001, 10-core vs six core). CONCLUSIONS: Taking more biopsy cores improves the accuracy of the biopsy Gleason score in predicting the final Gleason score at RP; the predictive accuracy of the final Gleason score may be increased from 41% to 58% by increasing the number of biopsies from six to 10.     

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.     

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.     

Comparison of Gleason grade and score between preoperative biopsy and prostatectomy specimens in prostate cancer

AIM: Although the histopathological findings obtained from biopsy specimens are important for choosing the appropriate management of prostate cancer, there have been some discrepancies in Gleason grade and consequently, score between biopsy and surgical specimens. A comparison of findings between these two kinds of specimens was performed. METHODS: Radical prostatectomy was performed at Asahi General Hospital on 223 cases of T1b-T3 without previous cancer treatment, and the Gleason grade and score of the biopsy and surgical specimens were compared. RESULTS: A 37% coincidence in Gleason score was obtained between biopsy and surgical specimens; coincidence including one digit difference in score was approximately 70%. Upgrading was more than downgrading. Disagreement in secondary grade was greater than that in primary grade. Disagreement in Gleason score was roughly similar among different score items and was not influenced by level of prostate-specific antigen, however, the small volume of the cancer tissues more affected the discrepancy in score. CONCLUSION: The use of biopsy findings is required to be taken into account regarding the discrepancy.