Heterogeneity of gleason grade in multifocal adenocarcinorna of the prostate

被引:241
|
作者
Arora, R
Koch, MO
Eble, JN
Ulbright, TM
Li, L
Cheng, L
机构
[1] Indiana Univ, Sch Med, Dept Pathol & Lab Med, Indianapolis, IN USA
[2] Indiana Univ, Sch Med, Dept Urol, Indianapolis, IN 46204 USA
[3] Indiana Univ, Sch Med, Dept Med, Div Biostat, Indianapolis, IN USA
关键词
prostate; neoplasm; prostatectomy; Gleason grade; multifocal; heterogeneity; staging;
D O I
10.1002/cncr.20243
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND. The Gleason grading system uniquely combines data front different areas of carcinoma in the same prostate specimen. Prostatic adenocarcinoma often is multifocal, and different Gleason grades may be present in different foci. The current study was undertaken to compare the Gleason grades of individual adenocarcinoma foci in a given specimen with the overall Gleason grades (primary and secondary) of that specimen. METHODS. Data were obtained front 115 consecutive radical prostatectomy specimens via whole-mount processing and complete sectioning. Diagrams were constructed by tracing the outline of each whole-mount section, and tumor maps subsequently were generated. The largest focus was considered the index tumor. Each prostatectomy specimen was assigned primary and secondary Gleason grades, and each tumor focus was assigned its own primary and secondary Gleason grades. Tumor volume was measured using the grid method. RESULTS. Two or more adenocarcinoma foci were present in 87% of all specimens (2 foci, n = 20; 3 foci, n = 33; 4 foci, n = 17; 5 foci, n = 13; > 5 foci, n = 17). Specimens (n = 15) containing a single tumor were excluded from further analysis. Among the remaining specimens (n = 100), all tumor foci had Gleason grades that were the same as the corresponding overall Gleason grades in only 9 cases (9%). The Gleason score (i.e., the sum of the primary and secondary grades) of the index tumor was correlated with the overall Gleason score in 68% of specimens. The primary grade of the index tumor was the same as the overall primary grade in 97 specimens, whereas the secondary grade of the index tumor was the same as the overall secondary grade in only 68 specimens. The primary and secondary grades of the index tumor, compared with the overall Gleason primary and secondary grades, were reversed in 17 specimens. CONCLUSIONS. The findings of the current study demonstrated the histologic heterogeneity of multifocal prostate malignancies. Although the Gleason grading system was used to determine an overall score for prostate carcinoma within a specimen, the scores of individual tumors, including index tumors, often did not agree with this overall score. These findings may have implications with respect to future biomarker and tissue array studies. (C) 2004 American Cancer Society.
引用
收藏
页码:2362 / 2366
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Limitations of biopsy Gleason grade: Implications for counseling patients with biopsy Gleason 6 prostate cancer
    Sved, PD
    Manoharan, M
    Gomez, P
    Kim, S
    Soloway, MS
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2004, 171 (04): : 281 - 281
  • [22] Consensus Guidelines for Reporting Prostate Cancer Gleason Grade Reply
    Zietman, Anthony
    Klein, Eric
    Droller, Michael J.
    Dasgupta, Prokar
    Catto, James
    Smith, Joseph A., Jr.
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2016, 196 (04): : 1322 - 1323
  • [23] Gleason sum and percent Gleason grade 4/5 as predictors of the natural history of prostate cancer
    Egevad, L
    Granfors, T
    Karlberg, L
    Bergh, A
    Stattin, P
    LABORATORY INVESTIGATION, 2001, 81 (01) : 107A - 107A
  • [24] Is the primary grade in gleason score 7 predictable by prostate biopsies?
    Ravery, V.
    Dominique, S.
    Toublanc, M.
    Boccon-Gibod, L.
    Boccon-Gibod, L. M.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY SUPPLEMENTS, 2007, 6 (02) : 277 - 277
  • [25] GLEASON GRADE CORRELATES WITH SERUM PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN LEVELS
    POTEAT, H
    WELCH, W
    SACKS, D
    LABORATORY INVESTIGATION, 1993, 68 (01) : A67 - A67
  • [26] Re: Consensus Guidelines for Reporting Prostate Cancer Gleason Grade
    Egevad, Lars
    Samaratunga, Hemamali
    Srigley, John R.
    Delahunt, Brett
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2016, 196 (04): : 1321 - 1322
  • [27] Gleason sum and percent Gleason grade 4/5 as predictors of the natural history of prostate cancer
    Egevad, L
    Granfors, T
    Karlberg, L
    Bergh, A
    Stattin, P
    MODERN PATHOLOGY, 2001, 14 (01) : 107A - 107A
  • [28] Consensus guidelines for reporting prostate cancer Gleason Grade Reply
    Zietman, Anthony
    Smith, Joseph
    Klein, Eric
    Droller, Michael
    Dasgupta, Prokar
    Catto, James
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2016, 118 (03) : E2 - E2
  • [29] Prostate cancer: from Gleason scoring to prognostic grade grouping
    Montironi, Rodolfo
    Santoni, Matteo
    Mazzucchelli, Roberta
    Burattini, Luciano
    Berardi, Rossana
    Galosi, Andrea B.
    Cheng, Liang
    Lopez-Beltran, Antonio
    Briganti, Alberto
    Montorsi, Francesco
    Scarpelli, Marina
    EXPERT REVIEW OF ANTICANCER THERAPY, 2016, 16 (04) : 433 - 440
  • [30] Proliferation Index of Gleason Grade 3 Prostate Adenocarcinoma with and without Associated Grade 4
    Hwang, Michael
    Fu, Liying
    Adeniran, Adebowale
    Humphrey, Peter A.
    LABORATORY INVESTIGATION, 2016, 96 : 239A - 239A