Cargando…

Validation of the WHO 2016 new Gleason score of prostatic carcinoma

CONTEXT: New Gleason Score of Prostate. AIMS: The aim of this study is to assign the patients with carcinoma prostate into new prognostic grade groups (PGGs) based on revised Gleason score (GS) and follow-up according to the WHO 2016. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: All the biopsies/resected specimens of carc...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rao, Vishal, Garudadri, Gowri, Shilpa, Arya Sahithi, Fonseca, Daphne, Sudha, S. Murthy, Sharma, Rakesh, Subramanyeshwar, T. Rao, Challa, Sundaram
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6060600/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30089994
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/UA.UA_185_17
_version_ 1783342067797196800
author Rao, Vishal
Garudadri, Gowri
Shilpa, Arya Sahithi
Fonseca, Daphne
Sudha, S. Murthy
Sharma, Rakesh
Subramanyeshwar, T. Rao
Challa, Sundaram
author_facet Rao, Vishal
Garudadri, Gowri
Shilpa, Arya Sahithi
Fonseca, Daphne
Sudha, S. Murthy
Sharma, Rakesh
Subramanyeshwar, T. Rao
Challa, Sundaram
author_sort Rao, Vishal
collection PubMed
description CONTEXT: New Gleason Score of Prostate. AIMS: The aim of this study is to assign the patients with carcinoma prostate into new prognostic grade groups (PGGs) based on revised Gleason score (GS) and follow-up according to the WHO 2016. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: All the biopsies/resected specimens of carcinoma prostate from January 2014 to June 2016 were reviewed, and GS was done according to the WHO 2016. Accordingly, cribriform, fused, and glomeruloid glands were assigned GS 4. Thus, two groups were identified with GS 7 (3 + 4 and 4 + 3). The patients were grouped into PGGs 1–5. The number of patients with change in the prognostic group along with follow-up was calculated. RESULTS: There were 143 patients with carcinoma prostate, with a median age of 65 years. The initial GS was revised, and there was a decrease in GS 3 + 4 from 13.9% to 9% and increase in 4 + 3 from 19.6% to 23.8%. There was upgradation of PGG in 11 (7.69%) biopsies; with PGG from 1 to 2 in one; 2to 3 in eight; and 3to 4 in two. Follow-up at 2 years in 22 showed the poor prognoses in the patients who were upgraded to the higher prognostic group. CONCLUSIONS: A change in PGG according to the WHO 2016 criteria was assigned in 7.69% biopsies of carcinoma prostate, and it correlated with prognosis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6060600
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60606002018-08-08 Validation of the WHO 2016 new Gleason score of prostatic carcinoma Rao, Vishal Garudadri, Gowri Shilpa, Arya Sahithi Fonseca, Daphne Sudha, S. Murthy Sharma, Rakesh Subramanyeshwar, T. Rao Challa, Sundaram Urol Ann Original Article CONTEXT: New Gleason Score of Prostate. AIMS: The aim of this study is to assign the patients with carcinoma prostate into new prognostic grade groups (PGGs) based on revised Gleason score (GS) and follow-up according to the WHO 2016. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: All the biopsies/resected specimens of carcinoma prostate from January 2014 to June 2016 were reviewed, and GS was done according to the WHO 2016. Accordingly, cribriform, fused, and glomeruloid glands were assigned GS 4. Thus, two groups were identified with GS 7 (3 + 4 and 4 + 3). The patients were grouped into PGGs 1–5. The number of patients with change in the prognostic group along with follow-up was calculated. RESULTS: There were 143 patients with carcinoma prostate, with a median age of 65 years. The initial GS was revised, and there was a decrease in GS 3 + 4 from 13.9% to 9% and increase in 4 + 3 from 19.6% to 23.8%. There was upgradation of PGG in 11 (7.69%) biopsies; with PGG from 1 to 2 in one; 2to 3 in eight; and 3to 4 in two. Follow-up at 2 years in 22 showed the poor prognoses in the patients who were upgraded to the higher prognostic group. CONCLUSIONS: A change in PGG according to the WHO 2016 criteria was assigned in 7.69% biopsies of carcinoma prostate, and it correlated with prognosis. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC6060600/ /pubmed/30089994 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/UA.UA_185_17 Text en Copyright: © 2018 Urology Annals http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Rao, Vishal
Garudadri, Gowri
Shilpa, Arya Sahithi
Fonseca, Daphne
Sudha, S. Murthy
Sharma, Rakesh
Subramanyeshwar, T. Rao
Challa, Sundaram
Validation of the WHO 2016 new Gleason score of prostatic carcinoma
title Validation of the WHO 2016 new Gleason score of prostatic carcinoma
title_full Validation of the WHO 2016 new Gleason score of prostatic carcinoma
title_fullStr Validation of the WHO 2016 new Gleason score of prostatic carcinoma
title_full_unstemmed Validation of the WHO 2016 new Gleason score of prostatic carcinoma
title_short Validation of the WHO 2016 new Gleason score of prostatic carcinoma
title_sort validation of the who 2016 new gleason score of prostatic carcinoma
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6060600/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30089994
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/UA.UA_185_17
work_keys_str_mv AT raovishal validationofthewho2016newgleasonscoreofprostaticcarcinoma
AT garudadrigowri validationofthewho2016newgleasonscoreofprostaticcarcinoma
AT shilpaaryasahithi validationofthewho2016newgleasonscoreofprostaticcarcinoma
AT fonsecadaphne validationofthewho2016newgleasonscoreofprostaticcarcinoma
AT sudhasmurthy validationofthewho2016newgleasonscoreofprostaticcarcinoma
AT sharmarakesh validationofthewho2016newgleasonscoreofprostaticcarcinoma
AT subramanyeshwartrao validationofthewho2016newgleasonscoreofprostaticcarcinoma
AT challasundaram validationofthewho2016newgleasonscoreofprostaticcarcinoma