Cargando…

Percent Gleason pattern 4 in stratifying the prognosis of patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer

The Gleason score remains the most reliable prognosticator in men with prostate cancer. One of the recent important modifications in the Gleason grading system recommended from the International Society of Urological Pathology consensus conference is recording the percentage of Gleason pattern 4 in...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Sharma, Meenal, Miyamoto, Hiroshi
Formato:	Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:	English
Publicado:	AME Publishing Company 2018
Materias:	Review Article
Acceso en línea:	https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6178316/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30363387 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tau.2018.03.20

Ejemplares similares

Inter-observer variability of cribriform architecture and percent Gleason pattern 4 in prostate cancer: relation to clinical outcome
por: van der Slot, Margaretha A., et al.
Publicado: (2020)

The highest percentage of Gleason Pattern 4 is a predictor in intermediate‐risk prostate cancer
por: Sato, Shun, et al.
Publicado: (2022)

Influence of Active Surveillance on Gleason Score Upgrade and Prognosis in Low- and Favorable Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer
por: Hu, Xuanhan, et al.
Publicado: (2022)

Favorable intermediate risk prostate cancer with biopsy Gleason score of 6
por: Oh, Jong Jin, et al.
Publicado: (2021)

Clinical significance of subtypes of Gleason pattern 4 prostate cancer
por: Hassan, Oudai, et al.
Publicado: (2018)

Quantification of Gleason Pattern 4 at MRI-Guided Biopsy to Predict Adverse Pathology at Radical Prostatectomy in Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer Patients
por: Kamecki, Hubert, et al.
Publicado: (2023)

Alternative prostate cancer grading systems incorporating percent pattern 4/5 (IQ-Gleason) and cribriform architecture (cGrade) improve prediction of outcome after radical prostatectomy
por: Seyrek, Neslisah, et al.
Publicado: (2022)

Identification of novel prostate cancer genes in patients stratified by Gleason classification: Role of antitumoral genes
por: Díaz de la Guardia‐Bolívar, Elisa, et al.
Publicado: (2022)

Cribriform architecture outperforms Gleason pattern 4 percentage and tertiary Gleason pattern 5 in predicting the outcome of Grade Group 2 prostate cancer patients
por: Seyrek, Neslisah, et al.
Publicado: (2021)

Prognostic Impact of Different Gleason Patterns on Biopsy Within Grade Group 4 Prostate Cancer
por: Mori, Keiichiro, et al.
Publicado: (2021)

Influence of Biopsy Gleason Score on the Risk of Lymph Node Invasion in Patients With Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy
por: Wenzel, Mike, et al.
Publicado: (2021)

Quantification of the individual risk of each Gleason pattern, including tertiary Gleason pattern 5, after radical prostatectomy: development of the modified Gleason grade grouping (mGGG) model
por: Taguchi, Satoru, et al.
Publicado: (2020)

Loss of DNA mismatch repair proteins in prostate cancer
por: Sharma, Meenal, et al.
Publicado: (2020)

The Development of a Gleason Score-Related Gene Signature for Predicting the Prognosis of Prostate Cancer
por: Yimamu, Yiliyasi, et al.
Publicado: (2022)

Impact of Gleason Pattern 5 on outcomes of patients with prostate cancer and iodine-125 prostate brachytherapy
por: Makino, Tomoyuki, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Molecular risk classifier score and biochemical recurrence risk are associated with cribriform pattern type in Gleason 3+4=7 prostate cancer
por: Greenland, Nancy Y., et al.
Publicado: (2022)

Immunohistochemistry of immune checkpoint markers PD-1 and PD-L1 in prostate cancer
por: Sharma, Meenal, et al.
Publicado: (2019)

Biochemical Recurrence in Gleason Score 7 Prostate Cancer in Korean Men: Significance of the Primary Gleason Grade
por: Ro, Yun Kwan, et al.
Publicado: (2012)

Molecular characterization of Gleason patterns 3 and 4 prostate cancer using reverse Warburg effect-associated genes
por: Georgescu, Ilinca, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

The gut microbiota associated with high‐Gleason prostate cancer
por: Matsushita, Makoto, et al.
Publicado: (2021)

Gleason 6 prostate cancer: That which cannot be named
por: Burke, Harry B.
Publicado: (2022)

Role of Brachytherapy Boost in Clinically Localized Intermediate and High-Risk Prostate Cancer: Lack of Benefit in Patients with Very High-Risk Factors T3b–4 and/or Gleason 9–10
por: Yamazaki, Hideya, et al.
Publicado: (2022)

A novel lysosome-related gene signature coupled with gleason score for prognosis prediction in prostate cancer
por: Huang, Ying, et al.
Publicado: (2023)

Machine learning classifiers can predict Gleason pattern 4 prostate cancer with greater accuracy than experienced radiologists
por: Antonelli, Michela, et al.
Publicado: (2019)

Comedonecrosis Gleason pattern 5 is associated with worse clinical outcome in operated prostate cancer patients
por: Hansum, Tim, et al.
Publicado: (2021)

The Urine Biomarker PUR-4 Is Positively Associated with the Amount of Gleason 4 in Human Prostate Cancers
por: Ball, Richard Y., et al.
Publicado: (2021)

Differences in survival of prostate cancer Gleason 8–10 disease and the establishment of a new Gleason survival grading system
por: Zhou, Yuan, et al.
Publicado: (2020)

Validation of the WHO 2016 new Gleason score of prostatic carcinoma
por: Rao, Vishal, et al.
Publicado: (2018)

Multimodal Radiomic Features for the Predicting Gleason Score of Prostate Cancer
por: Chaddad, Ahmad, et al.
Publicado: (2018)

Beyond the Gleason score: the prognostic significance of prostate cancer subtypes
por: Flood, Trevor A., et al.
Publicado: (2018)

SBRT for the Primary Treatment of Localized Prostate Cancer: The Effect of Gleason Score, Dose and Heterogeneity of Intermediate Risk on Outcome Utilizing 2.2014 NCCN Risk Stratification Guidelines
por: Bernetich, Matthew, et al.
Publicado: (2014)

Incidence of metastasis and prostate-specific antigen levels at diagnosis in Gleason 3+4 versus 4+3 prostate cancer
por: Kamel, Mohamed H., et al.
Publicado: (2018)

Deep learning for automatic Gleason pattern classification for grade group determination of prostate biopsies
por: Lucas, Marit, et al.
Publicado: (2019)

Small Extracellular Vesicle-Derived microRNAs Stratify Prostate Cancer Patients According to Gleason Score, Race and Associate with Survival of African American and Caucasian Men
por: Ali, Hamdy E. A., et al.
Publicado: (2021)

ARRDC4 and UBXN1: Novel Target Genes Correlated with Prostate Cancer Gleason Score
por: Oh, Jong Jin, et al.
Publicado: (2021)

CRMP4 CpG Hypermethylation Predicts Upgrading to Gleason Score ≥ 8 in Prostate Cancer
por: Qin, Xiao-Ping, et al.
Publicado: (2022)

Oncologic Outcomes of Patients With Gleason Score 7 and Tertiary Gleason Pattern 5 After Radical Prostatectomy
por: Leng, Yi-Hsueh, et al.
Publicado: (2013)

Percentage Gleason pattern 4 and PI-RADS score predict upgrading in biopsy Grade Group 2 prostate cancer patients without cribriform pattern
por: van der Slot, Margaretha A., et al.
Publicado: (2022)

ASO Author Reflections: Is There Any Difference Among Various Gleason Scores Classified as Grade Group 4 Prostate Cancer?
por: Mori, Keiichiro, et al.
Publicado: (2021)

Predicting Gleason Score of Prostate Cancer Patients Using Radiomic Analysis
por: Chaddad, Ahmad, et al.
Publicado: (2018)

Cannot write session to /tmp/vufind_sessions/sess_qlhq5iuj0golkrhq1qq85966ea