Cargando…
Prognostic Impact of Different Gleason Patterns on Biopsy Within Grade Group 4 Prostate Cancer
BACKGROUND: Grade group (GG) 4 prostate cancer (PC) is considered a single entity; however, there are questions regarding prognostic heterogeneity. This study assessed the prognostic differences among various Gleason scores (GSs) classified as GG 4 PC on biopsy before radical prostatectomy (RP). MET...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8591010/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34117577 http://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-021-10257-x |
_version_ | 1784599119737651200 |
---|---|
author | Mori, Keiichiro Sharma, Vidit Comperat, Eva M. Sato, Shun Laukhtina, Ekaterina Schuettfort, Victor M. Pradere, Benjamin Sari Motlagh, Reza Mostafaei, Hadi Quhal, Fahad Kardoust Parizi, Mehdi Abufaraj, Mohammad Karakiewicz, Pierre I. Egawa, Shin Tilki, Derya Boorjian, Stephen A. Shariat, Shahrokh F. |
author_facet | Mori, Keiichiro Sharma, Vidit Comperat, Eva M. Sato, Shun Laukhtina, Ekaterina Schuettfort, Victor M. Pradere, Benjamin Sari Motlagh, Reza Mostafaei, Hadi Quhal, Fahad Kardoust Parizi, Mehdi Abufaraj, Mohammad Karakiewicz, Pierre I. Egawa, Shin Tilki, Derya Boorjian, Stephen A. Shariat, Shahrokh F. |
author_sort | Mori, Keiichiro |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Grade group (GG) 4 prostate cancer (PC) is considered a single entity; however, there are questions regarding prognostic heterogeneity. This study assessed the prognostic differences among various Gleason scores (GSs) classified as GG 4 PC on biopsy before radical prostatectomy (RP). METHODS: We conducted a multicenter retrospective study, and a total of 1791 patients (GS 3 + 5: 190; GS 4 + 4: 1557; and GS 5 + 3: 44) with biopsy GG 4 were included for analysis. Biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free survival, cancer-specific survival, and overall survival were analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier method and the log-rank test. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with high-risk surgical pathologic features. Cox regression models were used to analyze time-dependent oncologic endpoints. RESULTS: Over a median follow-up of 75 months, 750 patients (41.9%) experienced BCR, 146 (8.2%) died of any causes, and 57 (3.2%) died of PC. Biopsy GS 5 + 3 was associated with significantly higher rates of GS upgrading in RP specimens than GS 3 + 5 and GS 4 + 4. On multivariable analysis adjusted for clinicopathologic features, different GSs within GG 4 were significantly associated with BCR (p = 0.03) but not PC-specific or all-cause mortality. Study limitations include the lack of central pathological specimen evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with GG 4 at biopsy exhibited some limited biological and clinical heterogeneity. Specifically, GS 5 + 3 had an increased risk of GS upgrading. This can help individualize patients’ counseling and encourage further study to refine biopsy specimen-based GG classification. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1245/s10434-021-10257-x. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8591010 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-85910102021-11-23 Prognostic Impact of Different Gleason Patterns on Biopsy Within Grade Group 4 Prostate Cancer Mori, Keiichiro Sharma, Vidit Comperat, Eva M. Sato, Shun Laukhtina, Ekaterina Schuettfort, Victor M. Pradere, Benjamin Sari Motlagh, Reza Mostafaei, Hadi Quhal, Fahad Kardoust Parizi, Mehdi Abufaraj, Mohammad Karakiewicz, Pierre I. Egawa, Shin Tilki, Derya Boorjian, Stephen A. Shariat, Shahrokh F. Ann Surg Oncol Urologic Oncology BACKGROUND: Grade group (GG) 4 prostate cancer (PC) is considered a single entity; however, there are questions regarding prognostic heterogeneity. This study assessed the prognostic differences among various Gleason scores (GSs) classified as GG 4 PC on biopsy before radical prostatectomy (RP). METHODS: We conducted a multicenter retrospective study, and a total of 1791 patients (GS 3 + 5: 190; GS 4 + 4: 1557; and GS 5 + 3: 44) with biopsy GG 4 were included for analysis. Biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free survival, cancer-specific survival, and overall survival were analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier method and the log-rank test. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with high-risk surgical pathologic features. Cox regression models were used to analyze time-dependent oncologic endpoints. RESULTS: Over a median follow-up of 75 months, 750 patients (41.9%) experienced BCR, 146 (8.2%) died of any causes, and 57 (3.2%) died of PC. Biopsy GS 5 + 3 was associated with significantly higher rates of GS upgrading in RP specimens than GS 3 + 5 and GS 4 + 4. On multivariable analysis adjusted for clinicopathologic features, different GSs within GG 4 were significantly associated with BCR (p = 0.03) but not PC-specific or all-cause mortality. Study limitations include the lack of central pathological specimen evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with GG 4 at biopsy exhibited some limited biological and clinical heterogeneity. Specifically, GS 5 + 3 had an increased risk of GS upgrading. This can help individualize patients’ counseling and encourage further study to refine biopsy specimen-based GG classification. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1245/s10434-021-10257-x. Springer International Publishing 2021-06-11 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8591010/ /pubmed/34117577 http://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-021-10257-x Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Urologic Oncology Mori, Keiichiro Sharma, Vidit Comperat, Eva M. Sato, Shun Laukhtina, Ekaterina Schuettfort, Victor M. Pradere, Benjamin Sari Motlagh, Reza Mostafaei, Hadi Quhal, Fahad Kardoust Parizi, Mehdi Abufaraj, Mohammad Karakiewicz, Pierre I. Egawa, Shin Tilki, Derya Boorjian, Stephen A. Shariat, Shahrokh F. Prognostic Impact of Different Gleason Patterns on Biopsy Within Grade Group 4 Prostate Cancer |
title | Prognostic Impact of Different Gleason Patterns on Biopsy Within Grade Group 4 Prostate Cancer |
title_full | Prognostic Impact of Different Gleason Patterns on Biopsy Within Grade Group 4 Prostate Cancer |
title_fullStr | Prognostic Impact of Different Gleason Patterns on Biopsy Within Grade Group 4 Prostate Cancer |
title_full_unstemmed | Prognostic Impact of Different Gleason Patterns on Biopsy Within Grade Group 4 Prostate Cancer |
title_short | Prognostic Impact of Different Gleason Patterns on Biopsy Within Grade Group 4 Prostate Cancer |
title_sort | prognostic impact of different gleason patterns on biopsy within grade group 4 prostate cancer |
topic | Urologic Oncology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8591010/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34117577 http://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-021-10257-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT morikeiichiro prognosticimpactofdifferentgleasonpatternsonbiopsywithingradegroup4prostatecancer AT sharmavidit prognosticimpactofdifferentgleasonpatternsonbiopsywithingradegroup4prostatecancer AT comperatevam prognosticimpactofdifferentgleasonpatternsonbiopsywithingradegroup4prostatecancer AT satoshun prognosticimpactofdifferentgleasonpatternsonbiopsywithingradegroup4prostatecancer AT laukhtinaekaterina prognosticimpactofdifferentgleasonpatternsonbiopsywithingradegroup4prostatecancer AT schuettfortvictorm prognosticimpactofdifferentgleasonpatternsonbiopsywithingradegroup4prostatecancer AT praderebenjamin prognosticimpactofdifferentgleasonpatternsonbiopsywithingradegroup4prostatecancer AT sarimotlaghreza prognosticimpactofdifferentgleasonpatternsonbiopsywithingradegroup4prostatecancer AT mostafaeihadi prognosticimpactofdifferentgleasonpatternsonbiopsywithingradegroup4prostatecancer AT quhalfahad prognosticimpactofdifferentgleasonpatternsonbiopsywithingradegroup4prostatecancer AT kardoustparizimehdi prognosticimpactofdifferentgleasonpatternsonbiopsywithingradegroup4prostatecancer AT abufarajmohammad prognosticimpactofdifferentgleasonpatternsonbiopsywithingradegroup4prostatecancer AT karakiewiczpierrei prognosticimpactofdifferentgleasonpatternsonbiopsywithingradegroup4prostatecancer AT egawashin prognosticimpactofdifferentgleasonpatternsonbiopsywithingradegroup4prostatecancer AT tilkiderya prognosticimpactofdifferentgleasonpatternsonbiopsywithingradegroup4prostatecancer AT boorjianstephena prognosticimpactofdifferentgleasonpatternsonbiopsywithingradegroup4prostatecancer AT shariatshahrokhf prognosticimpactofdifferentgleasonpatternsonbiopsywithingradegroup4prostatecancer |