scholarly journals The factors predicting upgrading of prostate cancer by using International Society for Urological Pathology (ISUP) 2014 Gleason grading system

2019 ◽  
Vol 45 (-1) ◽  
pp. 36-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Turgay Turan ◽  
◽  
Berrin Gucluer ◽  
Ozgur Elifoglu ◽  
Furkan Sendogan ◽  
...  
2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 49-49 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Donovan ◽  
Phillipp Torkler ◽  
Johan Skog ◽  
Mikkel Noerholm ◽  
Peter Carroll

49 Background: Overdetection and overtreatment of indolent prostate cancer (PCa) remains a significant health issue requiring noninvasive assays to guide the prostate biopsy decision process. We demonstrated that a urine exosome gene expression assay (ExoDx P rostate ( I ntelliScore) (EPI) discriminates GS 7 PCa from GS 6 and benign disease, potentially reducing the number of unnecessary biopsies. The International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) proposed a prognostic PCa grading system to accurately reflect the biology of PCa; ISUP separates GS 7 PCa into group 2 (GS 3+4) and group 3 (GS 4+3). We sought to evaluate the performance of the EPI test according to the newly proposed ISUP system. Methods: The 519 patient validation cohort was re-annotated using ISUP and assessed benign (B) +/- ISUP 1 and B+ISUP 1+2 (GS 3+3, GS 3+4) from ISUP 3-5 (GS >= 4+3). We used validated / adjusted cut-points to assess performance with the AUC, sensitivity, specificity and NPV. In addition, we investigated the association of the EPI score with the benign biopsies (BB) and ISUP groups in the combined training and test cohort (n=774). Results: Applying the adjusted cut point (EPI 20) on the 519 ISUP cohort discriminated benign biopsies (BB) + ISUP 1 from >/=ISUP 2, 37% of biopsies avoided, NPV of 90%, equivalent to Gleason grading. Utilizing either the validated (15.6) or adjusted cut points on BB+ISUP 1+ 2 vs. >/=ISUP 3 (dominant pattern 4), 26% vs 37% biopsies avoided, with an improved NPV 98%. In the combined training / test cohort, higher EPI scores were significantly associated with ISUP categories. In this analysis EPI in BB vs. all ISUP groups (p<0.0001); BB+ISUP 1 vs. >/= ISUP2 (p<0.0001) and BB+ISUP 1+2 vs. >/=ISUP3 (p<0.0001); supporting accurate discrimination in high grade PCa. Conclusions: The EPI test is a noninvasive, first-catch non-DRE gene expression assay that accurately discriminates low-grade from high-grade PCa in both ISUP as well as Gleason score based grading systems. The test has the potential to reduce the number of unnecessary biopsies and performs equally well in contemporary approaches to PCa stratification.


2016 ◽  
Vol 140 (10) ◽  
pp. 1140-1152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oleksandr N. Kryvenko ◽  
Jonathan I. Epstein

Since 1966, when Donald Gleason, MD, first proposed grading prostate cancer based on its histologic architecture, there have been numerous changes in clinical and pathologic practices relating to prostate cancer. Patterns 1 and 2, comprising more than 30% of cases in the original publications by Gleason, are no longer reported on biopsy and are rarely diagnosed on radical prostatectomy. Many of these cases may even have been mimickers of prostate cancer that were described later with the use of contemporary immunohistochemistry. The original Gleason system predated many newly described variants of prostate cancer and our current concept of intraductal carcinoma. Gleason also did not describe how to report prostate cancer on biopsy with multiple cores of cancer or on radical prostatectomy with separate tumor nodules. To address these issues, the International Society of Urological Pathology first made revisions to the grading system in 2005, and subsequently in 2014. Additionally, a new grading system composed of Grade Groups 1 to 5 that was first developed in 2013 at the Johns Hopkins Hospital and subsequently validated in a large multi-institutional and multimodal study was presented at the 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology meeting and accepted both by participating pathologists as well as urologists, oncologists, and radiation therapists. In the present study, we describe updates to the grading of prostate cancer along with the new grading system.


2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katsuki Tsuchiyama ◽  
Hideaki Ito ◽  
Minekatsu Taga ◽  
Konosuke Oshinoya ◽  
Kenichi Nagano ◽  
...  

2007 ◽  
Vol 8 (5) ◽  
pp. 411-419 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia Harnden ◽  
Mike D Shelley ◽  
Bernadette Coles ◽  
John Staffurth ◽  
Malcom D Mason

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document