Concordance between the Gleason Score of the Prostate Biopsy and the Final Histopathological Result of the Radical Prostatectomy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54212/27068048.v9i2.8Keywords:
prostate, prostate neoplasms, prostatectomyAbstract
Introduction: Gleason grading is a histological staging instrument used in patients diagnosed with prostate cancer. It is expected that there will be agreement between the result of the prostate biopsy and the surgical piece, however, there is some variability when comparing both results. Objective: To determine the concordance between the Gleason score of the prostate biopsy with the Gleason score of the radical prostatectomy. Materials and Methods: Analysis of diagnostic tests of 146 radical prostatectomy pathology records that were performed between 2013-2019. To determine the agreement between the variables, Cohen's Kappa coefficient was used. Results: For Gleason in the risk group, Cohen's Kappa coefficient was 0.216, obtaining a regular concordance between the result of the prostate biopsy and that of the radical prostatectomy. Conclusions: The concordance of the Gleason score of the biopsies with the final histopathological result was regular. However, it was not concluded that this was a determining factor when making decisions based on treatment, since the degrees of overstaging and understaging have been similar to the results of international observational studies.
Downloads
References
Narain V, Bianco FJ Jr, Grignon DJ, Sakr WA, Pontes JE, Wood DP Jr. How accurately does prostate biopsy Gleason score predict pathologic findings and disease free survival? Prostate 2001; 49: 185-90. https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.1133 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.1133
Feneley MR, Partin AW. Indicators of pathologic stage of prostate cancer and their use in clinical practice. UrolClin North Am 2001; 28: 443-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0094-0143(05)70154-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0094-0143(05)70154-3
Derweesh IH, Kupelian PA, Zippe C, Levin HS, Brainard J, Magi-Galluzi C, et al. Continuing trends in pathologi-cal stage migration in radical prostatectomy specimens. Urol Oncol 2004; 22: 300-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2003.11.011 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2003.11.011
Stamey T, Caldwell M, Mcneal J, Molley R, Hermandez M, Downs J. The Prostate Specific Antigen era in the United States is over for Prostate Cancer: What happened in the last 20 years? J Urol 2002; 172: 1297-301. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000139993.51181.5d DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000139993.51181.5d
Bostwick DG, Grignon DI, Hammond EH, Amin MB, Cohen M, Crawford D, et al. Prognostic factors in prostate cancer: College of American Pathologist consensus statement 1999. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2000; 124: 995- 1000. https://doi.org/10.5858/2000-124-0995-PFIPC DOI: https://doi.org/10.5858/2000-124-0995-PFIPC
Partin AW, Kattan MW, Subong EN, Walsh PC, Wojno KJ, Oesterling JE, et al. Combination of prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage, and Gleason score to predict pathological stage of localized prostate cancer: A multiinstitutional update. JAMA 1997; 277: 1445-51. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1997.03540420041027 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.277.18.1445
Cookson MS, Fleshner NE, Soloway SM, Fair WR. Correlation between Gleason score of needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimen: accuracy and clinical implications. J Urol 1997; 157: 559-62. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005392-199702000-00039 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(01)65201-7
Djavan B, Kadesky K, Klopukh B, Marberger M, Roehrborn CG. Gleason scores from prostate biopsies obtained with 18-gauge biopsy needles poorly predict Gleason scores of radical prostatectomy specimens. Eur Urol 1998; 33: 261-70. https://doi.org/10.1159/000019578 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000019578
King CR. Patterns of prostate cancer biopsy grading: trends and clinical implications. Int J Cancer 2000; 90:305-11. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0215(20001220)90:6<305::AID-IJC1>3.0.CO;2-U DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0215(20001220)90:6<305::AID-IJC1>3.0.CO;2-U
Gleason DF, Mellinger GT. Prediction of prognosis for prostatic carcinoma by combined histological grading and clinical staging. J Urol 1974; 111: 58-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(17)59889-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(17)59889-4
Epstein JI, Feng Z, Trock BJ, Pierorazio PM. Upgrading and Downgrading of Prostate Cancer from Biopsy to Radical Prostatectomy: Incidence and Predictive Factors Using the Modified Gleason Grading System and Factoring in Tertiary Grades. Eur Urol. 2012;61(5):1019-1024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2012.01.050 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2012.01.050
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 José Manuel Rodríguez Méndez, Mauricio Gallo Ochoa, Jair Abdiel Toro Guerrero y Edgar Chávez Solís
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
