Consistencies and inconsistencies of Gleason score and grade group system in prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy

Timofte, Andrei Daniel; Giuşcă, Simona Eliza; Manole, Mariana Bianca; Gîrlescu, Nona; Profire, Bianca; Prutianu, Iulian; Rusu, Andreea; Căruntu, Irina-Draga

doi:10.22551/msj.2021.02.14

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…13 There has been a great deal of inconsistency with respect to individual grades of the tumors. 14 Historically there has been a predilection to diagnose potentially aggressive tumors and even a small proportion of poorly formed glands were recognized and graded as highest pattern. This has the subsequent implication of patients getting overtreated.…”

Section: Discusssionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inter-Observer Variability in Gleason Scoring System F0r Histological Grading of Adenocarcinoma Prostate

Ahsan

Khan²,

Asif³

et al. 2022

PAFMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT Objective: To evaluate the reproducibility of the Gleason scoring system and to compare its inter-observer variability for histological grading of prostatic adenocarcinoma. Study Design: Prospective double-blind study. Place and Duration of Study: Histopathology department of Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (Jan-Jul 2020). Methodology: A total of 128 pathology slides of prostate biopsies from patients with prostate cancer were re-evaluated. The International Society of Urological Pathology 2005 modified Gleason grading system with Epstein’s modification was used. Two pathologists, blinded to each other and to the initial pathology report, performed the pathological evaluation. To determine inter-observer concordance, the kappa coefficient test was used. Results: Concordance rates between the two observers for Gleason pattern sums were 67% (Ꝁ=0.556, 95% CI 0.40-0.59), respectively. Best concordance was at Gleason sum 7 (n=30/128). Conclusion: The agreement between observers on the Gleason sum was moderate. It can be greatly reduced if better trained uropathologists employ the Gleason scoring system resulting in less variability and more conformity.

show abstract

Section: Discusssionmentioning

confidence: 99%