Histologic grading study of prostate adenocarcinoma: The development of a new system and comparison with other methods—A preliminary study

Brawn, Peter N.; Ayala, Alberto G.; Eschenbach, Andrew C. von; Hussey, David H.; Johnson, Douglas E.

doi:10.1002/1097-0142(19820201)49:3<525::aid-cncr2820490321>3.0.co;2-m

Cited by 149 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[19][20][21][22][23][30][31][32][33][34][35] Although a prognostic relevance for all these grading systems has been shown, the Gleason system was able to prevail against them, as a result of its ease of application in combination with its well documented prognostic relevance. However, diseasespecific aspects of this era have to be considered.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combined histoarchitectural and cytological biopsy grading improves grading accuracy in low‐grade prostate cancer

Helpap

Köllermann

2011

Int J of Urology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abbreviations & AcronymsObjectives: Accurate tumor grading on prostate biopsy represents the mainstay for therapy planning. Biopsy undergrading is a persistent diagnostic dilemma with therapeutic relevance. We questioned whether Gleason grading combined with an established alternative grading system incorporating cytological parameters improves grading accuracy. Methods: Needle biopsies of 968 patients and the corresponding radical prostatectomy specimens were graded according to the Gleason grading system. In addition, all biopsies were graded according to the histo-and cytological grading system of Helpap. Biopsy Gleason grade, as well as the combined Gleason/Helpap grade, was compared with the final Gleason score and the pathological tumor-stage of the corresponding radical prostatectomy. Results: In biopsy Gleason score 6 cancers, an upgrading was seen in 76.0% of the patients (98/129), and 30.2% of them (39/129) showed non-organ confined disease. In combined biopsy Gleason 6/Helpap 2a patients, a final Gleason score of 6 was found in 22 out of 24 patients (91.7%, P < 0.0001), and all 24 patients showed organ-confined disease (pT2a). In biopsy Gleason 6/Helpap 2b cancers, a final Gleason score of 6 was found in just 9 out of 105 patients (8.6%), and the rate of organ-confined disease decreased to 62.8% (66/105, P = 0.0001). In higher Gleason grades, combined biopsy grading failed to show a diagnostic benefit over sole Gleason grading. Conclusion: Combined biopsy Gleason/Helpap grading improves the identification of low-grade/low-stage cancers and might contribute to more precise therapy planning in prostate cancer management.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combined histoarchitectural and cytological biopsy grading improves grading accuracy in low‐grade prostate cancer

Helpap

Köllermann

2011

Int J of Urology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The most common score obtained was 6 in 4 cases out of 7 adenocarcinoma cases. Vollmer 20 had score 6 most common whereas Brawn et al 21 had scores 6 and 7 in his study.…”

Section: Features Favoring Prostatic Carcinomamentioning

confidence: 61%

"Study of Various Histopathological Patterns in Prostate Biopsy"

2017

IJCRR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Diseases of prostate gland are important source of morbidity and mortality in male patients. The spectrum of diseases consists of inflammatory conditions, nodular hyperplasia, malignancy etc. The risk of diseases increases with age. Prostate biopsy is essentially a test which detects cancer and other benign conditions of the prostate in patients who have specific indications for it. Other modalities of diagnosis also have been developed, comprising of radiological modalities and prostatic biomarkers. However, biopsy with histopathological examination is the gold standard for the final diagnosis.

show abstract

“…Of the many histologic grading systems introduced to help predict pathologic stage and prognosis for prostate cancer [22][23][24][25], the most commonly used is the Gleason system [24], which correlates directly with pathologic extent of disease. The Gleason grading system is based on a low-power microscopic description of the histologic architecture of the cancer [24,26].…”

Section: Histologic Grade and Locally Advanced Prostate Cancermentioning

confidence: 99%

Management of High-Risk Populations with Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer

Khan

Partin

2003

The Oncologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prostate cancer that extends beyond the confines of the prostatic gland on clinical and/or radiographic assessment, without evidence of lymph node or distant metastases, is regarded as locally advanced. The locally advanced prostate cancer patient population consists of a heterogeneous group of men, some of whom have tumors that may be amenable to primary curative intent with local definitive therapy associated with acceptable long-term cancer control rates. In order to optimally manage this group of patients, it is important to be able to recognize who is at a high risk of tumor recurrence after primary local therapy. In this brief review, we discuss the factors that contribute to the prediction of high risk in populations with locally advanced disease and the treatment options available. The Oncologist 2003;8:259-269

show abstract

Histologic grading study of prostate adenocarcinoma: The development of a new system and comparison with other methods—A preliminary study

Cited by 149 publications

References 4 publications

Combined histoarchitectural and cytological biopsy grading improves grading accuracy in low‐grade prostate cancer

Combined histoarchitectural and cytological biopsy grading improves grading accuracy in low‐grade prostate cancer

"Study of Various Histopathological Patterns in Prostate Biopsy"

Management of High-Risk Populations with Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About