Dataset Information

Clinical Validation of the 2005 ISUP Gleason Grading System in a Cohort of Intermediate and High Risk Men Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy.

ABSTRACT: In 2005, the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) introduced several modifications to the original Gleason system that were intended to enhance the prognostic power of Gleason score (GS). The objective of this study was to clinically validate the 2005 ISUP Gleason grading system for its ability to detect metastasis. We queried our institutional RP database for men with NCCN clinically localized intermediate to high-risk disease undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) between 1992 and 2010 with no additional treatment until the time of metastatic progression. A case-cohort design was utilized. A total of 333 available RP samples were re-reviewed and GS was reassigned per the 2005 ISUP Gleason system. Cumulative incidence of metastasis was 0%, 8.4%, 24.5% and 44.4% among specimens that were downgraded, unchanged, had one point GS increase and two point GS increase, respectively. The hazard ratio for metastasis raised in GS 8 and 9 compared to GS 7 from 2.77 and 5.91 to 3.49 and 9.31, respectively. The survival c-index of GS increased from 0.70 to 0.80 when samples were re-graded at 5 years post RP. The c-index of the reassigned GS was higher than the original GS (0.77 vs 0.64) for predicting PCSM at 10 years post RP. The regraded GS improved the prediction of metastasis and PCSM. This validates the updated Gleason grading system using an unambiguous clinical endpoint and highlights the need for reassignment of Gleason grading according to 2005 ISUP system when considering comparisons of novel biomarkers to clinicopathological variables in archival cohorts.

SUBMITTER: Faraj SF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4712132 | biostudies-literature | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Clinical Validation of the 2005 ISUP Gleason Grading System in a Cohort of Intermediate and High Risk Men Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy.

Faraj Sheila F SF Bezerra Stephania M SM Yousefi Kasra K Fedor Helen H Glavaris Stephanie S Han Misop M Partin Alan W AW Humphreys Elizabeth E Tosoian Jeffrey J Johnson Michael H MH Davicioni Elai E Trock Bruce J BJ Schaeffer Edward M EM Ross Ashley E AE Netto George J GJ

PloS one 20160105 1

In 2005, the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) introduced several modifications to the original Gleason system that were intended to enhance the prognostic power of Gleason score (GS). The objective of this study was to clinically validate the 2005 ISUP Gleason grading system for its ability to detect metastasis. We queried our institutional RP database for men with NCCN clinically localized intermediate to high-risk disease undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) between 1992 a ...[more]

PMID: 26731672

Similar Datasets

Project description:An emerging field of research describes the role of preoperative health behaviours, known as prehabilitation. The preoperative period may be a more physically and emotionally salient time to introduce and foster chronic adherence to health behaviours, such as exercise, in patients compared to post-treatment during recovery. Moreover, physical and psychosocial improvements during the preoperative period may translate into an enhanced recovery trajectory with reduced operative complications and postoperative adverse effects. No studies have assessed prehabilitation for men with prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy.This is a multi-centre, pilot randomized control trial conducted at two Canadian urban teaching hospitals. 100 men undergoing radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer with no contraindications to exercise will be recruited and randomized to the prehabiliation program or usual care. Prehabilitation participants will engage in a preoperative, individualized exercise program including pelvic floor muscle strengthening instructions and a healthy lifestyle guide for men with prostate cancer. These participants will be asked to engage in 60 minutes of home-based, unsupervised, moderate-intensity exercise on 3-4 days per week. Usual care participants will receive the same pelvic floor muscle strengthening instructions and healthy lifestyle guide only. We will assess the feasibility of conducting an adequately powered trial of the same design via recruitment rate, programmatic adherence/contamination, attrition, and safety. Estimates of intervention efficacy will be captured through measurements at baseline (4-8 weeks preoperatively), within 1 week prior to surgery, and postoperatively at 4, 12, and 26 weeks. Efficacy outcomes include: fatigue, quality of life, urinary incontinence, physical fitness, body composition, aerobic fitness, pain, and physical activity volume.The primary outcome of this study is to determine the feasibility of conducting a full-scale, randomized controlled trial of prehabilitation versus usual care and to estimate effect sizes that will inform sample size determinations for subsequent trials in this field. To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine a structured presurgical exercise program for men undergoing radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. This trial will advance our understanding of strategies to efficiently and effectively use the preoperative period to optimize postoperative recovery.Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02036684.

Project description:BACKGROUND: The controversies concerning possible overtreatment of prostate cancer, highlighted by debate over PSA screening, have highlighted active surveillance (AS) as an alternative management option for appropriate men. Regional differences in the underlying prevalence of PSA testing may alter the pre-test probability for high-risk disease, which can potentially interfere with the performance of selection criteria for AS. In a multicentre study from three different countries, we examine men who were initially suitable for AS according to the Toronto and Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS) criteria, that underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) in regards to:1.the proportion of pathological reclassification(Gleason score ≥7, ≥pT3 disease),2.predictors of high-risk disease,3.create a predictive model to assist with selection of men suitable for AS. METHODS: From three centres in the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia, data on men who underwent RP were retrospectively reviewed (n=2329). Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify predictors of high-risk disease. A nomogram was generated by logistic regression analysis, and performance characterised by receiver operating characteristic curves. RESULTS: For men suitable for AS according to the Toronto (n=800) and PRIAS (410) criteria, the rates for upgrading were 50.6, 42.7%, and upstaging 17.6, 12.4%, respectively. Significant predictors of high-risk disease were:•Toronto criteria: increasing age, cT2 disease, centre of diagnosis and number of positive cores.•PRIAS criteria: increasing PSA and cT2 disease.Cambridge had a high pT3a rate (26 vs 12%). To assist selection of men in the United Kingdom for AS, from the Cambridge data, we generated a nomogram predicting high-risk features in patients who meet the Toronto criteria (AUC of 0.72). CONCLUSION: The proportion of pathological reclassification in our cohort was higher than previously reported. Care must be used when applying the AS criteria generated from one population to another. With more stringent selection criteria, there is less reclassification but also fewer men who may benefit from AS.

Project description:BackgroundSeveral biologic mechanisms, including inflammation and immune changes, have been proposed to explain the role of obesity in prostate cancer (CaP) progression. Compared to men of a healthy weight, overweight and obese men are more likely to have CaP recurrence post-prostatectomy. Obesity is related to inflammation and immune dysregulation; thus, weight loss may be an avenue to reduce inflammation and reverse these immune processes.ObjectivesThis study explores the reversibility of the biological mechanisms through intentional weight loss using a comprehensive weight management program in men undergoing prostatectomy. Outcomes include blood and tissue biomarkers, microtumor environment gene expression, inflammation markers and Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII) scores.MethodsTwenty overweight men undergoing prostatectomy participated in this study. Fifteen men chose the intervention and 5 men chose the nonintervention group. The intervention consisted of a comprehensive weight loss program prior to prostatectomy and a weight maintenance program following surgery. Prostate tissue samples were obtained from diagnostic biopsies before the intervention and prostatectomy samples after weight loss. Blood samples and diet records were collected at baseline, pre-surgery after weight loss and at study end after weight maintenance. Immunohistochemistry and NanoString analysis were used to analyze the tissue samples. Flow cytometry was used to assess circulating immune markers. Inflammation markers were measured using Luminex panels.ResultsThe intervention group lost >5% body weight prior to surgery. DII scores improved during the weight loss intervention from baseline to pre-surgery (P = 0.002); and between group differences were significant (P = 0.02). DII scores were not associated with IL-6 nor hsCRP. In the intervention, CXCL12, CXCR7, and CXCR4 (C-X-C motif chemokine ligand/receptor) and Ki67 expression decreased in the prostate tissue from biopsy to surgery (P = 0.06), yet plasma CXCL12 increased during the same timeframe (P = 0.009). The downregulation of several genes (FDR<0.001) was observed in the intervention compared to the non-intervention. Changes in immune cells were not significant in either group.ConclusionThis feasibility study demonstrates that in overweight men with localized CaP, weight loss alters blood, and tissue biomarkers, as well as tumor gene expression. More research is needed to determine the biological and clinical significance of these findings.

Project description:ImportanceActive surveillance is recommended for patients with very low-risk (VLR) and low-risk (LR) prostate cancer. Despite controversy, recent clinical guidelines state surveillance may be considered for men with low-volume intermediate-risk (LVIR) disease.ObjectiveTo compare rates of adverse pathologic findings among VLR, LR, and LVIR men electing immediate radical prostatectomy and evaluate criteria to define if a favorable intermediate-risk group minimizing risk exists.Design, setting, and participantsThis was a cohort study of men (2005-July 2016) with clinically localized VLR (1264 patients), LR (4849 patients), and LVIR (608 patients) (1-2 cores, Gleason 3?+?4?=?7, prostate-specific antigen [PSA] level <20 ng/mL) prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy evaluated retrospectively at Johns Hopkins Hospital.InterventionsRadical prostatectomy.Main outcomes and measuresThe proportions of men found to have at least Gleason 4?+?3?=?7 disease and other adverse pathologic features were compared by risk group. Log-binomial regression calculated relative risk (RR) of adverse pathologic findings in the LVIR cohort compared with VLR and LR cohorts. Analyses were repeated in subgroups of the LVIR population who otherwise met criteria for VLR (T1c, PSA density [PSAD] <0.15 ng/mL/cm3, ?50% cancer in any core) and LR (?T2a, PSA level <10 ng/mL) disease. Rates of adverse pathologic findings within the LVIR group were calculated based on various clinical thresholds, and univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to identify predictors of adverse pathologic findings.ResultsThe rate of adverse pathologic findings was significantly higher for LVIR disease (150 of 608 patients [24.7%]; RR, 4.50; 95% CI, 3.73-5.43; P?<?.001) compared with LR disease (280 of 4849 [5.8%]), and LVIR disease (RR, 5.14; 95% CI, 3.84-6.89; P?<?.001) compared with men with VLR disease (60 of 1264 [4.7%]). Restriction of LVIR men to additional criteria did not significantly affect results. There were no preoperative clinical or pathologic criteria that could identify a subgroup of the LVIR population with rates of adverse pathologic findings comparable with those of the VLR and LR cohorts. PSAD was a significant predictor of adverse pathologic findings, but Gleason score had the largest effect (odds ratio, 4.30 (95% CI, 3.40-5.44; P?<?.001).Conclusions and relevanceNearly 25% of men (150 of 608) electing immediate radical prostatectomy with low-volume, Gleason 3?+?4 prostate cancer on biopsy are found to harbor adverse surgical pathologic findings. These data do not support the presence of a "favorable" subgroup among included patients and could have important implications for active surveillance in similar patients with Gleason 3?+?4?=?7 prostate cancer.

Dataset Information

Clinical Validation of the 2005 ISUP Gleason Grading System in a Cohort of Intermediate and High Risk Men Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy.

Publications

Clinical Validation of the 2005 ISUP Gleason Grading System in a Cohort of Intermediate and High Risk Men Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets