DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparative Histopathological Characterization of Prostate Cancer in Saudi Patients by Conventional and 2005 ISUP Modified Gleason Systems

  • Al Suhaibani, Entissar Sulaiman ;
  • Kizilbash, Nadeem Abbas ;
  • Al Beladi, Fatima
  • Published : 2015.01.22

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to compare the characterization of prostate cancer using the conventional and 2005 ISUP modified Gleason systems. Materials and Methods: The study employed samples from 40 prostate cancer patients with resection, biopsy and RP materials. The majority of cases (95%) comprised adenocarcinoma of the prostate with a modified combined Gleason score of 7 in 20 of the cases (50%). Results: Upgrading of Gleason scores to a score of 7 occurred in more than 45% of the cases. Conclusion: The study successfully showed that by the use of the 2005 ISUP modified Gleason system, score 6 cancers decreased from 25% to 17.5% of cases, whereas score 7 cancers increased from 45% to 50%.

Keywords

Prostate cancer;conventional Gleason grading;2005 ISUP modified Gleason;histopathology

References

  1. Allsbrook WC, Mangold Jr KA, Yang X, Epstein JI (1999). The Gleason grading system: an overview. J Urol Pathol, 10, 141-58. https://doi.org/10.1385/JUP:10:2:141
  2. Bayder DE, Epstein JI (2009), Gleason grading system, modifications and additions to the original scheme. Turkish J Pathol, 25, 59-70. https://doi.org/10.5146/tjpath.2009.00975
  3. Brimo F, Montironi R, Egevad L, et al (2013). Contemporary grading for prostate cancer: implications for patient care. Eur Urol, 6, 892-901.
  4. de la Taille A, Antiphon P, Salomon L, et al (2003). Prospective evaluation of a 21-sample needle biopsy procedure designed to improve the prostate cancer detection rate. Urology, 61, 1181-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0090-4295(03)00108-0
  5. Egevad L, Norlen BJ, Norberg M (2001). The value of multiple core biopsies for predicting the Gleason score of prostate cancer. BJU Int, 88, 716-21. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1464-4096.2001.02419.x
  6. Epstein JI, Allsbrook WC Jr, Amin MB, et al (2005). The 2005 international society of urological pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol, 29, 1228-42. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.pas.0000173646.99337.b1
  7. Epstein JI, Allsbrook Jr WC, Amin MB, Egevad LL (2005). ISUP Grading committee: 2005 international society of urological pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol, 29, 1228-42. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.pas.0000173646.99337.b1
  8. Ferlay J, ShinHR, Bray F, et al (2010). Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008. Int J Cancer, 127, 2893-917. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.25516
  9. Fletcher CDM. (2007). Diagnostic Histopathology of Tumors, 3rd edition Philadelphia, Elsevier, 755.
  10. Garnick MB, Fair WR (1996). Prostate cancer: emerging concepts, Part II. Ann Intern Med, 125, 205-12. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-125-3-199608010-00009
  11. Goldstein A S, Huang J, Guo C, Garraway IP, Witte O N (2010) Identification of a cell of origin for human prostate cancer. Science, 329, 568-71. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1189992
  12. Gleason DF (1992) Histologic grading of prostate cancer: A perspective. Hum Pathol, 23, 273-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0046-8177(92)90108-F
  13. Helpap B, Egevad L (2008) Correlation of modified gleason grading with pt stage of prostatic carcinoma after radical prostatectomy. Anal Quant Cytol Histol, 30, 1-7.
  14. Hugosson J, Carlsson S, Aus G, et al (2010). Mortality results from the Goteborg randomised population-based prostate-cancer screening trial. Lancet Oncol, 11, 725-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(10)70146-7
  15. Kiernan JA (2001). Histological and histochemical methods: theory and practice, London a hodder arnold publication.
  16. Kolawole AO (2011). Feasible cancer control strategies for nigeria: mini-review. Am J Tropical Med & Public Health, 1, 1-10.
  17. McPherson SJ, Hussain S, Balanathan P, et al (2010). Estrogen receptor-$\beta$ activated apoptosis in benign hyperplasia and cancer of the prostate is androgen independent and $TNF{\alpha}$ mediated. Proc Natl Acad Sci, 107, 3123-8. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0905524107
  18. Orozco, R, O'Dowd G, Kunnel B, Miller MC, Veltri RW (1998). Observations on pathology trends in 62,537 prostate biopsies obtained from urology private practices in the United States. Urology, 51, 186-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0090-4295(97)00620-1
  19. Ogawa O (2004). Risk Factors for prostate cancer. JMAJ, 47, 186-1.
  20. Par Kash D, Lal M, Hashmi AH, Mubarak M (2014). Utility of digital rectal examination, serum prostate specific antigen, and transrectal ultrasound in the detection of prostate cancer: a developing country perspective. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 15, 3087-91. https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.7.3087
  21. Park S, Bae J, Nam B-H, Yoo K-Y (2008). Aetiology of cancer in Asia. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 9, 371-80.
  22. Pourmand G, Salem S, Mehrsai A, et al (2007). The risk factors of prostate cancer: a multicentric case-control study in Iran. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 8, 422-8.
  23. Routh JC, Leibovich BC (2005). Adenocarcinoma of the prostate: epidemiological trends, screening, diagnosis, and surgical management of localized disease. Mayo Clin Proc, 80, 899-7. https://doi.org/10.4065/80.7.899
  24. Svetec D, Thompson IM (1998). PSA screening-current controversy. Annal Oncol, 9, 1283-8. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008446208963
  25. Timmerman R, Paulus R, Galvin J, et al (2010). Stereotactic body radiation therapy for inoperable early stage lung cancer. JAMA, 303, 1070-6. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2010.261
  26. Varadhachary GR, Raber MN, Matamoros A, et al (2008). Carcinoma of unknown primary with a colon-cancer profile - changing paradigm and emerging definitions. Lancet Oncol, 9, 596-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(08)70151-7
  27. Verim L, Yildirim A, Basok EK, et al (2013). Impact of PSA and DRE on histologic findings at prostate biopsy in Turkish men over 75 years of age. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 14, 6085-8. https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2013.14.10.6085
  28. Visvader JE (2011). Cells of origin in cancer. Nature, 469, 314-22. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09781
  29. Weinstein IB, Santella RM, Perera FP (1995). Molecular biology and epidemiology of cancer. in 'cancer prevention and control'. Eds Greenwald P, Kramer BS and Weed DL. Marcel-Dekker, New York, pp 83-110.
  30. Wu SL, Li NC, Xiao YX et al (2006). Natural history of benign prostate hyperplasia, Clin Med J, 119, 2085-9.
  31. Zhao FJ, Han BM, Yu SQ, Xia SJ (2009) Tumor formation of prostate cancer cells influenced by stromal cells from the transitional or peripheral zones of the normal prostate. Asian J Androl, 11, 176-82. https://doi.org/10.1038/aja.2008.33

Cited by

  1. Biopsy undergrading in men with Gleason score 6 and fatal prostate cancer in the European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer Rotterdam vol.24, pp.4, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1111/iju.13294