Gleason score down and upgrading at radical prostatectomy in targeted vs. systematic prostate biopsy: Findings from an institutional cohort

IF 2.9 4区 医学 Q2 PATHOLOGY
Vincenzo Fiorentino , Ludovica Pepe , Valeria Zuccalà , Cristina Pizzimenti , Antonio Ieni , Maurizio Martini , Mara Curduman , Pietro Pepe
{"title":"Gleason score down and upgrading at radical prostatectomy in targeted vs. systematic prostate biopsy: Findings from an institutional cohort","authors":"Vincenzo Fiorentino ,&nbsp;Ludovica Pepe ,&nbsp;Valeria Zuccalà ,&nbsp;Cristina Pizzimenti ,&nbsp;Antonio Ieni ,&nbsp;Maurizio Martini ,&nbsp;Mara Curduman ,&nbsp;Pietro Pepe","doi":"10.1016/j.prp.2025.156040","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Accurate Gleason score (GS)/International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Grade Group (GG) assessment in prostate cancer (PCa) is crucial for risk stratification and treatment. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and targeted biopsies (TPBx) have enhanced PCa detection, but their accuracy compared to systematic biopsies (SPBx) is under discussion. This study investigates GS/GG concordance between prostate biopsies (TPBx and SPBx) and radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens, evaluating rates and factors associated with GS/GG upgrading and downgrading.</div></div><div><h3>Materials and Methods</h3><div>A retrospective analysis of 100 patients with PI-RADS score <u>&gt;</u> 3 lesions</div><div>who underwent SPBx, with or without TPBx, followed by RP for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) was performed.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>csPCa diagnosis was made by SPBx alone in 9/100 (9 %) cases, TPBx alone in 1/100 (1 %), and TPBx combined with SPBx in 90/100 (90 %). In the TPBx group, 76/90 (84.4 %) patients presented concordant GS/GG between biopsy and RP, while 14/90 (15.6 %) showed lower GS/GG at RP. In the SPBx group, 88/90 (97.8 %) presented concordant GS/GG, while 2/90 (2.2 %) showed higher GS at RP.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Our study highlights potential downgrading risk associated with TPBx alone, particularly in patients with initial GS of 4 + 4/GG4. While this has minimal implications for high-risk PCa, it raises concerns about potential overdiagnosis and overtreatment in men eligible for active surveillance (AS) who may be downgraded from intermediate-risk to low-risk or favourable intermediate-risk categories. This underscores the importance of using both TPBx and SPBx for PCa diagnosis and risk assessment.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":19916,"journal":{"name":"Pathology, research and practice","volume":"271 ","pages":"Article 156040"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pathology, research and practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S034403382500233X","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Accurate Gleason score (GS)/International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Grade Group (GG) assessment in prostate cancer (PCa) is crucial for risk stratification and treatment. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and targeted biopsies (TPBx) have enhanced PCa detection, but their accuracy compared to systematic biopsies (SPBx) is under discussion. This study investigates GS/GG concordance between prostate biopsies (TPBx and SPBx) and radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens, evaluating rates and factors associated with GS/GG upgrading and downgrading.

Materials and Methods

A retrospective analysis of 100 patients with PI-RADS score > 3 lesions
who underwent SPBx, with or without TPBx, followed by RP for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) was performed.

Results

csPCa diagnosis was made by SPBx alone in 9/100 (9 %) cases, TPBx alone in 1/100 (1 %), and TPBx combined with SPBx in 90/100 (90 %). In the TPBx group, 76/90 (84.4 %) patients presented concordant GS/GG between biopsy and RP, while 14/90 (15.6 %) showed lower GS/GG at RP. In the SPBx group, 88/90 (97.8 %) presented concordant GS/GG, while 2/90 (2.2 %) showed higher GS at RP.

Conclusions

Our study highlights potential downgrading risk associated with TPBx alone, particularly in patients with initial GS of 4 + 4/GG4. While this has minimal implications for high-risk PCa, it raises concerns about potential overdiagnosis and overtreatment in men eligible for active surveillance (AS) who may be downgraded from intermediate-risk to low-risk or favourable intermediate-risk categories. This underscores the importance of using both TPBx and SPBx for PCa diagnosis and risk assessment.
根治性前列腺切除术与系统性前列腺活检的Gleason评分降低和提高:来自机构队列的研究结果
准确的Gleason评分(GS)/国际泌尿病理学会(ISUP)分级组(GG)评估前列腺癌(PCa)的风险分层和治疗至关重要。多参数磁共振成像(mpMRI)和靶向活检(TPBx)增强了前列腺癌的检测,但与系统活检(SPBx)相比,它们的准确性仍在讨论中。本研究探讨前列腺活检(TPBx和SPBx)和根治性前列腺切除术(RP)标本的GS/GG一致性,评估GS/GG升级和降级的比率和相关因素。材料与方法回顾性分析100例PI-RADS评分>; 3病变患者行SPBx(伴或不伴TPBx)后RP治疗临床显著性前列腺癌(csPCa)的病例。结果单用SPBx诊断spca的占9/100(9 %),单用TPBx诊断SPBx的占1/100(1 %),TPBx联合SPBx诊断spca的占90/100(90 %)。在TPBx组中,76/90(84.4 %)患者活检和RP的GS/GG一致,14/90(15.6 %)患者RP的GS/GG较低。在SPBx组中,88/90(97.8 %)表现出一致的GS/GG,而2/90(2.2 %)在RP时表现出更高的GS。我们的研究强调了单独使用TPBx的潜在降级风险,特别是在初始GS为4 + 4/GG4的患者中。虽然这对高危PCa的影响很小,但它引起了对有资格接受主动监测(AS)的男性潜在的过度诊断和过度治疗的担忧,这些男性可能从中度风险降级为低风险或有利的中度风险类别。这强调了使用TPBx和SPBx进行前列腺癌诊断和风险评估的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
3.60%
发文量
405
审稿时长
24 days
期刊介绍: Pathology, Research and Practice provides accessible coverage of the most recent developments across the entire field of pathology: Reviews focus on recent progress in pathology, while Comments look at interesting current problems and at hypotheses for future developments in pathology. Original Papers present novel findings on all aspects of general, anatomic and molecular pathology. Rapid Communications inform readers on preliminary findings that may be relevant for further studies and need to be communicated quickly. Teaching Cases look at new aspects or special diagnostic problems of diseases and at case reports relevant for the pathologist''s practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信