对患有 2 级前列腺癌的男性进行病理评估。

IF 4 3区 医学 Q1 ANDROLOGY
Anika Jain, Lawrence Kim, Manish I Patel
{"title":"对患有 2 级前列腺癌的男性进行病理评估。","authors":"Anika Jain, Lawrence Kim, Manish I Patel","doi":"10.5534/wjmh.230216","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>A variety of treatment options are now available for men with localized prostate cancer (PC); however, there is still debate in determining how and when to intervene for Grade Group (GG) 2 disease. Our study aims to formulate strategies to identify men at risk of upgrading and having adverse pathological outcomes.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This retrospective study includes 243 patients with GG2 PC that were treated with radical prostatectomy between 2015 and 2021. Patients on active surveillance, previous history of prostate biopsy, hormonal and/or radiation therapy prior to surgery were excluded from this study. A retrospective analysis was conducted using clinicopathological data obtained from medical records.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score were statistically significant variables for risk of upgrading. In men who had presence of composite poor outcomes, PSA, PI-RADS score, presence of extraprostatic extension and seminal vesical invasion on MRI, number of positive cores, percentage of high grade (pattern 4/5) on prostate biopsy and Gleason pattern 4 volume on biopsy were all statistically significant variables. Strategy 8 (PI-RADS 5 lesion or percentage high grade [Gleason pattern 4] on prostate biopsy grade >10% or >3 cores positive on prostate biopsy) had significant association to identifying the highest number of men with upgrading and composite poor outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study supports the use of strategy 8 in treatment decision making of men with GG2 PC. Further validation of the use of this strategy is warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":54261,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Mens Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pathological Assessment of Men with Grade Group 2 Prostate Cancer.\",\"authors\":\"Anika Jain, Lawrence Kim, Manish I Patel\",\"doi\":\"10.5534/wjmh.230216\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>A variety of treatment options are now available for men with localized prostate cancer (PC); however, there is still debate in determining how and when to intervene for Grade Group (GG) 2 disease. Our study aims to formulate strategies to identify men at risk of upgrading and having adverse pathological outcomes.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This retrospective study includes 243 patients with GG2 PC that were treated with radical prostatectomy between 2015 and 2021. Patients on active surveillance, previous history of prostate biopsy, hormonal and/or radiation therapy prior to surgery were excluded from this study. A retrospective analysis was conducted using clinicopathological data obtained from medical records.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score were statistically significant variables for risk of upgrading. In men who had presence of composite poor outcomes, PSA, PI-RADS score, presence of extraprostatic extension and seminal vesical invasion on MRI, number of positive cores, percentage of high grade (pattern 4/5) on prostate biopsy and Gleason pattern 4 volume on biopsy were all statistically significant variables. Strategy 8 (PI-RADS 5 lesion or percentage high grade [Gleason pattern 4] on prostate biopsy grade >10% or >3 cores positive on prostate biopsy) had significant association to identifying the highest number of men with upgrading and composite poor outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study supports the use of strategy 8 in treatment decision making of men with GG2 PC. Further validation of the use of this strategy is warranted.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54261,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"World Journal of Mens Health\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"World Journal of Mens Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5534/wjmh.230216\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANDROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Mens Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5534/wjmh.230216","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANDROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:对于患有局部前列腺癌(PC)的男性,目前有多种治疗方案可供选择;然而,在确定如何以及何时干预2级(GG)疾病方面仍存在争议。我们的研究旨在制定策略,识别有升级风险和不良病理结果的男性:这项回顾性研究包括2015年至2021年间接受根治性前列腺切除术治疗的243例GG2级PC患者。本研究排除了正在接受主动监测、既往前列腺活检史、术前接受过激素和/或放射治疗的患者。研究利用从病历中获取的临床病理数据进行了回顾性分析:结果:前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)和前列腺成像报告与数据系统(PI-RADS)评分是导致升级风险的重要统计学变量。在出现综合不良后果的男性中,PSA、PI-RADS 评分、核磁共振成像中是否存在前列腺外扩展和精囊侵犯、阳性核芯数量、前列腺活检中高分级(4/5 型)的百分比以及活检中格里森 4 型的体积都是具有统计学意义的变量。策略8(PI-RADS 5病变或前列腺活检中高分级[Gleason模式4]百分比>10%或前列腺活检中阳性核数>3)与识别出最多的升级和综合不良结局的男性有显著关联:我们的研究支持将策略 8 用于 GG2 PC 男性患者的治疗决策。我们的研究支持在 GG2 PC 男性患者的治疗决策中使用策略 8。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Pathological Assessment of Men with Grade Group 2 Prostate Cancer.

Purpose: A variety of treatment options are now available for men with localized prostate cancer (PC); however, there is still debate in determining how and when to intervene for Grade Group (GG) 2 disease. Our study aims to formulate strategies to identify men at risk of upgrading and having adverse pathological outcomes.

Materials and methods: This retrospective study includes 243 patients with GG2 PC that were treated with radical prostatectomy between 2015 and 2021. Patients on active surveillance, previous history of prostate biopsy, hormonal and/or radiation therapy prior to surgery were excluded from this study. A retrospective analysis was conducted using clinicopathological data obtained from medical records.

Results: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score were statistically significant variables for risk of upgrading. In men who had presence of composite poor outcomes, PSA, PI-RADS score, presence of extraprostatic extension and seminal vesical invasion on MRI, number of positive cores, percentage of high grade (pattern 4/5) on prostate biopsy and Gleason pattern 4 volume on biopsy were all statistically significant variables. Strategy 8 (PI-RADS 5 lesion or percentage high grade [Gleason pattern 4] on prostate biopsy grade >10% or >3 cores positive on prostate biopsy) had significant association to identifying the highest number of men with upgrading and composite poor outcomes.

Conclusions: Our study supports the use of strategy 8 in treatment decision making of men with GG2 PC. Further validation of the use of this strategy is warranted.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
World Journal of Mens Health
World Journal of Mens Health Medicine-Psychiatry and Mental Health
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
2.10%
发文量
92
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
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