前列腺癌活检中Gleason模式4最高和总体百分比的比较。

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q1 PATHOLOGY
L J Kroon, K P Leeuwenburgh, S Remmers, C F Kweldam, R C N van den Bergh, C H Bangma, G J L H van Leenders
{"title":"前列腺癌活检中Gleason模式4最高和总体百分比的比较。","authors":"L J Kroon, K P Leeuwenburgh, S Remmers, C F Kweldam, R C N van den Bergh, C H Bangma, G J L H van Leenders","doi":"10.1007/s00428-025-04117-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Current guidelines recommend pathologists to report percentage Gleason pattern 4 (GP4%) in Gleason score (GS) 7 prostate cancer (PCa) biopsies. However, it is unspecified whether the highest or overall GP4% should be reported. This study aims to clarify which quantification method correlates best with radical prostatectomy (RP) pathology. This study included 308 men with the highest GS 3 + 4 = 7, 4 + 3 = 7, or 4 + 4 = 8 on centrally revised systematic and/or targeted biopsies who underwent RP between 2018 and 2022. The highest and overall biopsy GP4% were compared with RP GP4% using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient and adverse pathology (AP) (pT-stage ≥ T3, GS ≥ 4 + 3 = 7 and/or pN1) using multivariable logistic regression models adjusted for clinical tumor stage, prostate specific antigen (PSA), percentage of tumor positive biopsies, biopsy modality (systematic/targeted/both), and cribriform pattern. Both quantification methods correlated with RP GP4% (both rho = 0.59), and no significant difference was found between them (p = 0.78). On multivariable analyses, both GP4% quantification methods were significantly associated with AP (per 10% increase, highest GP4% odds ratio [OR] 1.26 [95% CI 1.14-1.39], overall GP4% OR 1.38 [95% CI 1.22-1.58], both p < 0.001). The area under the curve (AUC) was slightly better for overall (0.78 [95% CI 0.73-0.83]) than the highest GP4% (0.76 [95% CI 0.71-0.81], p = 0.041). This study found that the highest and overall biopsy GP4% both correlated with RP GP4%. Although the discriminative performance of the highest and overall GP4% was comparable with respect to AP at RP, the overall GP4% statistically slightly outperformed the highest GP4%. Including the overall GP4% may have added value in risk stratification and clinical decision-making in a subset of PCa patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":23514,"journal":{"name":"Virchows Archiv","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of highest and overall percentage Gleason pattern 4 in prostate cancer biopsies.\",\"authors\":\"L J Kroon, K P Leeuwenburgh, S Remmers, C F Kweldam, R C N van den Bergh, C H Bangma, G J L H van Leenders\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00428-025-04117-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Current guidelines recommend pathologists to report percentage Gleason pattern 4 (GP4%) in Gleason score (GS) 7 prostate cancer (PCa) biopsies. However, it is unspecified whether the highest or overall GP4% should be reported. This study aims to clarify which quantification method correlates best with radical prostatectomy (RP) pathology. This study included 308 men with the highest GS 3 + 4 = 7, 4 + 3 = 7, or 4 + 4 = 8 on centrally revised systematic and/or targeted biopsies who underwent RP between 2018 and 2022. The highest and overall biopsy GP4% were compared with RP GP4% using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient and adverse pathology (AP) (pT-stage ≥ T3, GS ≥ 4 + 3 = 7 and/or pN1) using multivariable logistic regression models adjusted for clinical tumor stage, prostate specific antigen (PSA), percentage of tumor positive biopsies, biopsy modality (systematic/targeted/both), and cribriform pattern. Both quantification methods correlated with RP GP4% (both rho = 0.59), and no significant difference was found between them (p = 0.78). On multivariable analyses, both GP4% quantification methods were significantly associated with AP (per 10% increase, highest GP4% odds ratio [OR] 1.26 [95% CI 1.14-1.39], overall GP4% OR 1.38 [95% CI 1.22-1.58], both p < 0.001). The area under the curve (AUC) was slightly better for overall (0.78 [95% CI 0.73-0.83]) than the highest GP4% (0.76 [95% CI 0.71-0.81], p = 0.041). This study found that the highest and overall biopsy GP4% both correlated with RP GP4%. Although the discriminative performance of the highest and overall GP4% was comparable with respect to AP at RP, the overall GP4% statistically slightly outperformed the highest GP4%. Including the overall GP4% may have added value in risk stratification and clinical decision-making in a subset of PCa patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23514,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Virchows Archiv\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Virchows Archiv\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-025-04117-2\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PATHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Virchows Archiv","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-025-04117-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目前的指南建议病理学家报告Gleason评分(GS) 7前列腺癌(PCa)活检中Gleason模式4 (GP4%)的百分比。然而,最高的还是总体的GP4%是否应该报告,目前还没有明确规定。本研究旨在阐明哪种定量方法与根治性前列腺切除术(RP)病理最相关。该研究纳入了308名在2018年至2022年期间接受RP的男性,他们在中央修订的系统和/或靶向活检中GS最高(3 + 4 = 7,4 + 3 = 7或4 + 4 = 8)。采用多变量logistic回归模型对临床肿瘤分期、前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)、肿瘤阳性活检百分比、活检方式(系统性/靶向性/两种)和筛状模式进行校正,利用Spearman等级相关系数和不良病理(pt分期≥T3、GS≥4 + 3 = 7和/或pN1)对最高和总体活检GP4%与RP GP4%进行比较。两种定量方法均与RP GP4%相关(均rho = 0.59),两种方法间无显著差异(p = 0.78)。在多变量分析中,两种GP4%量化方法均与AP显著相关(每增加10%,最高GP4%比值比[OR] 1.26 [95% CI 1.14-1.39],总GP4%比值比[OR] 1.38 [95% CI 1.22-1.58],均p
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of highest and overall percentage Gleason pattern 4 in prostate cancer biopsies.

Current guidelines recommend pathologists to report percentage Gleason pattern 4 (GP4%) in Gleason score (GS) 7 prostate cancer (PCa) biopsies. However, it is unspecified whether the highest or overall GP4% should be reported. This study aims to clarify which quantification method correlates best with radical prostatectomy (RP) pathology. This study included 308 men with the highest GS 3 + 4 = 7, 4 + 3 = 7, or 4 + 4 = 8 on centrally revised systematic and/or targeted biopsies who underwent RP between 2018 and 2022. The highest and overall biopsy GP4% were compared with RP GP4% using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient and adverse pathology (AP) (pT-stage ≥ T3, GS ≥ 4 + 3 = 7 and/or pN1) using multivariable logistic regression models adjusted for clinical tumor stage, prostate specific antigen (PSA), percentage of tumor positive biopsies, biopsy modality (systematic/targeted/both), and cribriform pattern. Both quantification methods correlated with RP GP4% (both rho = 0.59), and no significant difference was found between them (p = 0.78). On multivariable analyses, both GP4% quantification methods were significantly associated with AP (per 10% increase, highest GP4% odds ratio [OR] 1.26 [95% CI 1.14-1.39], overall GP4% OR 1.38 [95% CI 1.22-1.58], both p < 0.001). The area under the curve (AUC) was slightly better for overall (0.78 [95% CI 0.73-0.83]) than the highest GP4% (0.76 [95% CI 0.71-0.81], p = 0.041). This study found that the highest and overall biopsy GP4% both correlated with RP GP4%. Although the discriminative performance of the highest and overall GP4% was comparable with respect to AP at RP, the overall GP4% statistically slightly outperformed the highest GP4%. Including the overall GP4% may have added value in risk stratification and clinical decision-making in a subset of PCa patients.

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
Virchows Archiv
Virchows Archiv 医学-病理学
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
2.90%
发文量
204
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Manuscripts of original studies reinforcing the evidence base of modern diagnostic pathology, using immunocytochemical, molecular and ultrastructural techniques, will be welcomed. In addition, papers on critical evaluation of diagnostic criteria but also broadsheets and guidelines with a solid evidence base will be considered. Consideration will also be given to reports of work in other fields relevant to the understanding of human pathology as well as manuscripts on the application of new methods and techniques in pathology. Submission of purely experimental articles is discouraged but manuscripts on experimental work applicable to diagnostic pathology are welcomed. Biomarker studies are welcomed but need to abide by strict rules (e.g. REMARK) of adequate sample size and relevant marker choice. Single marker studies on limited patient series without validated application will as a rule not be considered. Case reports will only be considered when they provide substantial new information with an impact on understanding disease or diagnostic 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:604180095
Book学术官方微信