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}
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.
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.