nach oben

Erschienen in:

06.04.2018 | Original Article

A Multi-Institutional Validation of Gleason Score Derived from Tissue Microarray Cores

verfasst von: Sami-Ramzi Leyh-Bannurah, Dominique Trudel, Mathieu Latour, Emanuele Zaffuto, Andree-Anne Grosset, Christine Tam, Veronique Ouellet, Markus Graefen, Lars Budäus, Armen G. Aprikian, Louis Lacombe, Neil E. Fleshner, Martin E. Gleave, Anne-Marie Mes-Masson, Fred Saad, Pierre I Karakiewicz

Erschienen in: Pathology & Oncology Research | Ausgabe 3/2019

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

To test the agreement between high-grade PCa at RP and TMA, and the ability of TMA to predict BCR. Validation of concordance between tissue microarray (TMA) and radical prostatectomy (RP) high-grade prostate cancer (PCa) is crucial because latter determines the treated natural history of PCa. We hypothesized that TMA Gleason score is in agreement with RP pathology and capable of accurately predicting biochemical recurrence (BCR). Data were provided from a multi-institutional Canadian sample of 1333 TMA and RP specimens with complete clinicopathological data. First, rate of agreement between TMA and high-grade Gleason at RP or biopsy and RP was tested. Second, ability of RP, TMA and biopsy to predict BCR was compared. Multivariable (MVA) Cox regression models were fitted and BCR rates were illustrated with Kaplan-Meier plots. Agreement between RP and TMA and between RP and biopsy was 72.6% (95% CI:69.7–75.5) and 60.4% (95% CI:57.2–63.6), respectively. In MVA predicting BCR, the accuracy for RP, TMA and biopsy was 0.73, 0.72 and 0.68, respectively. TMA added discriminatory ability among exclusively low-grade Gleason RP patients (p = 0.02), but did not improve BCR discrimination in exclusive high-grade PCa RP patients (p = 0.8). TMA Gleason grade accurately reflects presence of high-grade Gleason in RP specimen, accurately predicts BCR rates after RP and improves prediction of BCR in low-grade Gleason patients at RP.

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Santoni M, Scarpelli M, Mazzucchelli R, Lopez-Beltran A, Cheng L, Epstein JI, Cascinu S, Briganti A, Catto JW, Montorsi F, Montironi R (2016) Current Histopathologic and molecular Characterisations of prostate Cancer: towards individualised prognosis and therapies. European Urology 69(2):186–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.05.041 CrossRefPubMed

Wittschieber D, Kollermann J, Schlomm T, Sauter G, Erbersdobler A (2010) Nuclear grading versus Gleason grading in small samples containing prostate cancer: a tissue microarray study. Pathology oncology research: POR 16(4):479–484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12253-010-9270-x CrossRefPubMed

Epstein JI, Zelefsky MJ, Sjoberg DD, Nelson JB, Egevad L, Magi-Galluzzi C, Vickers AJ, Parwani AV, Reuter VE, Fine SW, Eastham JA, Wiklund P, Han M, Reddy CA, Ciezki JP, Nyberg T, Klein EA (2016) A contemporary prostate Cancer grading system: a validated alternative to the Gleason score. European Urology 69(3):428–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.046 CrossRefPubMed

Loeb S, Folkvaljon Y, Robinson D, Lissbrant IF, Egevad L, Stattin P (2015) Evaluation of the 2015 Gleason grade groups in a Nationwide population-based cohort. European Urology 69:1135–1141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.11.036 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Sauter G, Steurer S, Clauditz TS, Krech T, Wittmer C, Lutz F, Lennartz M, Janssen T, Hakimi N, Simon R, von Petersdorff-Campen M, Jacobsen F, von Loga K, Wilczak W, Minner S, Tsourlakis MC, Chirico V, Haese A, Heinzer H, Beyer B, Graefen M, Michl U, Salomon G, Steuber T, Budaus LH, Hekeler E, Malsy-Mink J, Kutzera S, Fraune C, Gobel C, Huland H, Schlomm T (2016) Clinical utility of quantitative Gleason grading in prostate biopsies and prostatectomy specimens. European Urology 69(4):592–598. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.10.029 CrossRefPubMed

Timilshina N, Ouellet V, Alibhai SM, Mes-Masson AM, Delvoye N, Drachenberg D, Finelli A, Jammal MP, Karakiewicz P, Lapointe H, Lattouf JB, Lynch K, Paradis JB, Sitarik P, So A, Saad F (2016) Analysis of active surveillance uptake for low-risk localized prostate cancer in Canada: a Canadian multi-institutional study. World Journal of Urology 35:595–603. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-016-1897-0 CrossRefPubMed

Meyer CP, Hansen J, Boehm K, Tilki D, Abdollah F, Trinh QD, Fisch M, Sauter G, Graefen M, Huland H, Chun FK, Ahyai SA (2016) Tumor volume improves the long-term prediction of biochemical recurrence-free survival after radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer with positive surgical margins. World Journal of Urology 35:199–206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-016-1861-z CrossRefPubMed

Budaus L, Isbarn H, Eichelberg C, Lughezzani G, Sun M, Perrotte P, Chun FK, Salomon G, Steuber T, Kollermann J, Sauter G, Ahyai SA, Zacharias M, Fisch M, Schlomm T, Haese A, Heinzer H, Huland H, Montorsi F, Graefen M, Karakiewicz PI (2010) Biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy: multiplicative interaction between surgical margin status and pathological stage. The Journal of Urology 184(4):1341–1346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2010.06.018 CrossRefPubMed

Isbarn H, Ahyai SA, Chun FK, Budaus L, Schlomm T, Salomon G, Zacharias M, Erbersdobler A, Kollermann J, Sauter G, Huland H, Graefen M, Steuber T (2009) Prevalence of a tertiary Gleason grade and its impact on adverse histopathologic parameters in a contemporary radical prostatectomy series. European Urology 55(2):394–401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2008.08.015 CrossRefPubMed

10.

Suardi N, Porter CR, Reuther AM, Walz J, Kodama K, Gibbons RP, Correa R, Montorsi F, Graefen M, Huland H, Klein EA, Karakiewicz PI (2008) A nomogram predicting long-term biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Cancer 112(6):1254–1263. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.23293 CrossRefPubMed

11.

Briganti A, Karnes RJ, Joniau S, Boorjian SA, Cozzarini C, Gandaglia G, Hinkelbein W, Haustermans K, Tombal B, Shariat S, Sun M, Karakiewicz PI, Montorsi F, Van Poppel H, Wiegel T (2014) Prediction of outcome following early salvage radiotherapy among patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. European Urology 66(3):479–486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.11.045 CrossRefPubMed

12.

Lughezzani G, Briganti A, Karakiewicz PI, Kattan MW, Montorsi F, Shariat SF, Vickers AJ (2010) Predictive and prognostic models in radical prostatectomy candidates: a critical analysis of the literature. European Urology 58(5):687–700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2010.07.034 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Lughezzani G, Budaus L, Isbarn H, Sun M, Perrotte P, Haese A, Chun FK, Schlomm T, Steuber T, Heinzer H, Huland H, Montorsi F, Graefen M, Karakiewicz PI (2010) Head-to-head comparison of the three most commonly used preoperative models for prediction of biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. European Urology 57(4):562–568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2009.12.003 CrossRefPubMed

14.

Walz J, Chun FK, Klein EA, Reuther A, Saad F, Graefen M, Huland H, Karakiewicz PI (2009) Nomogram predicting the probability of early recurrence after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. The Journal of Urology 181(2):601–607; discussion 607-608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2008.10.033 CrossRefPubMed

15.

Epstein JI, Egevad L, Amin MB, Delahunt B, Srigley JR, Humphrey PA, Grading C (2016) The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma: definition of grading patterns and proposal for a new grading system. The American Journal of Surgical Pathology 40(2):244–252. https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0000000000000530 CrossRefPubMed

16.

Bubendorf L, Nocito A, Moch H, Sauter G (2001) Tissue microarray (TMA) technology: miniaturized pathology archives for high-throughput in situ studies. The Journal of Pathology 195(1):72–79. https://doi.org/10.1002/path.893 CrossRefPubMed

17.

Rubin MA, Dunn R, Strawderman M, Pienta KJ (2002) Tissue microarray sampling strategy for prostate Cancer biomarker analysis. The American Journal of Surgical Pathology 26(3):312–319. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000478-200203000-00004 CrossRefPubMed

18.

Diallo JS, Aldejmah A, Mouhim AF, Fahmy MA, Koumakpayi IH, Sircar K, Begin LR, Mes-Masson AM, Saad F (2008) Co-assessment of cytoplasmic and nuclear androgen receptor location in prostate specimens: potential implications for prostate cancer development and prognosis. BJU International 101(10):1302–1309. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2008.07514.x CrossRefPubMed

19.

Gannon PO, Lessard L, Stevens LM, Forest V, Begin LR, Minner S, Tennstedt P, Schlomm T, Mes-Masson AM, Saad F (2013) Large-scale independent validation of the nuclear factor-kappa B p65 prognostic biomarker in prostate cancer. European Journal of Cancer 49(10):2441–2448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2013.02.026 CrossRefPubMed

20.

Koumakpayi IH, Le Page C, Mes-Masson AM, Saad F (2010) Hierarchical clustering of immunohistochemical analysis of the activated ErbB/PI3K/Akt/NF-kappaB signalling pathway and prognostic significance in prostate cancer. British Journal of Cancer 102(7):1163–1173. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6605571 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

21.

Ross AE, Johnson MH, Yousefi K, Davicioni E, Netto GJ, Marchionni L, Fedor HL, Glavaris S, Choeurng V, Buerki C, Erho N, Lam LL, Humphreys EB, Faraj S, Bezerra SM, Han M, Partin AW, Trock BJ, Schaeffer EM (2016) Tissue-based genomics augments post-prostatectomy risk stratification in a natural history cohort of intermediate- and high-risk men. European Urology 69(1):157–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.05.042 CrossRefPubMed

22.

Ruela-de-Sousa RR, Hoekstra E, Hoogland AM, Souza Queiroz KC, Peppelenbosch MP, Stubbs AP, Pelizzaro-Rocha K, van Leenders GJ, Jenster G, Aoyama H, Ferreira CV, Fuhler GM (2016) Low-molecular-weight protein tyrosine phosphatase predicts prostate Cancer outcome by increasing the metastatic potential. European Urology 69(4):710–719. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.040 CrossRefPubMed

23.

Belledant A, Hovington H, Garcia L, Caron P, Brisson H, Villeneuve L, Simonyan D, Tetu B, Fradet Y, Lacombe L, Guillemette C, Levesque E (2016) The UGT2B28 sex-steroid inactivation pathway is a regulator of Steroidogenesis and modifies the risk of prostate Cancer progression. European Urology 69(4):601–609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.054 CrossRefPubMed

24.

Bostrom PJ, Bjartell AS, Catto JW, Eggener SE, Lilja H, Loeb S, Schalken J, Schlomm T, Cooperberg MR (2015) Genomic predictors of outcome in prostate Cancer. European Urology 68:1033–1044. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.04.008 CrossRefPubMed

25.

Cullen J, Rosner IL, Brand TC, Zhang N, Tsiatis AC, Moncur J, Ali A, Chen Y, Knezevic D, Maddala T, Lawrence HJ, Febbo PG, Srivastava S, Sesterhenn IA, McLeod DG (2015) A biopsy-based 17-gene genomic prostate score predicts recurrence after radical prostatectomy and adverse surgical pathology in a racially diverse population of men with clinically low- and intermediate-risk prostate Cancer. European Urology 68(1):123–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.11.030 CrossRefPubMed

26.

Eggener S (2015) Prostate Cancer screening biomarkers: an emerging embarrassment of 'Riches'? European Urology 70:54–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.09.002 CrossRefPubMed

27.

Schlomm T, Weischenfeldt J, Korbel J, Sauter G (2015) The aging prostate is never "normal": implications from the genomic characterization of multifocal prostate cancers. European Urology 68:348–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.04.012 CrossRefPubMed

28.

Klein EA, Yousefi K, Haddad Z, Choeurng V, Buerki C, Stephenson AJ, Li J, Kattan MW, Magi-Galluzzi C, Davicioni E (2015) A genomic classifier improves prediction of metastatic disease within 5 years after surgery in node-negative high-risk prostate cancer patients managed by radical prostatectomy without adjuvant therapy. European Urology 67(4):778–786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.10.036 CrossRefPubMed

29.

Tomlins SA, Day JR, Lonigro RJ, Hovelson DH, Siddiqui J, Kunju LP, Dunn RL, Meyer S, Hodge P, Groskopf J, Wei JT, Chinnaiyan AM (2015) Urine TMPRSS2:ERG plus PCA3 for individualized prostate Cancer risk assessment. European Urology 70:45–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.04.039 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

30.

Mehra R, Udager AM, Ahearn TU, Cao X, Feng FY, Loda M, Petimar JS, Kantoff P, Mucci LA, Chinnaiyan AM (2015) Overexpression of the long non-coding RNA SChLAP1 independently predicts lethal prostate Cancer. European Urology 70:549–552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.12.003 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

31.

Rubin MA, Girelli G, Demichelis F (2016) Genomic correlates to the newly proposed grading prognostic groups for prostate Cancer. European Urology 69(4):557–560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.10.040 CrossRefPubMed

32.

Chun FK, Briganti A, Graefen M, Montorsi F, Porter C, Scattoni V, Gallina A, Walz J, Haese A, Steuber T, Erbersdobler A, Schlomm T, Ahyai SA, Currlin E, Valiquette L, Heinzer H, Rigatti P, Huland H, Karakiewicz PI (2007) Development and external validation of an extended 10-core biopsy nomogram. European Urology 52(2):436–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2006.08.039 CrossRefPubMed

33.

Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Turkbey B, George AK, Rothwax J, Shakir N, Okoro C, Raskolnikov D, Parnes HL, Linehan WM (2015) Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion–guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. JAMA 313(4):390–397CrossRef

Titel: A Multi-Institutional Validation of Gleason Score Derived from Tissue Microarray Cores
verfasst von: Sami-Ramzi Leyh-Bannurah
Dominique Trudel
Mathieu Latour
Emanuele Zaffuto
Andree-Anne Grosset
Christine Tam
Veronique Ouellet
Markus Graefen
Lars Budäus
Armen G. Aprikian
Louis Lacombe
Neil E. Fleshner
Martin E. Gleave
Anne-Marie Mes-Masson
Fred Saad
Pierre I Karakiewicz
Publikationsdatum: 06.04.2018
Verlag: Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in: Pathology & Oncology Research / Ausgabe 3/2019
Print ISSN: 1219-4956
Elektronische ISSN: 1532-2807
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12253-018-0408-6

Neu im Fachgebiet Onkologie

24.04.2024 | DGIM 2024 | Nachrichten

Springer Medizin

A Multi-Institutional Validation of Gleason Score Derived from Tissue Microarray Cores

Abstract

Neu im Fachgebiet Onkologie

Bei Senioren mit Prostatakarzinom auf Anämie achten!

ICI-Therapie in der Schwangerschaft wird gut toleriert

Krebspatienten impfen: Was? Wen? Und wann nicht?

Müde im Alter? Auch an die Nebenniere denken

Update Onkologie

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2019

Co-expression of XIAP and CIAP1 Play Synergistic Effect on Patient’s Prognosis in Head and Neck Cancer

Thyroid Carcinoma Coexisting with Hashimoto’s Thyreoiditis: Clinicopathological and Molecular Characteristics Clue up Pathogenesis

LncRNA EGOT Promotes Tumorigenesis Via Hedgehog Pathway in Gastric Cancer

Correlations between Histological and Array Comparative Genomic Hybridization Characterizations of Wilms Tumor

Diagnostic Value of Circulating Free DNA Integrity and Global Methylation Status in Gall Bladder Carcinoma

Polymorphisms in Genes Related to Cervical Cancer in A Brazilian Population: A Case-Control Study

Neu im Fachgebiet Onkologie

Bei Senioren mit Prostatakarzinom auf Anämie achten!

ICI-Therapie in der Schwangerschaft wird gut toleriert

Krebspatienten impfen: Was? Wen? Und wann nicht?

Müde im Alter? Auch an die Nebenniere denken

Update Onkologie