1
|
Loghin A, Popelea MC, Nechifor-Boilă IA, Borda A. Systematic Biopsy vs. Prostatectomy: Evaluating Correlations and Grading Discrepancies in Prostate Cancer. Cureus 2024; 16:e68075. [PMID: 39347309 PMCID: PMC11437350 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.68075] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 08/29/2024] [Indexed: 10/01/2024] Open
Abstract
Background Prostate Cancer (PCa) represents a growing global health challenge. The main factor in predicting PCa prognosis is represented by the Gleason Score (GS) therefore, the accuracy of pathological features from preoperative biopsy is critical in the management of the patient. We aimed to investigate the correlation between prostate biopsy parameters and the prostatectomy specimen pathological features and to identify factors that lead to over- and under-grading tumors in biopsy samples. Materials and methods We performed a retrospective study that included 110 male patients with confirmed PCa, selected based on specific inclusion criteria. Biopsy and radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens were analyzed using standard histopathological techniques, and pathological features were assessed according to the latest guidelines. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics version 26.0.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). Results The study included 110 male patients with a median age of 67 years old, ranging from 48 to 79 years old. Correlations between biopsy parameters and RP outcomes were assessed and revealed several key findings. The tumoral length on biopsy was correlated with positive surgical margin (r=0.289, p<0.01) and with tumoral volume (r=0.526, p<0.001) on prostatectomy. Patients with higher grade groups (GG) on biopsy had an approximately four times higher chance of exhibiting extraprostatic extension. We demonstrated a significant correlation between Gleason Pattern 4 (%GP4) on biopsy and pT stage, with pT4 showing the highest %GP4, and a noticeable increase in %GP4 as the pT stage progressed from pT2b to pT4. The study found a significantly higher rate of undergrading at biopsy (30.90%) compared to overgrading (6.36%). Additionally, greater tumor length and higher tumor percentages in biopsies improved grading accuracy (p<0.001). Conclusion Our findings suggest that systemic biopsies play a key role in predicting pathological outcomes, especially through parameters that serve as key prognostic markers. However, due to the potential of the biopsy results to be under- or overgraded, urologists should take into consideration the advantages of using repeat biopsies or additional imaging techniques to achieve a more precise diagnosis and treatment strategy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrada Loghin
- Histology, "George Emil Palade" University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science and Technology of Targu Mures, Târgu Mureș, ROU
- Pathology, Mures Clinical County Hospital, Târgu Mureș, ROU
| | | | - Ioan A Nechifor-Boilă
- Anatomy, "George Emil Palade" University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science and Technology of Targu Mures, Târgu Mureș, ROU
- Urology, Mures Clinical County Hospital, Târgu Mureș, ROU
| | - Angela Borda
- Histology, "George Emil Palade" University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science and Technology of Targu Mures, Târgu Mureș, ROU
- Pathology, Targu-Mures Emergency County Hospital, Târgu Mureș, ROU
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Hoeh B, Flammia RS, Hohenhorst L, Sorce G, Chierigo F, Tian Z, Saad F, Gallucci M, Briganti A, Terrone C, Shariat SF, Graefen M, Tilki D, Kluth LA, Mandel P, Becker A, Chun FKH, Karakiewicz PI. Non-organ confined stage and upgrading rates in exclusive PSA high-risk prostate cancer patients. Prostate 2022; 82:687-694. [PMID: 35188982 DOI: 10.1002/pros.24313] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/25/2021] [Revised: 01/12/2022] [Accepted: 01/24/2022] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The pathological stage of prostate cancer with high-risk prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, but otherwise favorable and/or intermediate risk characteristics (clinical T-stage, Gleason Grade group at biopsy [B-GGG]) is unknown. We hypothesized that a considerable proportion of such patients will exhibit clinically meaningful GGG upgrading or non-organ confined (NOC) stage at radical prostatectomy (RP). MATERIALS AND METHODS Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2010-2015) we identified RP-patients with cT1c-stage and B-GGG1, B-GGG2, or B-GGG3 and PSA 20-50 ng/ml. Rates of GGG4 or GGG5 and/or rates of NOC stage (≥ pT3 and/or pN1) were analyzed. Subsequently, separate univariable and multivariable logistic regression models tested for predictors of NOC stage and upgrading at RP. RESULTS Of 486 assessable patients, 134 (28%) exhibited B-GGG1, 209 (43%) B-GGG2, and 143 (29%) B-GGG3, respectively. The overall upgrading and NOC rates were 11% and 51% for a combined rate of upgrading and/or NOC stage of 53%. In multivariable logistic regression models predicting upgrading, only B-GGG3 was an independent predictor (odds ratio [OR]: 5.29; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.21-14.19; p < 0.001). Conversely, 33%-66% (OR: 2.36; 95% CI: 1.42-3.95; p = 0.001) and >66% of positive biopsy cores (OR: 4.85; 95% CI: 2.84-8.42; p < 0.001), as well as B-GGG2 and B-GGG3 were independent predictors for NOC stage (all p ≤ 0.001). CONCLUSIONS In cT1c-stage patients with high-risk PSA baseline, but low- to intermediate risk B-GGG, the rate of upgrading to GGG4 or GGG5 is low (11%). However, NOC stage is found in the majority (51%) and can be independently predicted with percentage of positive cores at biopsy and B-GGG.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benedikt Hoeh
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Department of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Canada
| | - Rocco S Flammia
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Department of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Canada
- Department of Maternal-Child and Urological Sciences, Sapienza Rome University, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, Rome, Italy
| | - Lukas Hohenhorst
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Department of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Canada
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Gabriele Sorce
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Department of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Canada
- Unit of Urology, Division of Experimental Oncology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Francesco Chierigo
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Department of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Canada
- Department of Surgical and Diagnostic Integrated Sciences (DISC), University of Genova, Genova, Italy
| | - Zhe Tian
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Department of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Canada
| | - Fred Saad
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Department of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Canada
| | - Michele Gallucci
- Department of Maternal-Child and Urological Sciences, Sapienza Rome University, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, Rome, Italy
| | - Alberto Briganti
- Unit of Urology, Division of Experimental Oncology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Carlo Terrone
- Department of Surgical and Diagnostic Integrated Sciences (DISC), University of Genova, Genova, Italy
| | - Shahrokh F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York City, New York, USA
- Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, Texas, USA
- Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
- Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia
- Hourani Center for Applied Scientific Research, Al-Ahliyya Amman University, Amman, Jordan
| | - Markus Graefen
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Derya Tilki
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Department of Urology, Koc University Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Luis A Kluth
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Philipp Mandel
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Andreas Becker
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Felix K H Chun
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Pierre I Karakiewicz
- Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Department of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Canada
| |
Collapse
|