PTU - Polskie Towarzystwo Urologiczne
home page
current numbers
archival numbers
list of articles:
list przewodni/covering letter
editor
Scientific Committee
publisher
subscription
advertising
important links

THE COMPARISON OF PROSTATE CANCER GRADE OBTAINED FROM NEEDLE BIOPSY WITH GRADE OBTAINED FROM RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY SPECIMEN
Article published in Urologia Polska 2000/53/2.

authors

Romuald Zdrojowy, Elżbieta Górzyńska
Katedra i Klinika Urologii AM we Wrocławiu
Kierownik Kliniki: prof. dr hab. med. J. Lorenz
Pracownia Histopatologii Wojewódzkiego Szpitala Zespolonego, Wrocław
Kierownik Pracowni: dr n. med. E. Górzyńska

keywords

prostate adenocarcinoma grading

summary

Objectives. The histological differentiation of prostate cancer is an important
predictive factor. However, the grading obtained from the needle biopsy
specimen may be significantly different from grading obtained from radical
prostatectomy specimen. The aim of the study was to compare the prostate
needle biopsy grade with the grade of the whole prostate specimen after radical
prostatectomy.
Material and methods. The prostate cancer grade of 98 men treated by radical
prostatectomy between 1990-1997 at Clinic of Urology of Medical University
of Wroclaw was performed. The statistical analysis comparing grade obtained
from needle biopsy with the grade from prostate specimen after radical
prostatectomy was made. The postoperative primary tumour differentiation
was performed on histopathological analysis of paraffin slides made
transversally, every 0.5 cm from prostate specimen.
Results. The needle biopsy grade was as follows: G1 in 30/98 (31%), G2 in
21/98 (21%) and G3 in 47/98 (48%) patients. The histopathological examination
of postoperative specimen showed: pG0 in 2/98 (2%), pG3 in 20/98 (20%), pG2
in 18/98 (18%) and pG3 in 58/98 (60%) patients. The grade obtained from needle
biopsy statistically differed (significance level 0. 05) from the grade from prostate
specimen after radical prostatectomy. The needle biopsy median value was G2
compared to G3 from postoperative specimen. The good and median cancer
differentiation (G1+G2) was often observed in the needle specimens than in
postoperative specimens. However, the strong correlation between these two
grading systems was observed.
Conclusions. The needle biopsy grade is often lower than the grade of radical
prostatectomy specimen. The difference between them is statistically significant
although the strong correlation also exists.

references

  1. [1] Bluestein, D. L., Bostwick, D. G., Bergstralh, E. J., Oesterling, J. E.:
  2. Eliminating the need of bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy in select patients with
  3. prostate cancer. J. Urol. 1994,151,1315-1320.
  4. [2] Borowka, A.: Epidemiologia rakagruczolu krokowego. Nowa Med. 1996,2, 20-
  5. 21.
  6. [3] Borowka, A.: Epidemiologia raka stercza w Polsce (wyklad, doniesienie ust-
  7. ne). Krakow, 21. 11.1997.
  8. [4] Bostwick, D. G.: Gleason grading of prostate needle biopsies. Correlation with
  9. grade in 316 matched prostatectomies. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 1994,18, 796-803.
  10. [5] Debruyne, F. M., Witjes, W. P.: Neoadjuvant hormonal treatment in localized
  11. prostate cancer: a critical appraisal. Urol. Pol. 1999, 52, supl. 3A, 35-49.
  12. [6] Djavan, B., Kadesky, K., Klopukh, B., Marberger, M., Roehrborn, C.
  13. G.: Gleason scores from prostate biopsies obtained with 18-gauge biopsy needles
  14. poorly predict Gleason scores of radical prostatectomy specimens. Eur. Urol. 1998,
  15. 33, 261-270.
  16. [7] Ferguson, J., Zincke, H., Ellison, E., Bergstrahl, E., Bostwick, D. G.: De-
  17. crease of prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia following androgen deprivation
  18. therapy in patients with stage T3 carcinoma treated by radical prostatectomy. Urol-
  19. ogy 1994, 44, 91-95.
  20. [8] Garnett, J. E., Oyasu, R., Grayhack, J. T.: The accuracy of diagnostic biopsy
  21. specimens in predicting tumor grades by Gleason's classification of radical pros-
  22. tatectomy specimens. J. Urol. 1984,131, 690-696.
  23. [9] Harada, M., Mostofi, F. K., Corle, D. K., Byar, D. P., Trump, B. F.: Pre-
  24. liminary studies of histologic prognosis in cancer of the prostate. Cancer Treat.
  25. Rep. 1977, 61, 223-230.
  26. [10] Hellstrom, M., Haggman, M., Brandstedt, S., de la Torre, M., Peders-
  27. en, K., Jarlsfeldt, I., Wijkstrom, H., Busch, C: Histopathological changes
  28. in androgen-deprived localized prostatic cancer. Eur. Urol. 1993, 24, 461-465.
  29. [11] Hohenfellner, R.: Indicator of oestrogen effect. Pergamon Press, Vieweg, Ox-
  30. ford 1970,181-195.
  31. [12] Kramer, S. A., Spahr, J., Brendler, B. B.: Experience with Gleason, s histo-
  32. pathological grading in prostatic cancer. J. Urol. 1980, 124, 223-229.
  33. [13] Mostofi, F. K.: Pathology of prostate cancer. Pergamon Press, Vieweg, Oxford
  34. 1970, 41-63.
  35. [14] Puppo, P., Perachino, M.: Clinical stage, prostate specific-antigen and Gleason
  36. grade to predict extracapsular disease or nodal metastasis in men with newly di-
  37. agnosed, previously untreated prostate cancer. Eur. Urol. 1997, 32, 273-279.
  38. [15] Spires, S. E., Cibull, M. L., Wood, D. P., Miller, S., Spires, S. M., Banks,
  39. E. R.: Gleason histologic grading in prostatic carcinoma. Correlation of 18-gauge
  40. core biopsy with prostatectomy. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 1994,118, 705-708.
  41. [16] Stenzl, A., Studer, U. E.: Outcome of patients with untreated cancer of the
  42. prostate. Eur. Urol. 1993, 24,1-6.
  43. [17] Stoklosa, A., Malewski, A., Keller, E., Czaplicki, M.: Przydatnosc PSAD
  44. (PSA density) w rozpoznawaniu raka gruczolu krokowego niewyczuwalnego pal-
  45. cem (DRE) u chorych z podwyzszonymi stezeniami PSA w surowicy krwi. Urol.
  46. Pol. 1998, 51, 53-61.
  47. [18] Thickman, D., Speers, W. C, Philpott, P. J., Shapiro, H.: Effect of the
  48. number of core biopsies of the prostate on predicting Gleason score of prostate can-
  49. cer. J. Urol. 1996,156,110-113.
  50. [19] Visakorpi, T., Kalioniemi, O. P., Koivula, T., Isola, J.: New prognostic
  51. factors in prostatic carcinoma. Eur. Urol. 1993, 24, 438-449.
  52. [20] Zatonski, W., Tyczyriski, J.: Nowotwory zlosliwe w Polsce w 1994 roku. Biule-
  53. tyn Centrum Onkologii Instytutu im. M. Sklodowskiej-Curie. Centrum
  54. Onkologii, Warszawa 1997.
  55. [21] Zdrojowy, R.: Wplyw wytrzebienia na ocenianq ultrasonograficznie wielkosc ster-
  56. cza zmienionego nowotworowo ? znaczenie rokownicze. Praca doktorska.
  57. Wroclaw 1990.