Prognostic Gleason grade grouping: data based on the modified Gleason scoring system
What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? The Gleason scoring system is a well‐established predictor of pathological stage and oncological outcomes for men with prostate cancer. Modifications throughout the last few decades – most recently by the International Society of Urologi...
Saved in:
| Published in: | BJU international Vol. 111; no. 5; pp. 753 - 760 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , |
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Oxford
Wiley-Blackwell
01.05.2013
Wiley Subscription Services, Inc |
| Subjects: | |
| ISSN: | 1464-4096, 1464-410X, 1464-410X |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Abstract | What's known on the subject? and What does the study add?
The Gleason scoring system is a well‐established predictor of pathological stage and oncological outcomes for men with prostate cancer. Modifications throughout the last few decades – most recently by the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) in 2005 – have attempted to improve the correlation between biopsy and radical prostatectomy Gleason sum and better stratify patients to predict clinical outcomes.
Based on these clinical outcomes and the excellent prognosis for patients with low Gleason scores, we recommend Gleason grades incorporating a prognostic grade grouping which accurately reflect prognosis and are clearly understood by physicians and patients alike.
Objective
To investigate pathological and short‐term outcomes since the most recent Gleason system modifications by the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) in an attempt to divide the current Gleason grading system into prognostically accurate Gleason grade groups.
Patients and Methods
We queried the Johns Hopkins Radical Prostatectomy Database (1982–2011), approved by the institutional review board, for men undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) without a tertiary pattern since 2004 and identified 7869 men.
Multivariable models were created using preoperative and postoperative variables; prognostic grade group (Gleason grade ≤6; 3 + 4; 4 + 3; 8; 9–10) was among the strongest predictors of biochemical recurrence‐free (BFS) survival.
Results
Significant differences were noted among the Gleason grade groups at biopsy; differences were noted in the race, PSA level, clinical stage, number of positive cores at biopsy and the maximum percentage of positive cores among the Gleason grade groups at RP.
With a median (range) follow‐up of 2 (1–7) years, 5‐year BFS rates for men with Gleason grade ≤6, 3 + 4, 4 + 3, 8 and 9–10 tumours at biopsy were 94.6, 82.7, 65.1, 63.1 and 34.5%, respectively (P < 0.001 for trend); and 96.6, 88.1, 69.7, 63.7 and 34.5%, respectively (P < 0.001), based on RP pathology.
Conclusions
The 2005 ISUP modifications to the Gleason grading system for prostate carcinoma accurately categorize patients by pathological findings and short‐term biochemical outcomes but, while retaining the essence of the Gleason system, there is a need for a change in its reporting to more closely reflect tumour behaviour.
We propose reporting Gleason grades, including prognostic grade groups which accurately reflect prognosis as follows: Gleason score ≤6 (prognostic grade group I); Gleason score 3+4=7 (prognostic grade group II); Gleason score 4+3=7 (prognostic grade group III); Gleason score 4+4=8 (prognostic grade group (IV); and Gleason score 9–10 (prognostic grade group (V). |
|---|---|
| AbstractList | WHAT'S KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT? AND WHAT DOES THE STUDY ADD?: The Gleason scoring system is a well-established predictor of pathological stage and oncological outcomes for men with prostate cancer. Modifications throughout the last few decades - most recently by the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) in 2005 - have attempted to improve the correlation between biopsy and radical prostatectomy Gleason sum and better stratify patients to predict clinical outcomes. Based on these clinical outcomes and the excellent prognosis for patients with low Gleason scores, we recommend Gleason grades incorporating a prognostic grade grouping which accurately reflect prognosis and are clearly understood by physicians and patients alike.
To investigate pathological and short-term outcomes since the most recent Gleason system modifications by the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) in an attempt to divide the current Gleason grading system into prognostically accurate Gleason grade groups.
We queried the Johns Hopkins Radical Prostatectomy Database (1982-2011), approved by the institutional review board, for men undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) without a tertiary pattern since 2004 and identified 7869 men. Multivariable models were created using preoperative and postoperative variables; prognostic grade group (Gleason grade ≤ 6; 3 + 4; 4 + 3; 8; 9-10) was among the strongest predictors of biochemical recurrence-free (BFS) survival.
Significant differences were noted among the Gleason grade groups at biopsy; differences were noted in the race, PSA level, clinical stage, number of positive cores at biopsy and the maximum percentage of positive cores among the Gleason grade groups at RP. With a median (range) follow-up of 2 (1-7) years, 5-year BFS rates for men with Gleason grade ≤ 6, 3 + 4, 4 + 3, 8 and 9-10 tumours at biopsy were 94.6, 82.7, 65.1, 63.1 and 34.5%, respectively (P < 0.001 for trend); and 96.6, 88.1, 69.7, 63.7 and 34.5%, respectively (P < 0.001), based on RP pathology.
The 2005 ISUP modifications to the Gleason grading system for prostate carcinoma accurately categorize patients by pathological findings and short-term biochemical outcomes but, while retaining the essence of the Gleason system, there is a need for a change in its reporting to more closely reflect tumour behaviour. We propose reporting Gleason grades, including prognostic grade groups which accurately reflect prognosis as follows: Gleason score ≤ 6 (prognostic grade group I); Gleason score 3+4=7 (prognostic grade group II); Gleason score 4+3=7 (prognostic grade group III); Gleason score 4+4=8 (prognostic grade group (IV); and Gleason score 9-10 (prognostic grade group (V). What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Objective Patients and Methods Results Conclusions [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT] WHAT'S KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT? AND WHAT DOES THE STUDY ADD?: The Gleason scoring system is a well-established predictor of pathological stage and oncological outcomes for men with prostate cancer. Modifications throughout the last few decades - most recently by the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) in 2005 - have attempted to improve the correlation between biopsy and radical prostatectomy Gleason sum and better stratify patients to predict clinical outcomes. Based on these clinical outcomes and the excellent prognosis for patients with low Gleason scores, we recommend Gleason grades incorporating a prognostic grade grouping which accurately reflect prognosis and are clearly understood by physicians and patients alike.UNLABELLEDWHAT'S KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT? AND WHAT DOES THE STUDY ADD?: The Gleason scoring system is a well-established predictor of pathological stage and oncological outcomes for men with prostate cancer. Modifications throughout the last few decades - most recently by the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) in 2005 - have attempted to improve the correlation between biopsy and radical prostatectomy Gleason sum and better stratify patients to predict clinical outcomes. Based on these clinical outcomes and the excellent prognosis for patients with low Gleason scores, we recommend Gleason grades incorporating a prognostic grade grouping which accurately reflect prognosis and are clearly understood by physicians and patients alike.To investigate pathological and short-term outcomes since the most recent Gleason system modifications by the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) in an attempt to divide the current Gleason grading system into prognostically accurate Gleason grade groups.OBJECTIVETo investigate pathological and short-term outcomes since the most recent Gleason system modifications by the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) in an attempt to divide the current Gleason grading system into prognostically accurate Gleason grade groups.We queried the Johns Hopkins Radical Prostatectomy Database (1982-2011), approved by the institutional review board, for men undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) without a tertiary pattern since 2004 and identified 7869 men. Multivariable models were created using preoperative and postoperative variables; prognostic grade group (Gleason grade ≤ 6; 3 + 4; 4 + 3; 8; 9-10) was among the strongest predictors of biochemical recurrence-free (BFS) survival.PATIENTS AND METHODSWe queried the Johns Hopkins Radical Prostatectomy Database (1982-2011), approved by the institutional review board, for men undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) without a tertiary pattern since 2004 and identified 7869 men. Multivariable models were created using preoperative and postoperative variables; prognostic grade group (Gleason grade ≤ 6; 3 + 4; 4 + 3; 8; 9-10) was among the strongest predictors of biochemical recurrence-free (BFS) survival.Significant differences were noted among the Gleason grade groups at biopsy; differences were noted in the race, PSA level, clinical stage, number of positive cores at biopsy and the maximum percentage of positive cores among the Gleason grade groups at RP. With a median (range) follow-up of 2 (1-7) years, 5-year BFS rates for men with Gleason grade ≤ 6, 3 + 4, 4 + 3, 8 and 9-10 tumours at biopsy were 94.6, 82.7, 65.1, 63.1 and 34.5%, respectively (P < 0.001 for trend); and 96.6, 88.1, 69.7, 63.7 and 34.5%, respectively (P < 0.001), based on RP pathology.RESULTSSignificant differences were noted among the Gleason grade groups at biopsy; differences were noted in the race, PSA level, clinical stage, number of positive cores at biopsy and the maximum percentage of positive cores among the Gleason grade groups at RP. With a median (range) follow-up of 2 (1-7) years, 5-year BFS rates for men with Gleason grade ≤ 6, 3 + 4, 4 + 3, 8 and 9-10 tumours at biopsy were 94.6, 82.7, 65.1, 63.1 and 34.5%, respectively (P < 0.001 for trend); and 96.6, 88.1, 69.7, 63.7 and 34.5%, respectively (P < 0.001), based on RP pathology.The 2005 ISUP modifications to the Gleason grading system for prostate carcinoma accurately categorize patients by pathological findings and short-term biochemical outcomes but, while retaining the essence of the Gleason system, there is a need for a change in its reporting to more closely reflect tumour behaviour. We propose reporting Gleason grades, including prognostic grade groups which accurately reflect prognosis as follows: Gleason score ≤ 6 (prognostic grade group I); Gleason score 3+4=7 (prognostic grade group II); Gleason score 4+3=7 (prognostic grade group III); Gleason score 4+4=8 (prognostic grade group (IV); and Gleason score 9-10 (prognostic grade group (V).CONCLUSIONSThe 2005 ISUP modifications to the Gleason grading system for prostate carcinoma accurately categorize patients by pathological findings and short-term biochemical outcomes but, while retaining the essence of the Gleason system, there is a need for a change in its reporting to more closely reflect tumour behaviour. We propose reporting Gleason grades, including prognostic grade groups which accurately reflect prognosis as follows: Gleason score ≤ 6 (prognostic grade group I); Gleason score 3+4=7 (prognostic grade group II); Gleason score 4+3=7 (prognostic grade group III); Gleason score 4+4=8 (prognostic grade group (IV); and Gleason score 9-10 (prognostic grade group (V). What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? The Gleason scoring system is a well‐established predictor of pathological stage and oncological outcomes for men with prostate cancer. Modifications throughout the last few decades – most recently by the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) in 2005 – have attempted to improve the correlation between biopsy and radical prostatectomy Gleason sum and better stratify patients to predict clinical outcomes. Based on these clinical outcomes and the excellent prognosis for patients with low Gleason scores, we recommend Gleason grades incorporating a prognostic grade grouping which accurately reflect prognosis and are clearly understood by physicians and patients alike. Objective To investigate pathological and short‐term outcomes since the most recent Gleason system modifications by the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) in an attempt to divide the current Gleason grading system into prognostically accurate Gleason grade groups. Patients and Methods We queried the Johns Hopkins Radical Prostatectomy Database (1982–2011), approved by the institutional review board, for men undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) without a tertiary pattern since 2004 and identified 7869 men. Multivariable models were created using preoperative and postoperative variables; prognostic grade group (Gleason grade ≤6; 3 + 4; 4 + 3; 8; 9–10) was among the strongest predictors of biochemical recurrence‐free (BFS) survival. Results Significant differences were noted among the Gleason grade groups at biopsy; differences were noted in the race, PSA level, clinical stage, number of positive cores at biopsy and the maximum percentage of positive cores among the Gleason grade groups at RP. With a median (range) follow‐up of 2 (1–7) years, 5‐year BFS rates for men with Gleason grade ≤6, 3 + 4, 4 + 3, 8 and 9–10 tumours at biopsy were 94.6, 82.7, 65.1, 63.1 and 34.5%, respectively (P < 0.001 for trend); and 96.6, 88.1, 69.7, 63.7 and 34.5%, respectively (P < 0.001), based on RP pathology. Conclusions The 2005 ISUP modifications to the Gleason grading system for prostate carcinoma accurately categorize patients by pathological findings and short‐term biochemical outcomes but, while retaining the essence of the Gleason system, there is a need for a change in its reporting to more closely reflect tumour behaviour. We propose reporting Gleason grades, including prognostic grade groups which accurately reflect prognosis as follows: Gleason score ≤6 (prognostic grade group I); Gleason score 3+4=7 (prognostic grade group II); Gleason score 4+3=7 (prognostic grade group III); Gleason score 4+4=8 (prognostic grade group (IV); and Gleason score 9–10 (prognostic grade group (V). |
| Author | Pierorazio, Phillip M. Walsh, Patrick C. Partin, Alan W. Epstein, Jonathan I. |
| AuthorAffiliation | Department of Urology, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions and The James Brady Buchannan Urological Institute, Baltimore, MD, USA Department of Pathology, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions and The James Brady Buchannan Urological Institute, Baltimore, MD, USA Department of Oncology, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions and The James Brady Buchannan Urological Institute, Baltimore, MD, USA |
| AuthorAffiliation_xml | – name: Department of Pathology, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions and The James Brady Buchannan Urological Institute, Baltimore, MD, USA – name: Department of Urology, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions and The James Brady Buchannan Urological Institute, Baltimore, MD, USA – name: Department of Oncology, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions and The James Brady Buchannan Urological Institute, Baltimore, MD, USA |
| Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Phillip M. surname: Pierorazio fullname: Pierorazio, Phillip M. organization: The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions and The James Brady Buchannan Urological Institute – sequence: 2 givenname: Patrick C. surname: Walsh fullname: Walsh, Patrick C. organization: The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions and The James Brady Buchannan Urological Institute – sequence: 3 givenname: Alan W. surname: Partin fullname: Partin, Alan W. organization: The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions and The James Brady Buchannan Urological Institute – sequence: 4 givenname: Jonathan I. surname: Epstein fullname: Epstein, Jonathan I. organization: The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions and The James Brady Buchannan Urological Institute |
| BackLink | http://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=27242645$$DView record in Pascal Francis https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23464824$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
| BookMark | eNpdkk1v3CAQhlGVqvlo_kJlqarUy24YwGD3UCmN2jRVpPaQSLkhDHiDZcMW7Db774u3u9sPDsMw78NoBuYUHfngLUIF4CXkddEtgXG2YIAflgQDyVEOsHx6hk4OwtHexzU_RqcpdRjnAC9foGNCs1IRdoLuvsWw8iGNThfXvVUp-GIVlbHZhmnt_OpdYdSoikYla4qsjo-2GIJxrcvn_ZWkQ8xskTZptMNL9LxVfbLnu_0M3X_6eHf1eXH79frm6vJ20TFWwkIRU-MKAzVQ53osEaqpWt5ALRpRKwpVqcpS87IyumGsajTQsiVCY8oFGKBn6P3vvOupGazR1o9R9XId3aDiRgbl5L-Kd49yFX5IWosKWJkTvN0liOH7ZNMoB5e07XvlbZiSBEq4ICLbjL7-D-3CFH1ub0sBqwWdqVd_V3QoZf_gGXizA1TSqm-j8tqlP5wgjPBtZbvWfrrebg46YDkPgOzk_Ldy_mc5D4DcDoB8kh--3G9d-gsIhqTt |
| CODEN | BJINFO |
| ContentType | Journal Article |
| Copyright | 2013 BJU International 2014 INIST-CNRS 2013 BJU International. BJUI © 2013 BJU International 2013 BJU International 2013 |
| Copyright_xml | – notice: 2013 BJU International – notice: 2014 INIST-CNRS – notice: 2013 BJU International. – notice: BJUI © 2013 BJU International – notice: 2013 BJU International 2013 |
| DBID | IQODW CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 7QP 7X8 5PM |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11611.x |
| DatabaseName | Pascal-Francis Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts MEDLINE - Academic PubMed Central (Full Participant titles) |
| DatabaseTitle | MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts MEDLINE - Academic |
| DatabaseTitleList | MEDLINE Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts MEDLINE - Academic |
| Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 2 dbid: 7X8 name: MEDLINE - Academic url: https://search.proquest.com/medline sourceTypes: Aggregation Database |
| DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
| Discipline | Medicine |
| EISSN | 1464-410X |
| EndPage | 760 |
| ExternalDocumentID | PMC3978145 2942476271 23464824 27242645 BJU11611 |
| Genre | article Journal Article Comparative Study |
| GeographicLocations | United States |
| GeographicLocations_xml | – name: United States |
| GrantInformation_xml | – fundername: NCI NIH HHS grantid: P30 CA006973 |
| GroupedDBID | --- .3N .55 .GA .Y3 05W 0R~ 10A 1OC 23N 24P 2WC 31~ 33P 36B 3O- 3SF 4.4 50Y 50Z 51W 51X 52M 52N 52O 52P 52R 52S 52T 52U 52V 52W 52X 53G 5GY 5HH 5LA 5RE 5VS 66C 6P2 702 7PT 8-0 8-1 8-3 8-4 8-5 8UM 930 A01 A03 AAESR AAEVG AAHHS AAHQN AAIPD AAMNL AANLZ AAONW AASGY AAXRX AAYCA AAZKR ABCQN ABCUV ABDBF ABEML ABJNI ABLJU ABOCM ABPVW ABQWH ABXGK ACAHQ ACCFJ ACCZN ACFBH ACGFS ACGOF ACMXC ACPOU ACPRK ACSCC ACUHS ACXBN ACXQS ADBBV ADBTR ADEOM ADIZJ ADKYN ADMGS ADOZA ADXAS ADZMN ADZOD AEEZP AEIGN AEIMD AENEX AEQDE AEUQT AEUYR AFBPY AFEBI AFFNX AFFPM AFGKR AFPWT AFWVQ AFZJQ AHBTC AHMBA AIACR AITYG AIURR AIWBW AJBDE ALAGY ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS ALUQN ALVPJ AMBMR AMYDB ATUGU AZBYB AZVAB BAFTC BAWUL BFHJK BHBCM BMXJE BROTX BRXPI BY8 C45 CAG COF CS3 D-6 D-7 D-E D-F DCZOG DIK DPXWK DR2 DRFUL DRMAN DRSTM DU5 E3Z EAD EAP EBC EBD EBS EJD EMB EMK EMOBN ESX EX3 F00 F01 F04 F5P FUBAC G-S G.N GODZA H.X HF~ HGLYW HZI HZ~ IHE IX1 J0M J5H K48 KBYEO LATKE LC2 LC3 LEEKS LH4 LITHE LOXES LP6 LP7 LUTES LW6 LYRES MEWTI MK4 MRFUL MRMAN MRSTM MSFUL MSMAN MSSTM MXFUL MXMAN MXSTM N04 N05 N9A NF~ O66 O9- OIG OK1 OVD P2P P2W P2X P2Z P4B P4D PQQKQ Q.N Q11 QB0 R.K RJQFR ROL RX1 SUPJJ SV3 TEORI TUS UB1 V9Y W8V W99 WBKPD WHWMO WIH WIJ WIK WOHZO WOW WQJ WRC WVDHM WXI WXSBR X7M XG1 YFH ZGI ZXP ~IA ~WT AAMMB AEFGJ AEYWJ AGHNM AGXDD AGYGG AIDQK AIDYY IQODW CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 7QP O8X 7X8 5PM |
| ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-j4451-a2d908013d19464e27ab8f6b197b79a3185a55c658dcb448bc135f27c03671d13 |
| IEDL.DBID | DRFUL |
| ISICitedReferencesCount | 514 |
| ISICitedReferencesURI | http://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=Summon&SrcAuth=ProQuest&DestLinkType=CitingArticles&DestApp=WOS_CPL&KeyUT=000317865200024&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| ISSN | 1464-4096 1464-410X |
| IngestDate | Tue Nov 04 02:02:20 EST 2025 Thu Oct 02 13:05:15 EDT 2025 Sat Nov 29 14:55:50 EST 2025 Mon Jul 21 05:49:42 EDT 2025 Mon Jul 21 09:12:18 EDT 2025 Wed Jan 22 16:27:40 EST 2025 |
| IsPeerReviewed | true |
| IsScholarly | true |
| Issue | 5 |
| Keywords | Histological grading Prostate carcinoma Nephrology Urinary system disease Prognosis Prostate disease Evaluation scale Gleason grade Grouping Malignant tumor Urology Treatment radical prostatectomy Surgery Prostatectomy Male genital diseases Prostate cancer Cancer |
| Language | English |
| License | CC BY 4.0 2013 BJU International. |
| LinkModel | DirectLink |
| MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-j4451-a2d908013d19464e27ab8f6b197b79a3185a55c658dcb448bc135f27c03671d13 |
| Notes | ObjectType-Article-2 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-1 content type line 14 content type line 23 |
| PMID | 23464824 |
| PQID | 1326149736 |
| PQPubID | 1026371 |
| PageCount | 8 |
| ParticipantIDs | pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3978145 proquest_miscellaneous_1326727326 proquest_journals_1326149736 pubmed_primary_23464824 pascalfrancis_primary_27242645 wiley_primary_10_1111_j_1464_410X_2012_11611_x_BJU11611 |
| PublicationCentury | 2000 |
| PublicationDate | May 2013 |
| PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2013-05-01 |
| PublicationDate_xml | – month: 05 year: 2013 text: May 2013 |
| PublicationDecade | 2010 |
| PublicationPlace | Oxford |
| PublicationPlace_xml | – name: Oxford – name: England – name: Edgecliff |
| PublicationTitle | BJU international |
| PublicationTitleAlternate | BJU Int |
| PublicationYear | 2013 |
| Publisher | Wiley-Blackwell Wiley Subscription Services, Inc |
| Publisher_xml | – name: Wiley-Blackwell – name: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc |
| References | 2012; 82 2011; 136 2009; 40 2011 2010; 18 2009; 182 2000; 24 2004; 28 2007; 100 2011; 81 2007; 70 2008; 32 2005; 29 2001; 25 2003; 98 2008; 180 2009; 74 2006; 449 2009; 73 1967; 97 1993; 71 2010; 29 2000; 56 2002; 167 2008; 179 1974; 111 2009; 103 2011; 186 21685037 - Am J Clin Pathol. 2011 Jul;136(1):98-107 17979924 - BJU Int. 2007 Dec;100(6):1240-4 18550106 - J Urol. 2008 Aug;180(2):548-52; discussion 552-3 14669274 - Cancer. 2003 Dec 15;98(12):2560-5 7683970 - Cancer. 1993 Jun 1;71(11):3582-93 17826489 - Urology. 2007 Aug;70(2):277-82 15104304 - Am J Surg Pathol. 2004 Mar;28(3):394-8 4813554 - J Urol. 1974 Jan;111(1):58-64 19793829 - Int J Surg Pathol. 2010 Aug;18(4):248-54 21107843 - World J Urol. 2011 Oct;29(5):671-6 18724248 - Am J Surg Pathol. 2008 Oct;32(10):1532-9 18963536 - Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009 Apr 1;73(5):1439-45 11068310 - Urology. 2000 Nov 1;56(5):823-7 19683280 - J Urol. 2009 Oct;182(4):1364-70 16096414 - Am J Surg Pathol. 2005 Sep;29(9):1228-42 11342779 - Am J Surg Pathol. 2001 May;25(5):657-60 21316989 - Urol Oncol. 2013 Jan;31(1):93-8 17091254 - Virchows Arch. 2006 Dec;449(6):622-7 19076142 - BJU Int. 2009 May;103(9):1190-4 19616835 - Urology. 2009 Nov;74(5):1090-3 18076949 - J Urol. 2008 Feb;179(2):516-22; discussion 522 21237582 - Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012 Jan 1;82(1):200-3 21862072 - J Urol. 2011 Oct;186(4):1286-90 21493015 - Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011 Nov 15;81(4):e351-60 6018430 - J Urol. 1967 Feb;97(2):331-7 19683331 - Hum Pathol. 2009 Dec;40(12):1693-8 10757404 - Am J Surg Pathol. 2000 Apr;24(4):563-9 11992053 - J Urol. 2002 Jun;167(6):2440-2 |
| References_xml | – volume: 180 start-page: 548 year: 2008 end-page: 552 article-title: The impact of the 2005 international society of urological pathology consensus conference on standard Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma in needle biopsies publication-title: J Urol – volume: 74 start-page: 1090 year: 2009 end-page: 1093 article-title: Changes in Gleason score grading and their effect in predicting outcome after radical prostatectomy publication-title: Urology – volume: 32 start-page: 1532 year: 2008 end-page: 1539 article-title: Grading of invasive cribriform carcinoma on prostate needle biopsy: an interobserver study among experts in genitourinary pathology publication-title: Am J Surg Pathol – volume: 100 start-page: 1240 year: 2007 end-page: 1244 article-title: Major shifts in the treatment and prognosis of prostate cancer due to changes in pathological diagnosis and grading publication-title: BJU Int – volume: 25 start-page: 657 year: 2001 end-page: 660 article-title: Primary Gleason pattern as a predictor of disease progression in gleason score 7 prostate cancer: a multivariate analysis of 823 men treated with radical prostatectomy publication-title: Am J Surg Pathol – volume: 24 start-page: 563 year: 2000 end-page: 569 article-title: The prognostic significance of tertiary Gleason patterns of higher grade in radical prostatectomy specimens: a proposal to modify the Gleason grading system publication-title: Am J Surg Pathol – volume: 186 start-page: 1286 year: 2011 end-page: 1290 article-title: Gleason score 7 prostate cancer on needle biopsy: relation of primary pattern 3 or 4 to pathological stage and progression after radical prostatectomy publication-title: J Urol – volume: 182 start-page: 1364 year: 2009 end-page: 1370 article-title: Tertiary Gleason patterns and biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy: proposal for a modified Gleason scoring system publication-title: J Urol – volume: 82 start-page: 200 year: 2012 end-page: 203 article-title: Impact of primary Gleason grade on risk stratification for Gleason score 7 prostate cancers publication-title: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys – volume: 179 start-page: 516 year: 2008 end-page: 522 article-title: Significance of tertiary Gleason pattern 5 in Gleason score 7 radical prostatectomy specimens publication-title: J Urol – volume: 103 start-page: 1190 year: 2009 end-page: 1194 article-title: Usefulness of the 2005 International Society of Urologic Pathology Gleason grading system in prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens publication-title: BJU Int – volume: 28 start-page: 394 year: 2004 end-page: 398 article-title: The prognostic significance of tertiary Gleason pattern 5 in radical prostatectomy specimens publication-title: Am J Surg Pathol – volume: 18 start-page: 248 year: 2010 end-page: 254 article-title: Will the modification of the Gleason grading system affect the urology practice? publication-title: Int J Surg Pathol – volume: 70 start-page: 277 year: 2007 end-page: 282 article-title: Risk stratification of men with Gleason score 7 to 10 tumors by primary and secondary Gleason score: results from the SEARCH database publication-title: Urology – volume: 111 start-page: 58 year: 1974 end-page: 64 article-title: Prediction of prognosis for prostatic adenocarcinoma by combined histological grading and clinical staging publication-title: J Urol – year: 2011 article-title: Presence of high grade tertiary Gleason pattern upgrades the Gleason sum score and is inversely associated with biochemical recurrence‐free survival publication-title: Urol Oncol – volume: 73 start-page: 1439 year: 2009 end-page: 1445 article-title: Comparison of biochemical relapse‐free survival between primary Gleason score 3 and primary Gleason score 4 for biopsy Gleason score 7 prostate cancer publication-title: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys – volume: 167 start-page: 2440 year: 2002 end-page: 2442 article-title: Gleason score 7 prostate cancer on needle biopsy: is the prognostic difference in Gleason scores 4 + 3 and 3 + 4 independent of the number of involved cores? publication-title: J Urol – volume: 71 start-page: 3582 year: 1993 end-page: 3593 article-title: Correlation of pathologic findings with progression after radical retropubic prostatectomy publication-title: Cancer – volume: 136 start-page: 98 year: 2011 end-page: 107 article-title: Digital quantification of five high‐grade prostate cancer patterns, including the cribriform pattern, and their association with adverse outcome publication-title: Am J Clin Pathol – volume: 29 start-page: 1228 year: 2005 end-page: 1242 article-title: The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma publication-title: Am J Surg Pathol – volume: 449 start-page: 622 year: 2006 end-page: 627 article-title: The significance of modified Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma in biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens publication-title: Virchows Arch – volume: 56 start-page: 823 year: 2000 end-page: 827 article-title: Prognostic significance of Gleason score 3+4 versus Gleason score 4+3 tumor at radical prostatectomy publication-title: Urology – volume: 29 start-page: 671 year: 2010 end-page: 676 article-title: Impact of the primary Gleason pattern on biochemical recurrence‐free survival after radical prostatectomy: a single‐center cohort of 1,248 patients with Gleason 7 tumors publication-title: World J Urol – volume: 98 start-page: 2560 year: 2003 end-page: 2565 article-title: Prognostic significance of Gleason pattern in patients with Gleason score 7 prostate carcinoma publication-title: Cancer – volume: 81 start-page: e351 year: 2011 end-page: 360 article-title: Gleason pattern 5 is the greatest risk factor for clinical failure and death from prostate cancer after dose‐escalated radiation therapy and hormonal ablation publication-title: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys – volume: 97 start-page: 331 year: 1967 end-page: 337 article-title: The histology and prognosis of prostatic cancer publication-title: J Urol – volume: 40 start-page: 1693 year: 2009 end-page: 1698 article-title: A pathological reassessment of organ‐confined, Gleason score 6 prostatic adenocarcinomas that progress after radical prostatectomy publication-title: Hum Pathol – reference: 18076949 - J Urol. 2008 Feb;179(2):516-22; discussion 522 – reference: 21316989 - Urol Oncol. 2013 Jan;31(1):93-8 – reference: 11992053 - J Urol. 2002 Jun;167(6):2440-2 – reference: 11342779 - Am J Surg Pathol. 2001 May;25(5):657-60 – reference: 14669274 - Cancer. 2003 Dec 15;98(12):2560-5 – reference: 17091254 - Virchows Arch. 2006 Dec;449(6):622-7 – reference: 6018430 - J Urol. 1967 Feb;97(2):331-7 – reference: 7683970 - Cancer. 1993 Jun 1;71(11):3582-93 – reference: 4813554 - J Urol. 1974 Jan;111(1):58-64 – reference: 21107843 - World J Urol. 2011 Oct;29(5):671-6 – reference: 18724248 - Am J Surg Pathol. 2008 Oct;32(10):1532-9 – reference: 18550106 - J Urol. 2008 Aug;180(2):548-52; discussion 552-3 – reference: 19683280 - J Urol. 2009 Oct;182(4):1364-70 – reference: 17979924 - BJU Int. 2007 Dec;100(6):1240-4 – reference: 21685037 - Am J Clin Pathol. 2011 Jul;136(1):98-107 – reference: 11068310 - Urology. 2000 Nov 1;56(5):823-7 – reference: 18963536 - Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009 Apr 1;73(5):1439-45 – reference: 19616835 - Urology. 2009 Nov;74(5):1090-3 – reference: 19076142 - BJU Int. 2009 May;103(9):1190-4 – reference: 21237582 - Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012 Jan 1;82(1):200-3 – reference: 15104304 - Am J Surg Pathol. 2004 Mar;28(3):394-8 – reference: 19683331 - Hum Pathol. 2009 Dec;40(12):1693-8 – reference: 19793829 - Int J Surg Pathol. 2010 Aug;18(4):248-54 – reference: 16096414 - Am J Surg Pathol. 2005 Sep;29(9):1228-42 – reference: 21862072 - J Urol. 2011 Oct;186(4):1286-90 – reference: 17826489 - Urology. 2007 Aug;70(2):277-82 – reference: 21493015 - Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011 Nov 15;81(4):e351-60 – reference: 10757404 - Am J Surg Pathol. 2000 Apr;24(4):563-9 |
| SSID | ssj0014665 |
| Score | 2.586544 |
| Snippet | What's known on the subject? and What does the study add?
The Gleason scoring system is a well‐established predictor of pathological stage and oncological... WHAT'S KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT? AND WHAT DOES THE STUDY ADD?: The Gleason scoring system is a well-established predictor of pathological stage and oncological... What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Objective Patients and Methods Results Conclusions [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT] |
| SourceID | pubmedcentral proquest pubmed pascalfrancis wiley |
| SourceType | Open Access Repository Aggregation Database Index Database Publisher |
| StartPage | 753 |
| SubjectTerms | Adult Aged Biological and medical sciences Biopsy, Needle Follow-Up Studies Gleason grade Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics Humans Male Male genital diseases Medical sciences Middle Aged Neoplasm Grading - methods Neoplasm Recurrence, Local - mortality Neoplasm Recurrence, Local - pathology Nephrology. Urinary tract diseases prostate carcinoma Prostatectomy Prostatic Neoplasms - mortality Prostatic Neoplasms - pathology Prostatic Neoplasms - surgery radical prostatectomy Retrospective Studies Survival Rate - trends Tumors Tumors of the urinary system United States - epidemiology Urinary tract. Prostate gland |
| Title | Prognostic Gleason grade grouping: data based on the modified Gleason scoring system |
| URI | https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111%2Fj.1464-410X.2012.11611.x https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23464824 https://www.proquest.com/docview/1326149736 https://www.proquest.com/docview/1326727326 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC3978145 |
| Volume | 111 |
| WOSCitedRecordID | wos000317865200024&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| hasFullText | 1 |
| inHoldings | 1 |
| isFullTextHit | |
| isPrint | |
| journalDatabaseRights | – providerCode: PRVWIB databaseName: Wiley Online Library Full Collection 2020 customDbUrl: eissn: 1464-410X dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0014665 issn: 1464-4096 databaseCode: DRFUL dateStart: 19990101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com providerName: Wiley-Blackwell |
| link | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwrV1Lb9QwEB7BFqFeeLdsKSsjcQ3CdhxvuJXHghBUFepKe7MmtgNbQRZtWsTPZ8YJgUBPiFsUe6w448l8E3-eAXgsdaxRk6WFiCbLsSwzDLXKfDTKV6HmlOSp2IQ9Pp6vVuVJz3_iszBdfojhhxtbRvpes4Fj1f5p5HmWy6crZmgpul9I-YTw5I6iZWwmsPPyw2L5bthTyItUWLKTIuQ-5vVcOhYzJbGll1V3VS4ug6F_syl_R7nJTS1u_s8J3oIbPVgVR93qug1XYnMHrr_vt-PvwunJdsNEPWoWrz9HJOwuPm4xRJEOi5BXfCaYgirYVwZBrQQ3xZdNWNeEfAeR1icWoOiySt-D5eLV6Ys3WV-mITvj7GYZqlAS7pQ6yJIeOCqL1bwuKlnaypbIx7PRGE9QJ_iKosHKS21qZT05TyuD1HswaTZNvA9CWy8xGIsqx5z8KxYUbxlP40pbxxCnMBvpw33tUnI4ZRO0M1M4_Kkg1xtj6yjgJhBSWl1M4dHQTGbEeyPYxM1F14ehnKI--50-fw2uaVpzlU_BjjQ9dOAU3eOWZv0pperWKaUYPZZNmh4kRqFX7ljHjnXsko7dd_f87TJdHvyz5APYVal0B5MzD2Fyvr2ID-Ga_3a-brczuGpX81lvIj8AEcUQSA |
| linkProvider | Wiley-Blackwell |
| linkToHtml | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwrV3db9MwED9NGxp7AcbHKIzNSHsNmj8SN7zBtu6DrpqmVuqb5dgOFEGK2g3x53PnhIyMPU28RTmfZed8ud_Z5zuAPS5DaSVqmg82TZTN88T6UiQupMIVvqSU5LHYhB6N-tNpftGUA6K7MHV-iHbDjTQj_q9JwWlD-raWq0Tx_SmFaAl8n3H-DgHlmsJVhct97fByMBm2hwoqi5Ulay6E7t3Anjv7olBJu8SvVdZlLu7Cof-GU_4Nc6OdGjz-rzN8Ao8auMo-1OtrE1ZC9RTWz5sD-WcwvljMKVQPyez4W7CI3tnnhfWBxesiaBffMwpCZWQtPUMqAk72fe5nJWLflmXpYhwgq_NKP4fJ4Gh8cJI0hRqSr5TfLLHC54g8ufQ8xwEHoW3RL7OC57rQuaUL2jZNHYId7wr0BwvHZVoK7dB8au65fAGr1bwKL4FJ7bj1qbZCWYUW1mbocaUO--W6DD70YKcjEPOjTsphhI7gLu3B9h8JmUYdlwZdboQhuZZZD962ZFQkOh2xVZhf120IzAlss1UL9KZzidPqC9UD3RF124CSdHcp1exLTNYtY1IxHJaOom45Os6XMiRjQzI2Ucbml_l4NomPr-7NuQsPT8bnQzM8HX16DRsiFvKgUM1tWL1aXIc38MD9vJotFzuNpvwG-h8TUA |
| linkToPdf | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwrV1Lb9QwEB5V26riApRXF0oxEtcg_Ei86Q0o2xbKaoW60t4sxw9YVLLVbov4-Z1xQiDQE-IWxR7LzpfJfBOPZwBecBmilahpPtg8U7YsM-ujyFzIhat8pJTkqdiEnkxG83k5bcsB0VmYJj9E98ONNCN9r0nBw4WPf2q5yhR_NacQLYH3C85fIqHcVFRTZgCbh5_Gs9NuU0EVqbJkI4XUvR_Yc-NYFCpp1_i0YlPm4iYe-nc45e80N9mp8Z3_usK7cLulq-x1837twEao78H2x3ZD_j6cTVdLCtXDZnZ0Hiyyd_Z5ZX1g6bgI2sUDRkGojKylZ9iKhJN9W_pFRO7biaxdigNkTV7pBzAbvzt7e5y1hRqyr5TfLLPCl8g8ufS8xAkHoW01ikXFS13p0tIBbZvnDsmOdxX6g5XjMo9COzSfmnsuH8KgXtZhF5jUjlufayuUVWhhbYEeV-5wXK5j8GEI-z1AzEWTlMMInchdPoS9nwiZVh3XBl1upCGllsUQnnfNqEi0O2LrsLxq-hCZE9jnUQPor8ElLmsk1BB0D-quAyXp7rfUiy8pWbdMScVwWjpB3Un0nC9lCGNDGJuEsflh3ryfpcvH_yz5DLanh2NzejL58ARuiVTHgyI192BwuboKT2HLfb9crFf7raJcA2lFEss |
| openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Prognostic+Gleason+grade+grouping%3A+data+based+on+the+modified+Gleason+scoring+system&rft.jtitle=BJU+international&rft.au=PIERORAZIO%2C+Phillip+M&rft.au=WALSH%2C+Patrick+C&rft.au=PARTIN%2C+Alan+W&rft.au=EPSTEIN%2C+Jonathan+I&rft.date=2013-05-01&rft.pub=Wiley-Blackwell&rft.issn=1464-4096&rft.volume=111&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=753&rft.epage=760&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111%2Fj.1464-410X.2012.11611.x&rft.externalDBID=n%2Fa&rft.externalDocID=27242645 |
| thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1464-4096&client=summon |
| thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1464-4096&client=summon |
| thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1464-4096&client=summon |