King C R, Long J P
Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Int J Cancer. 2000 Dec 20;90(6):326-30. doi: 10.1002/1097-0215(20001220)90:6<326::aid-ijc3>3.0.co;2-j.
Potential reasons for discordance between the Gleason score in biopsies and surgical specimens are: 1) pathological interpretation bias, and 2) sampling effects. The importance of sampling effects in grading errors was examined in a series where the number of biopsy cores obtained was high. Biopsies were obtained using a technique whereby 18 directed cores were systematically obtained and mapped out within the gland. Gleason scores from biopsies and matched prostatectomy specimens were compared among 28 consecutive patients with localized prostate cancer. A pooled database from 10 series (n = 2,687) served as a baseline for comparison in the accuracy of Gleason score grading. With the present biopsy technique, an exact Gleason score match was achieved in 57% of cases, compared with the pooled database (PD) mean of 42% (P = 0.055), and was within 1 point in 93% of cases compared with 78% (PD) (P = 0.029). Upgrading of biopsies was seen in 35% of cases, compared with 43% (PD) (P = 0.19). With respect to Gleason score 7, an exact match was present in 78% of cases, compared with 63% (PD) (P = 0.17), and upgrading was 0%, compared with 20% (PD) (P = 0.07). The data suggest a significant reduction in grade errors by minimizing sampling effects, one that it is of the same order of magnitude as the reduction achieved from consensus pathologic evaluation. In our study, seven patients (25%) would have had their cancers missed altogether with sextant biopsies. Sampling effects may contribute significantly to grading errors in prostate needle biopsies, although a larger study is needed to confirm this. A methodology which adopts a higher number of cores combined with a consensus pathologic evaluation could potentially reduce grading errors substantially. The optimal number of cores remains to be determined in a larger study. Int. J. Cancer (Radiat. Oncol. Invest.) 90, 326-330 (2000).
活检组织与手术标本中Gleason评分不一致的潜在原因有:1)病理解读偏差,以及2)取材效应。在一系列取材活检组织芯数量较多的病例中,研究了取材效应在分级错误中的重要性。活检采用一种技术,即系统获取18个定向组织芯并在腺体内标记出来。对28例连续的局限性前列腺癌患者的活检组织与配对的前列腺切除标本的Gleason评分进行比较。来自10个系列(n = 2687)的汇总数据库作为Gleason评分分级准确性比较的基线。采用目前的活检技术,57%的病例实现了Gleason评分完全匹配,而汇总数据库(PD)的平均值为42%(P = 0.055);93%的病例评分相差在1分以内,而汇总数据库为78%(P = 0.029)。35%的病例活检组织出现升级,而汇总数据库为43%(P = 0.19)。对于Gleason评分7,78%的病例实现了完全匹配,而汇总数据库为63%(P = 0.17),升级率为0%,而汇总数据库为20%(P = 0.07)。数据表明,通过将取材效应降至最低,分级错误显著减少,其程度与通过共识病理评估所实现的减少程度相当。在我们的研究中,7例患者(25%)若采用六分区活检可能会完全漏诊癌症。取材效应可能在前列腺穿刺活检的分级错误中起重要作用,不过还需要更大规模的研究来证实这一点。一种采用更多组织芯数量并结合共识病理评估的方法可能会大幅减少分级错误。最佳组织芯数量仍有待在更大规模的研究中确定。《国际癌症杂志(放射肿瘤学与肿瘤学研究)》90, 326 - 330(2000年)