Suppr超能文献

前列腺癌活检中Gleason 4级最高百分比与总百分比的比较。

Comparison of highest and overall percentage Gleason pattern 4 in prostate cancer biopsies.

作者信息

Kroon L J, Leeuwenburgh K P, Remmers S, Kweldam C F, van den Bergh R C N, Bangma C H, van Leenders G J L H

机构信息

Department of Pathology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Department of Urology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Na-15, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Virchows Arch. 2025 Jun 6. doi: 10.1007/s00428-025-04117-2.

Abstract

Current guidelines recommend pathologists to report percentage Gleason pattern 4 (GP4%) in Gleason score (GS) 7 prostate cancer (PCa) biopsies. However, it is unspecified whether the highest or overall GP4% should be reported. This study aims to clarify which quantification method correlates best with radical prostatectomy (RP) pathology. This study included 308 men with the highest GS 3 + 4 = 7, 4 + 3 = 7, or 4 + 4 = 8 on centrally revised systematic and/or targeted biopsies who underwent RP between 2018 and 2022. The highest and overall biopsy GP4% were compared with RP GP4% using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient and adverse pathology (AP) (pT-stage ≥ T3, GS ≥ 4 + 3 = 7 and/or pN1) using multivariable logistic regression models adjusted for clinical tumor stage, prostate specific antigen (PSA), percentage of tumor positive biopsies, biopsy modality (systematic/targeted/both), and cribriform pattern. Both quantification methods correlated with RP GP4% (both rho = 0.59), and no significant difference was found between them (p = 0.78). On multivariable analyses, both GP4% quantification methods were significantly associated with AP (per 10% increase, highest GP4% odds ratio [OR] 1.26 [95% CI 1.14-1.39], overall GP4% OR 1.38 [95% CI 1.22-1.58], both p < 0.001). The area under the curve (AUC) was slightly better for overall (0.78 [95% CI 0.73-0.83]) than the highest GP4% (0.76 [95% CI 0.71-0.81], p = 0.041). This study found that the highest and overall biopsy GP4% both correlated with RP GP4%. Although the discriminative performance of the highest and overall GP4% was comparable with respect to AP at RP, the overall GP4% statistically slightly outperformed the highest GP4%. Including the overall GP4% may have added value in risk stratification and clinical decision-making in a subset of PCa patients.

摘要

当前指南建议病理学家报告Gleason评分(GS)为7的前列腺癌(PCa)活检中Gleason模式4的百分比(GP4%)。然而,并未明确应报告最高的还是总体的GP4%。本研究旨在明确哪种量化方法与根治性前列腺切除术(RP)病理结果的相关性最佳。本研究纳入了308名在2018年至2022年间接受RP的男性,这些男性在经过中心修订的系统和/或靶向活检中,最高GS为3 + 4 = 7、4 + 3 = 7或4 + 4 = 8。使用Spearman等级相关系数将活检中最高和总体的GP4%与RP的GP4%进行比较,并使用多变量逻辑回归模型将不良病理结果(AP)(pT分期≥T3、GS≥4 + 3 = 7和/或pN1)与临床肿瘤分期、前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)、肿瘤阳性活检的百分比、活检方式(系统/靶向/两者皆有)和筛状模式进行校正。两种量化方法均与RP的GP4%相关(两者rho = 0.59),且两者之间未发现显著差异(p = 0.78)。在多变量分析中,两种GP4%量化方法均与AP显著相关(每增加10%,最高GP4%的优势比[OR]为1.26 [95% CI 1.14 - 1.39],总体GP4%的OR为1.38 [95% CI 1.22 - 1.58],两者p < 0.001)。总体GP4%的曲线下面积(AUC)(0.78 [95% CI 0.73 - 0.83])略高于最高GP4%的AUC(0.76 [95% CI 0.71 - 0.81],p = 0.041)。本研究发现,活检中最高和总体的GP4%均与RP的GP4%相关。尽管在RP时,最高和总体GP4%在鉴别AP方面的表现相当,但总体GP4%在统计学上略优于最高GP4%。纳入总体GP4%可能在一部分PCa患者的风险分层和临床决策中具有附加价值。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验