Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://dspace.crs4.it/jspui/handle/1138/49
Title: Prognostic Utility of the Gleason Grading System Revisions and Histopathological Factors Beyond Gleason Grade
Authors: Zelic, Renata 
giunchi, francesca 
Fridfeldt, Jonna 
Carlsson, Jessica 
Davidsson, Sabina 
Lianas, Luca 
Mascia, Cecilia 
ZUGNA, DANIELA 
Molinaro, Luca 
Vincent, Per Henrik 
Zanetti, Gianluigi 
Andrén, Ove 
richiardi, lorenzo 
Akre, Olof 
Fiorentino, Michelangelo 
Pettersson, Andreas 
Affiliations: Clinical Epidemiology Division, Department of Medicine Solna, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden 
Pathology Department, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy 
Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden 
Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden 
Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden 
Data-Intensive Computing Division, Center for Advanced Studies, Research and Development in Sardinia (CRS4), Pula, Italy 
Data-Intensive Computing Division, Center for Advanced Studies, Research and Development in Sardinia (CRS4), Pula, Italy 
Cancer Epidemiology Unit, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, and CPO-Piemonte, Turin, Italy 
Division of Pathology, A.O. Città della Salute e della Scienza Hospital, Turin, Italy 
Department of Clinical Pathology and Cancer Diagnostics, Karolinska University Hospital, SE-17176 Stockholm, Sweden; Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, SE-17176 Stockholm, Sweden KI, Sweden 
Data-Intensive Computing Division, Center for Advanced Studies, Research and Development in Sardinia (CRS4), Pula, Italy 
Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden 
Cancer Epidemiology Unit, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, and CPO-Piemonte, Turin, Italy 
Department of Clinical Pathology and Cancer Diagnostics, Karolinska University Hospital, SE-17176 Stockholm, Sweden; Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, SE-17176 Stockholm, Sweden KI, Sweden 
Pathology Service, Maggiore Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy 
Clinical Epidemiology Division, Department of Medicine Solna, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden 
Editors: Ehrenstein, Vera 
Editors' affiliations: Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University, Denmark 
Keywords: prostate cancer;prognosis;prognostic markers;Gleason score;virtual microscopy;histopathology
Issue Date: 18-Jan-2022
Publisher: Dove Press
Project: Deep-Learning and HPC to Boost Biomedical Applications for Health 
DIFRA 
Journal: Clinical Epidemiology 
Volume: 2022:14
Start page: 59
End page: 70
Abstract: 
Background
The International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) revised the Gleason system in 2005 and 2014. The impact of these changes on prostate cancer (PCa) prognostication remains unclear.

Objective
To evaluate if the ISUP 2014 Gleason score (GS) predicts PCa death better than the pre-2005 GS, and if additional histopathological information can further improve PCa death prediction.

Patients and Methods
We conducted a case–control study nested among men in the National Prostate Cancer Register of Sweden diagnosed with non-metastatic PCa 1998–2015. We included 369 men who died from PCa (cases) and 369 men who did not (controls). Two uro-pathologists centrally re-reviewed biopsy ISUP 2014 Gleason grading, poorly formed glands, cribriform pattern, comedonecrosis, perineural invasion, intraductal, ductal and mucinous carcinoma, percentage Gleason 4, inflammation, high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN) and post-atrophic hyperplasia. Pre-2005 GS was back-transformed using i) information on cribriform pattern and/or poorly formed glands and ii) the diagnostic GS from the registry. Models were developed using Firth logistic regression and compared in terms of discrimination (AUC).

Results
The ISUP 2014 GS (AUC = 0.808) performed better than the pre-2005 GS when back-transformed using only cribriform pattern (AUC = 0.785) or both cribriform and poorly formed glands (AUC = 0.792), but not when back-transformed using only poorly formed glands (AUC = 0.800). Similarly, the ISUP 2014 GS performed better than the diagnostic GS (AUC = 0.808 vs 0.781). Comedonecrosis (AUC = 0.811), HGPIN (AUC = 0.810) and number of cores with ≥50% cancer (AUC = 0.810) predicted PCa death independently of the ISUP 2014 GS.

Conclusion
The Gleason Grading revisions have improved PCa death prediction, likely due to classifying cribriform patterns, rather than poorly formed glands, as Gleason 4. Comedonecrosis, HGPIN and number of cores with ≥50% cancer further improve PCa death discrimination slightly.
URI: https://dspace.crs4.it/jspui/handle/1138/49
DOI: 10.2147/CLEP.S339140
Appears in Collections:CRS4 publications

Files in This Item:
Show full item record

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.