Clinical role of pathological downgrading after radical prostatectomy in patients with biopsy confirmed Gleason score 3 + 4 prostate cancer

Tatsuo Gondo, Bing Ying Poon, Kazuhiro Matsumoto, Melanie Bernstein, Daniel D. Sjoberg, James A. Eastham

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective To identify preoperative factors predicting Gleason score downgrading after radical prostatectomy (RP) in patients with biopsy Gleason score 3+4 prostate cancer and to determine if prediction of downgrading can identify potential candidates for active surveillance (AS).

Patients and Methods We identified 1317 patients with biopsy Gleason score 3+4 prostate cancers who underwent RP at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center between 2005 and 2013. Several preoperative and biopsy characteristics were evaluated by forward selection regression, and selected predictors of downgrading were analysed by multivariable logistic regression. Decision curve analysis was used to evaluate the clinical utility of the multivariate model.

Results Gleason score was downgraded after RP in 115 patients (9%). We developed a multivariable model using age, prostate-specific antigen density, percentage of positive cores with Gleason pattern 4 cancer out of all cores taken, and maximum percentage of cancer involvement within a positive core with Gleason pattern 4 cancer. The area under the curve for this model was 0.75 after 10-fold cross validation. However, decision curve analysis revealed that the model was not clinically helpful in identifying patients who will downgrade at RP for the purpose of reassigning them to AS.

Conclusion While patients with pathological Gleason score 3 + 3 with tertiary Gleason pattern ≤4 at RP in patients with biopsy Gleason score 3 + 4 prostate cancer may be potential candidates for AS, decision curve analysis showed limited utility of our model to identify such men. Future study is needed to identify new predictors to help identify potential candidates for AS among patients with biopsy confirmed Gleason score 3 + 4 prostate cancer.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)81-86
Number of pages6
JournalBJU International
Volume115
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2015 Jan 1
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Neoplasm Grading
Prostatectomy
Prostatic Neoplasms
Biopsy
Decision Support Techniques
Neoplasms
Prostate-Specific Antigen
Area Under Curve
Logistic Models

Keywords

  • active surveillance
  • decision curve analysis
  • downgrading
  • prostate
  • prostatectomy
  • prostatic neoplasms

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Clinical role of pathological downgrading after radical prostatectomy in patients with biopsy confirmed Gleason score 3 + 4 prostate cancer. / Gondo, Tatsuo; Poon, Bing Ying; Matsumoto, Kazuhiro; Bernstein, Melanie; Sjoberg, Daniel D.; Eastham, James A.

In: BJU International, Vol. 115, No. 1, 01.01.2015, p. 81-86.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Gondo, Tatsuo ; Poon, Bing Ying ; Matsumoto, Kazuhiro ; Bernstein, Melanie ; Sjoberg, Daniel D. ; Eastham, James A. / Clinical role of pathological downgrading after radical prostatectomy in patients with biopsy confirmed Gleason score 3 + 4 prostate cancer. In: BJU International. 2015 ; Vol. 115, No. 1. pp. 81-86.
@article{e880e23dfc834ccda1ba0eb54b325fc5,
title = "Clinical role of pathological downgrading after radical prostatectomy in patients with biopsy confirmed Gleason score 3 + 4 prostate cancer",
abstract = "Objective To identify preoperative factors predicting Gleason score downgrading after radical prostatectomy (RP) in patients with biopsy Gleason score 3+4 prostate cancer and to determine if prediction of downgrading can identify potential candidates for active surveillance (AS).Patients and Methods We identified 1317 patients with biopsy Gleason score 3+4 prostate cancers who underwent RP at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center between 2005 and 2013. Several preoperative and biopsy characteristics were evaluated by forward selection regression, and selected predictors of downgrading were analysed by multivariable logistic regression. Decision curve analysis was used to evaluate the clinical utility of the multivariate model.Results Gleason score was downgraded after RP in 115 patients (9{\%}). We developed a multivariable model using age, prostate-specific antigen density, percentage of positive cores with Gleason pattern 4 cancer out of all cores taken, and maximum percentage of cancer involvement within a positive core with Gleason pattern 4 cancer. The area under the curve for this model was 0.75 after 10-fold cross validation. However, decision curve analysis revealed that the model was not clinically helpful in identifying patients who will downgrade at RP for the purpose of reassigning them to AS.Conclusion While patients with pathological Gleason score 3 + 3 with tertiary Gleason pattern ≤4 at RP in patients with biopsy Gleason score 3 + 4 prostate cancer may be potential candidates for AS, decision curve analysis showed limited utility of our model to identify such men. Future study is needed to identify new predictors to help identify potential candidates for AS among patients with biopsy confirmed Gleason score 3 + 4 prostate cancer.",
keywords = "active surveillance, decision curve analysis, downgrading, prostate, prostatectomy, prostatic neoplasms",
author = "Tatsuo Gondo and Poon, {Bing Ying} and Kazuhiro Matsumoto and Melanie Bernstein and Sjoberg, {Daniel D.} and Eastham, {James A.}",
year = "2015",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/bju.12769",
language = "English",
volume = "115",
pages = "81--86",
journal = "BJU International",
issn = "1464-4096",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Clinical role of pathological downgrading after radical prostatectomy in patients with biopsy confirmed Gleason score 3 + 4 prostate cancer

AU - Gondo, Tatsuo

AU - Poon, Bing Ying

AU - Matsumoto, Kazuhiro

AU - Bernstein, Melanie

AU - Sjoberg, Daniel D.

AU - Eastham, James A.

PY - 2015/1/1

Y1 - 2015/1/1

N2 - Objective To identify preoperative factors predicting Gleason score downgrading after radical prostatectomy (RP) in patients with biopsy Gleason score 3+4 prostate cancer and to determine if prediction of downgrading can identify potential candidates for active surveillance (AS).Patients and Methods We identified 1317 patients with biopsy Gleason score 3+4 prostate cancers who underwent RP at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center between 2005 and 2013. Several preoperative and biopsy characteristics were evaluated by forward selection regression, and selected predictors of downgrading were analysed by multivariable logistic regression. Decision curve analysis was used to evaluate the clinical utility of the multivariate model.Results Gleason score was downgraded after RP in 115 patients (9%). We developed a multivariable model using age, prostate-specific antigen density, percentage of positive cores with Gleason pattern 4 cancer out of all cores taken, and maximum percentage of cancer involvement within a positive core with Gleason pattern 4 cancer. The area under the curve for this model was 0.75 after 10-fold cross validation. However, decision curve analysis revealed that the model was not clinically helpful in identifying patients who will downgrade at RP for the purpose of reassigning them to AS.Conclusion While patients with pathological Gleason score 3 + 3 with tertiary Gleason pattern ≤4 at RP in patients with biopsy Gleason score 3 + 4 prostate cancer may be potential candidates for AS, decision curve analysis showed limited utility of our model to identify such men. Future study is needed to identify new predictors to help identify potential candidates for AS among patients with biopsy confirmed Gleason score 3 + 4 prostate cancer.

AB - Objective To identify preoperative factors predicting Gleason score downgrading after radical prostatectomy (RP) in patients with biopsy Gleason score 3+4 prostate cancer and to determine if prediction of downgrading can identify potential candidates for active surveillance (AS).Patients and Methods We identified 1317 patients with biopsy Gleason score 3+4 prostate cancers who underwent RP at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center between 2005 and 2013. Several preoperative and biopsy characteristics were evaluated by forward selection regression, and selected predictors of downgrading were analysed by multivariable logistic regression. Decision curve analysis was used to evaluate the clinical utility of the multivariate model.Results Gleason score was downgraded after RP in 115 patients (9%). We developed a multivariable model using age, prostate-specific antigen density, percentage of positive cores with Gleason pattern 4 cancer out of all cores taken, and maximum percentage of cancer involvement within a positive core with Gleason pattern 4 cancer. The area under the curve for this model was 0.75 after 10-fold cross validation. However, decision curve analysis revealed that the model was not clinically helpful in identifying patients who will downgrade at RP for the purpose of reassigning them to AS.Conclusion While patients with pathological Gleason score 3 + 3 with tertiary Gleason pattern ≤4 at RP in patients with biopsy Gleason score 3 + 4 prostate cancer may be potential candidates for AS, decision curve analysis showed limited utility of our model to identify such men. Future study is needed to identify new predictors to help identify potential candidates for AS among patients with biopsy confirmed Gleason score 3 + 4 prostate cancer.

KW - active surveillance

KW - decision curve analysis

KW - downgrading

KW - prostate

KW - prostatectomy

KW - prostatic neoplasms

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84928280254&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84928280254&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/bju.12769

DO - 10.1111/bju.12769

M3 - Article

C2 - 24725760

AN - SCOPUS:84928280254

VL - 115

SP - 81

EP - 86

JO - BJU International

JF - BJU International

SN - 1464-4096

IS - 1

ER -