Материалы доступны только для специалистов сферы здравоохранения.
Чтобы посмотреть материал полностью
Авторизуйтесь
или зарегистрируйтесь.
Третичный показатель Глисона как фактор прогноза рецидива рака предстательной железы
Третичный показатель Глисона как фактор прогноза рецидива рака предстательной железы
Материалы доступны только для специалистов сферы здравоохранения.
Чтобы посмотреть материал полностью
Авторизуйтесь
или зарегистрируйтесь.
Аннотация
Сумма баллов по шкале Глисона является важным прогностическим критерием, позволяющим предположить высокую вероятность прогрессирования заболевания, развития отдаленных метастазов и ухудшение показателей выживаемости больных раком предстательной железы, что и было подтверждено в многочисленных исследованиях. Предметом специального изучения является присутствие и определение третичного показателя Глисона в образцах опухоли предстательной железы, полученных после радикальной простатэктомии. В литературе появляется все больше данных о том, что третичный показатель связан с неблагоприятными патоморфологическими характеристиками и более высоким риском биохимического рецидива.
Ключевые слова: рак предстательной железы, сумма баллов по шкале Глисона, третичный показатель, биохимический рецидив.
Key words: prostate cancer, the Gleason sum, tertiary Gleason grade (TGG) pattern, biochemical recurrence.
Ключевые слова: рак предстательной железы, сумма баллов по шкале Глисона, третичный показатель, биохимический рецидив.
________________________________________________
Key words: prostate cancer, the Gleason sum, tertiary Gleason grade (TGG) pattern, biochemical recurrence.
Полный текст
Список литературы
1. Воробьев А.В. Рак предстательной железы: эволюция взглядов. Вопр. онкологии. 2009; 55 (2): 241–9.
2. Давыдов М.И., Аксель Е.М. Статистика злокачественных новообразований в России и странах СНГ в 2009 г. Вестн. РОНЦ им. Н.Н.Блохина РАМН. 2011; 22 (3).
3. Han M, Partin AW, Chan DY et al. An evaluation of the decreasing incidence of positive surgical margins in a large retropubic prostatectomy series. J Urol 2004; 171: 23–6.
4. Ahyai SA, Zacharias M, Isbarn H et al. Prognostic significance of a positive surgical margin in pathologically organ-confined prostate cancer. BJU International 2010; 106 (4): 478–83.
5. Graefen M, Walz J, Huland H. Open retropubic nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2006; 49: 38–48.
6. Zincke H, Oesterling JE, Blute ML et al. Long-term (15 years) results after radical prostatectomy for clinically localized (stage T2c or lower) prostate cancer. J Urol 1994; 152 (5 Pt. 2): 1850–7.
7. Liu L, Coker AL, Du XL et al. Long-term survival after radical prostatectomy compared to other treatments in older men with local/regional prostate cancer. J Surgical Oncol 2008; 97: 583–91.
8. Krongrad A, Lai H, Lai S. Survival after radical prostatectomy. JAMA 1997; 278 (1): 44–6.
9. Kupelian PA, Katcher J, Levin HS et al. Stage T1-2 prostate cancer a multivariate analysis of factors affecting biochemical and clinical failures after radical prostatectomy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1997; 37: 1043–52.
10. Catalona WJ, Smith DS. 5-year tumor recurrence rates after anatomical radical retropubic prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Urol 1994; 152: 1837–42.
11. Walsh PC, Partin AW, Epstein JI. Cancer control and quality of life following anatomical radical retropubic prostatectomy: results at 10 years. J Urol 1994; 152 (5): 1831–6.
12. Frazier HA, Robertson JE, Humphrey PA et al. Is prostate specific antigen of clinical importance in evaluating outcome after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 1993; 149 (3): 516–8.
13. Hull GW, Rabbani F, Abbas F et al. Cancer control with radical prostatectomy alone in 1,000 consecutive patients. J Urol 2002; 167 (2 Pt. 1): 528–34.
14. Grossfeld GD, Chang JJ, Broering JM et al. Does the completeness of prostate sampling predict outcome for patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: data from the CAPSURE database. Urology 2000; 56 (3): 430–5.
15. Han M, Partin AW, Zahurak M et al. Biochemical (prostate specific antigen) recurrence probability following radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 2003; 169 (2): 517–23.
16. Amling CL, Blute ML, Bergstralh EJ et al. Long-term hazard of progression after radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer: continued risk of biochemical failure after 5 years. J Urol 2000; 164 (2): 101–5.
17. Roehl KA, Han M, Ramos CG et al. Cancer progression and survival rates following anatomical radical retropubic prostatectomy in 3,478 consecutive patients: long-term results. J Urol 2004; 172 (3): 910–14.
18. Porter CR, Gallina A, Kodama K et al. Prostate cancer-specific survival in men treated with hormonal therapy after failure of radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2007; 52 (2): 446–52.
19. Boorjian SA, Karnes RJ, Crispen PL et al. The impact of PSMs on mortality following radical prostatectomy during the prostate specific antigen era. J Urol 2010; 183: 1003–9.
20. Bianco FJ, Vickers AJ, Cronin AM et al. Variations among experienced surgeons in cancer control after open radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2010; 183: 977–82.
21. Uhlman MA, Sun L, Stackhouse DA et al. Tumor volume, tumor percentage involvement, or prostate volume: which is predictive of prostate-specific antigen recurrence? Urology 2010; 75: 460–6.
22. Pfitzenmaier J, Pahernik S, Tremmel T et al. Positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy: do they have an impact on biochemical or clinical progression? BJU Int 2008; 102: 1413–8.
23. Freedland SJ, Humphreys EB, Mangold LA et al. Death in patients with recurrent prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy: prostate-specific antigen doubling time subgroups and their associated contributions to all-cause mortality. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 1765–71.
24. Humphrey P. Gleason grading and prognostic factors in carcinoma of the prostate. Modern Pathol 2004; 17: 292–306.
25. Catalona WJ, Smith DS. 5-year tumor recurrence rates after anatomical radical retropubic prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Urol 1994; 152: 1837–42.
26. Lerner SE, Blute ML, Bergstralh EJ et al. Analysis of risk factors for progression in patients with pathologically confined prostate cancers after radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol 1996; 156: 137–43.
27. Epstein JI, Partin AW, Sauvageot J et al. Prediction of progression following radical prostatectomy. A multivariate analysis of 721 men with long-term follow-up. Am J Surg Pathol 1996; 20: 286–92.
28. Green GA, Hanlon AL, Al-Saleem T et al. A Gleason score of 7 predicts a worse outcome for prostate carcinoma patients treated with radiotherapy. Cancer 1998; 83: 971–6.
29. Zagars GK, Ayala AG, Von Eschenbach AC et al. The prognostic importance of Gleason grade in prostatic adenocarcinoma: a long-term follow-up study of 648 patients treated with radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1995; 31: 237–45.
30. Catalona WJ, Smith DS. 5-year tumor recurrence rates after anatomical radical retropubic prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Urol 1994; 152: 1837–42.
31. Gilliland FD, Hoffman RM, Hamilton A et al. Predicting extra capsular extension of prostate cancer in men treated with radical prostatectomy: results from the population based prostate cancer outcomes study. J Urol 1999; 162 (4): 1341–5.
32. Pan CC, Potter SR, Partin AW et al. The prognostic significance of tertiary Gleason patterns of higher grade in radical prostatectomy specimens: a proposal to modify the Gleason grading system. Am J Surg Pathol 2000; 24: 563–9.
33. Epstein JI, Allsbrook WC, Amin MB et al. ISUP Grading Committee. The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 2005; 29: 1228–42.
34. Egevad L, Granfors T, Karlberg L et al. Percent Gleason grade 4/5 as prognostic factor in prostate cancer diagnosed at transurethral resection. J Urol 2002; 168: 509–13.
35. Rasiah KK, Stricker PD, Haynes AM et al. Prognostic significance of Gleason pattern in patients with Gleason score 7 prostate carcinoma. Cancer 2003; 98: 2560–5.
36. Mosse CA, Magi-Galluzzi C, Tsuzuki T. The prognostic significance of tertiary Gleason pattern 5 in radical prostatectomy specimens. Am J Surg Pathol 2004; 28: 394–8.
37. Hattab EM, Koch MO, Eble JN et al. Tertiary Gleason pattern 5 is a powerful predictor of biochemical relapse in patients with Gleason score 7 prostatic adenocarcinoma. J Urol 2006; 175: 1695–9.
38. Harnden P, Shelley MD, Coles B et al. Should the Gleason grading system for prostate cancer be modified to account for high-grade tertiary components? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol 2007; 8: 411–9.
39. Sim HG, Telesca D, Culp SH et al. Tertiary Gleason pattern 5 in Gleason 7 prostate cancer predicts pathological stage and biochemical recurrence. J Urol 2008; 179: 1775–9.
40. Whittemore DE, Hick EJ, Carter MR et al. Significance of tertiary Gleason pattern 5 in Gleason score 7 radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol 2008; 179: 516–22.
41. Ruijter ET, Van De Kaa CA, Schalken JA et al. Histological grade heterogeneity in multifocal prostate cancer. Biological and clinical implications. J Pathol 1996; 180: 295–9.
42. Harnden P, Shelley MD, Coles B et al. Should the Gleason grading system for prostate cancer be modified to account for high-grade tertiary components? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol 2007; 8 (5): 411–9.
43. Patel AA, Chen MH, Renshaw AA et al. PSA failure following definitive treatment of prostate cancer having biopsy Gleason score 7 with tertiary grade 5. JAMA 2007; 298 (13): 1533–8.
44. Turker P, Bas E, Bozkurt S et al. Presence of high grade tertiary Gleason pattern upgrades the Gleason sum score and is inversely associated with biochemical recurrence-free survival. Urol Oncol 2011.
45. Hashine K, Yuasa A, Shinomori K et al. Tertiary Gleason pattern 5 and oncological outcomes after radical prostatectomy. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2011; 41 (4): 571–6.
46. Isbarn H, Ahyai SA, Chun FK et al. Prevalence of a tertiary Gleason grade and its impact on adverse histopathologic parameters in a contemporary radical prostatectomy series. Eur Urol 2009; 55 (2): 394–401.
47. Oort IM, Schout BM, Kiemeney LA et al. Does the tertiary Gleason pattern influence the PSA progression-free interval after retropubic radical prostatectomy for organ-confined prostate cancer? Eur Urology 2005; 48 (4): 572–6.
2. Давыдов М.И., Аксель Е.М. Статистика злокачественных новообразований в России и странах СНГ в 2009 г. Вестн. РОНЦ им. Н.Н.Блохина РАМН. 2011; 22 (3).
3. Han M, Partin AW, Chan DY et al. An evaluation of the decreasing incidence of positive surgical margins in a large retropubic prostatectomy series. J Urol 2004; 171: 23–6.
4. Ahyai SA, Zacharias M, Isbarn H et al. Prognostic significance of a positive surgical margin in pathologically organ-confined prostate cancer. BJU International 2010; 106 (4): 478–83.
5. Graefen M, Walz J, Huland H. Open retropubic nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2006; 49: 38–48.
6. Zincke H, Oesterling JE, Blute ML et al. Long-term (15 years) results after radical prostatectomy for clinically localized (stage T2c or lower) prostate cancer. J Urol 1994; 152 (5 Pt. 2): 1850–7.
7. Liu L, Coker AL, Du XL et al. Long-term survival after radical prostatectomy compared to other treatments in older men with local/regional prostate cancer. J Surgical Oncol 2008; 97: 583–91.
8. Krongrad A, Lai H, Lai S. Survival after radical prostatectomy. JAMA 1997; 278 (1): 44–6.
9. Kupelian PA, Katcher J, Levin HS et al. Stage T1-2 prostate cancer a multivariate analysis of factors affecting biochemical and clinical failures after radical prostatectomy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1997; 37: 1043–52.
10. Catalona WJ, Smith DS. 5-year tumor recurrence rates after anatomical radical retropubic prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Urol 1994; 152: 1837–42.
11. Walsh PC, Partin AW, Epstein JI. Cancer control and quality of life following anatomical radical retropubic prostatectomy: results at 10 years. J Urol 1994; 152 (5): 1831–6.
12. Frazier HA, Robertson JE, Humphrey PA et al. Is prostate specific antigen of clinical importance in evaluating outcome after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 1993; 149 (3): 516–8.
13. Hull GW, Rabbani F, Abbas F et al. Cancer control with radical prostatectomy alone in 1,000 consecutive patients. J Urol 2002; 167 (2 Pt. 1): 528–34.
14. Grossfeld GD, Chang JJ, Broering JM et al. Does the completeness of prostate sampling predict outcome for patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: data from the CAPSURE database. Urology 2000; 56 (3): 430–5.
15. Han M, Partin AW, Zahurak M et al. Biochemical (prostate specific antigen) recurrence probability following radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 2003; 169 (2): 517–23.
16. Amling CL, Blute ML, Bergstralh EJ et al. Long-term hazard of progression after radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer: continued risk of biochemical failure after 5 years. J Urol 2000; 164 (2): 101–5.
17. Roehl KA, Han M, Ramos CG et al. Cancer progression and survival rates following anatomical radical retropubic prostatectomy in 3,478 consecutive patients: long-term results. J Urol 2004; 172 (3): 910–14.
18. Porter CR, Gallina A, Kodama K et al. Prostate cancer-specific survival in men treated with hormonal therapy after failure of radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2007; 52 (2): 446–52.
19. Boorjian SA, Karnes RJ, Crispen PL et al. The impact of PSMs on mortality following radical prostatectomy during the prostate specific antigen era. J Urol 2010; 183: 1003–9.
20. Bianco FJ, Vickers AJ, Cronin AM et al. Variations among experienced surgeons in cancer control after open radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2010; 183: 977–82.
21. Uhlman MA, Sun L, Stackhouse DA et al. Tumor volume, tumor percentage involvement, or prostate volume: which is predictive of prostate-specific antigen recurrence? Urology 2010; 75: 460–6.
22. Pfitzenmaier J, Pahernik S, Tremmel T et al. Positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy: do they have an impact on biochemical or clinical progression? BJU Int 2008; 102: 1413–8.
23. Freedland SJ, Humphreys EB, Mangold LA et al. Death in patients with recurrent prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy: prostate-specific antigen doubling time subgroups and their associated contributions to all-cause mortality. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 1765–71.
24. Humphrey P. Gleason grading and prognostic factors in carcinoma of the prostate. Modern Pathol 2004; 17: 292–306.
25. Catalona WJ, Smith DS. 5-year tumor recurrence rates after anatomical radical retropubic prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Urol 1994; 152: 1837–42.
26. Lerner SE, Blute ML, Bergstralh EJ et al. Analysis of risk factors for progression in patients with pathologically confined prostate cancers after radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol 1996; 156: 137–43.
27. Epstein JI, Partin AW, Sauvageot J et al. Prediction of progression following radical prostatectomy. A multivariate analysis of 721 men with long-term follow-up. Am J Surg Pathol 1996; 20: 286–92.
28. Green GA, Hanlon AL, Al-Saleem T et al. A Gleason score of 7 predicts a worse outcome for prostate carcinoma patients treated with radiotherapy. Cancer 1998; 83: 971–6.
29. Zagars GK, Ayala AG, Von Eschenbach AC et al. The prognostic importance of Gleason grade in prostatic adenocarcinoma: a long-term follow-up study of 648 patients treated with radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1995; 31: 237–45.
30. Catalona WJ, Smith DS. 5-year tumor recurrence rates after anatomical radical retropubic prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Urol 1994; 152: 1837–42.
31. Gilliland FD, Hoffman RM, Hamilton A et al. Predicting extra capsular extension of prostate cancer in men treated with radical prostatectomy: results from the population based prostate cancer outcomes study. J Urol 1999; 162 (4): 1341–5.
32. Pan CC, Potter SR, Partin AW et al. The prognostic significance of tertiary Gleason patterns of higher grade in radical prostatectomy specimens: a proposal to modify the Gleason grading system. Am J Surg Pathol 2000; 24: 563–9.
33. Epstein JI, Allsbrook WC, Amin MB et al. ISUP Grading Committee. The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 2005; 29: 1228–42.
34. Egevad L, Granfors T, Karlberg L et al. Percent Gleason grade 4/5 as prognostic factor in prostate cancer diagnosed at transurethral resection. J Urol 2002; 168: 509–13.
35. Rasiah KK, Stricker PD, Haynes AM et al. Prognostic significance of Gleason pattern in patients with Gleason score 7 prostate carcinoma. Cancer 2003; 98: 2560–5.
36. Mosse CA, Magi-Galluzzi C, Tsuzuki T. The prognostic significance of tertiary Gleason pattern 5 in radical prostatectomy specimens. Am J Surg Pathol 2004; 28: 394–8.
37. Hattab EM, Koch MO, Eble JN et al. Tertiary Gleason pattern 5 is a powerful predictor of biochemical relapse in patients with Gleason score 7 prostatic adenocarcinoma. J Urol 2006; 175: 1695–9.
38. Harnden P, Shelley MD, Coles B et al. Should the Gleason grading system for prostate cancer be modified to account for high-grade tertiary components? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol 2007; 8: 411–9.
39. Sim HG, Telesca D, Culp SH et al. Tertiary Gleason pattern 5 in Gleason 7 prostate cancer predicts pathological stage and biochemical recurrence. J Urol 2008; 179: 1775–9.
40. Whittemore DE, Hick EJ, Carter MR et al. Significance of tertiary Gleason pattern 5 in Gleason score 7 radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol 2008; 179: 516–22.
41. Ruijter ET, Van De Kaa CA, Schalken JA et al. Histological grade heterogeneity in multifocal prostate cancer. Biological and clinical implications. J Pathol 1996; 180: 295–9.
42. Harnden P, Shelley MD, Coles B et al. Should the Gleason grading system for prostate cancer be modified to account for high-grade tertiary components? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol 2007; 8 (5): 411–9.
43. Patel AA, Chen MH, Renshaw AA et al. PSA failure following definitive treatment of prostate cancer having biopsy Gleason score 7 with tertiary grade 5. JAMA 2007; 298 (13): 1533–8.
44. Turker P, Bas E, Bozkurt S et al. Presence of high grade tertiary Gleason pattern upgrades the Gleason sum score and is inversely associated with biochemical recurrence-free survival. Urol Oncol 2011.
45. Hashine K, Yuasa A, Shinomori K et al. Tertiary Gleason pattern 5 and oncological outcomes after radical prostatectomy. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2011; 41 (4): 571–6.
46. Isbarn H, Ahyai SA, Chun FK et al. Prevalence of a tertiary Gleason grade and its impact on adverse histopathologic parameters in a contemporary radical prostatectomy series. Eur Urol 2009; 55 (2): 394–401.
47. Oort IM, Schout BM, Kiemeney LA et al. Does the tertiary Gleason pattern influence the PSA progression-free interval after retropubic radical prostatectomy for organ-confined prostate cancer? Eur Urology 2005; 48 (4): 572–6.
Авторы
И.Н.Огнерубова1, И.В.Поддубная1, В.Б.Матвеев2, О.Т.Хван2
1 Кафедра онкологии ГБОУ ДПО РМАПО Минздрава РФ, Москва
2 ФГБУ РОНЦ им. Н.Н.Блохина РАМН, Москва
1 Кафедра онкологии ГБОУ ДПО РМАПО Минздрава РФ, Москва
2 ФГБУ РОНЦ им. Н.Н.Блохина РАМН, Москва
________________________________________________
Цель портала OmniDoctor – предоставление профессиональной информации врачам, провизорам и фармацевтам.