Pattern of Biopsy Gleason Grade Group 5 (4 + 5 vs 5 + 4 vs 5 + 5) Predicts Survival After Radical Prostatectomy or External Beam Radiation Therapy

Standard

Pattern of Biopsy Gleason Grade Group 5 (4 + 5 vs 5 + 4 vs 5 + 5) Predicts Survival After Radical Prostatectomy or External Beam Radiation Therapy. / Wenzel, Mike; Würnschimmel, Christoph; Chierigo, Francesco; Mori, Keiichiro; Tian, Zhe; Terrone, Carlo; Shariat, Shahrokh F; Saad, Fred; Tilki, Derya; Graefen, Markus; Mandel, Philipp; Roos, Frederik C; Chun, Felix K H; Karakiewicz, Pierre I.

In: EUR UROL FOCUS, Vol. 8, No. 3, 05.2022, p. 710-717.

Research output: SCORING: Contribution to journalSCORING: Journal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Wenzel, M, Würnschimmel, C, Chierigo, F, Mori, K, Tian, Z, Terrone, C, Shariat, SF, Saad, F, Tilki, D, Graefen, M, Mandel, P, Roos, FC, Chun, FKH & Karakiewicz, PI 2022, 'Pattern of Biopsy Gleason Grade Group 5 (4 + 5 vs 5 + 4 vs 5 + 5) Predicts Survival After Radical Prostatectomy or External Beam Radiation Therapy', EUR UROL FOCUS, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 710-717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2021.04.011

APA

Wenzel, M., Würnschimmel, C., Chierigo, F., Mori, K., Tian, Z., Terrone, C., Shariat, S. F., Saad, F., Tilki, D., Graefen, M., Mandel, P., Roos, F. C., Chun, F. K. H., & Karakiewicz, P. I. (2022). Pattern of Biopsy Gleason Grade Group 5 (4 + 5 vs 5 + 4 vs 5 + 5) Predicts Survival After Radical Prostatectomy or External Beam Radiation Therapy. EUR UROL FOCUS, 8(3), 710-717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2021.04.011

Vancouver

Bibtex

@article{29c487a422664ea6868e27205a917bad,
title = "Pattern of Biopsy Gleason Grade Group 5 (4 + 5 vs 5 + 4 vs 5 + 5) Predicts Survival After Radical Prostatectomy or External Beam Radiation Therapy",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: Previous cancer-specific mortality (CSM) analyses for different Gleason patterns in Gleason grade group (GGG) 5 cancer were limited by sample size.OBJECTIVE: To test for differences in CSM according to biopsy GG 5 patterns (4 + 5 vs 5 + 4 vs 5 + 5) among patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) or external beam radiation therapy (EBRT).DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database treated with RP and EBRT (2004-2016) were identified and stratified according to Gleason 4 + 5 versus 5 + 4 versus 5 + 5.INTERVENTION: RP or EBRT.OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSES: Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox regression models predicting CSM were constructed.RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Of 17 263 eligible patients with GG 5 cancer at biopsy (RP: n = 7208; EBRT: n = 10 055), 12 705 had Gleason 4 + 5, 3302 had Gleason 5 + 4, and 1256 had Gleason 5 + 5 disease. Median age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) at diagnosis, and advanced cT and cN stages significantly differed by Gleason pattern (Gleason 4 + 5 vs 5 + 4 vs 5 + 5; all p < 0.001). The 10-yr CSM rate was 18.2% for Gleason 4 + 5, 28.0% for Gleason 5 + 4, and 39.1% for Gleason 5 + 5 (p < 0.001). In multivariable analyses for the entire cohort adjusted for PSA, age at diagnosis, and cT and cN stage, Gleason 5 + 4 and Gleason 5 + 5 were associated with 1.6- and 2.2-fold higher CSM, respectively, relative to Gleason 4 + 5. In addition, Gleason 5 + 4 and Gleason 5 + 5 were associated with 1.6- and 2.5-fold, and 1.5- and 2.1-fold higher CSM rates in the RP and EBRT subgroups, respectively, relative to Gleason 4 + 5 (all p < 0.001).CONCLUSIONS: For patients with biopsy GG 5 prostate cancer treated with RP or EBRT, there are important CSM differences by Gleason pattern (4 + 5 vs 5 + 4 vs 5 + 5). Ideally, the individual Gleason pattern should be considered in pretreatment risk stratification.PATIENT SUMMARY: For patients with grade 5 prostate cancer, we found differences in cancer-specific death rates according to the pattern of abnormal cells in the prostate, called the Gleason score. The highest death rate was found for a Gleason pattern score of 5 + 5, followed by Gleason 5 + 4 and then Gleason 4 + 5. These differences were observed for both patients who were treated with prostate removal and patients who underwent radiotherapy.",
author = "Mike Wenzel and Christoph W{\"u}rnschimmel and Francesco Chierigo and Keiichiro Mori and Zhe Tian and Carlo Terrone and Shariat, {Shahrokh F} and Fred Saad and Derya Tilki and Markus Graefen and Philipp Mandel and Roos, {Frederik C} and Chun, {Felix K H} and Karakiewicz, {Pierre I}",
note = "Copyright {\textcopyright} 2021. Published by Elsevier B.V.",
year = "2022",
month = may,
doi = "10.1016/j.euf.2021.04.011",
language = "English",
volume = "8",
pages = "710--717",
journal = "EUR UROL FOCUS",
issn = "2405-4569",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Pattern of Biopsy Gleason Grade Group 5 (4 + 5 vs 5 + 4 vs 5 + 5) Predicts Survival After Radical Prostatectomy or External Beam Radiation Therapy

AU - Wenzel, Mike

AU - Würnschimmel, Christoph

AU - Chierigo, Francesco

AU - Mori, Keiichiro

AU - Tian, Zhe

AU - Terrone, Carlo

AU - Shariat, Shahrokh F

AU - Saad, Fred

AU - Tilki, Derya

AU - Graefen, Markus

AU - Mandel, Philipp

AU - Roos, Frederik C

AU - Chun, Felix K H

AU - Karakiewicz, Pierre I

N1 - Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier B.V.

PY - 2022/5

Y1 - 2022/5

N2 - BACKGROUND: Previous cancer-specific mortality (CSM) analyses for different Gleason patterns in Gleason grade group (GGG) 5 cancer were limited by sample size.OBJECTIVE: To test for differences in CSM according to biopsy GG 5 patterns (4 + 5 vs 5 + 4 vs 5 + 5) among patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) or external beam radiation therapy (EBRT).DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database treated with RP and EBRT (2004-2016) were identified and stratified according to Gleason 4 + 5 versus 5 + 4 versus 5 + 5.INTERVENTION: RP or EBRT.OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSES: Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox regression models predicting CSM were constructed.RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Of 17 263 eligible patients with GG 5 cancer at biopsy (RP: n = 7208; EBRT: n = 10 055), 12 705 had Gleason 4 + 5, 3302 had Gleason 5 + 4, and 1256 had Gleason 5 + 5 disease. Median age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) at diagnosis, and advanced cT and cN stages significantly differed by Gleason pattern (Gleason 4 + 5 vs 5 + 4 vs 5 + 5; all p < 0.001). The 10-yr CSM rate was 18.2% for Gleason 4 + 5, 28.0% for Gleason 5 + 4, and 39.1% for Gleason 5 + 5 (p < 0.001). In multivariable analyses for the entire cohort adjusted for PSA, age at diagnosis, and cT and cN stage, Gleason 5 + 4 and Gleason 5 + 5 were associated with 1.6- and 2.2-fold higher CSM, respectively, relative to Gleason 4 + 5. In addition, Gleason 5 + 4 and Gleason 5 + 5 were associated with 1.6- and 2.5-fold, and 1.5- and 2.1-fold higher CSM rates in the RP and EBRT subgroups, respectively, relative to Gleason 4 + 5 (all p < 0.001).CONCLUSIONS: For patients with biopsy GG 5 prostate cancer treated with RP or EBRT, there are important CSM differences by Gleason pattern (4 + 5 vs 5 + 4 vs 5 + 5). Ideally, the individual Gleason pattern should be considered in pretreatment risk stratification.PATIENT SUMMARY: For patients with grade 5 prostate cancer, we found differences in cancer-specific death rates according to the pattern of abnormal cells in the prostate, called the Gleason score. The highest death rate was found for a Gleason pattern score of 5 + 5, followed by Gleason 5 + 4 and then Gleason 4 + 5. These differences were observed for both patients who were treated with prostate removal and patients who underwent radiotherapy.

AB - BACKGROUND: Previous cancer-specific mortality (CSM) analyses for different Gleason patterns in Gleason grade group (GGG) 5 cancer were limited by sample size.OBJECTIVE: To test for differences in CSM according to biopsy GG 5 patterns (4 + 5 vs 5 + 4 vs 5 + 5) among patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) or external beam radiation therapy (EBRT).DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database treated with RP and EBRT (2004-2016) were identified and stratified according to Gleason 4 + 5 versus 5 + 4 versus 5 + 5.INTERVENTION: RP or EBRT.OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSES: Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox regression models predicting CSM were constructed.RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Of 17 263 eligible patients with GG 5 cancer at biopsy (RP: n = 7208; EBRT: n = 10 055), 12 705 had Gleason 4 + 5, 3302 had Gleason 5 + 4, and 1256 had Gleason 5 + 5 disease. Median age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) at diagnosis, and advanced cT and cN stages significantly differed by Gleason pattern (Gleason 4 + 5 vs 5 + 4 vs 5 + 5; all p < 0.001). The 10-yr CSM rate was 18.2% for Gleason 4 + 5, 28.0% for Gleason 5 + 4, and 39.1% for Gleason 5 + 5 (p < 0.001). In multivariable analyses for the entire cohort adjusted for PSA, age at diagnosis, and cT and cN stage, Gleason 5 + 4 and Gleason 5 + 5 were associated with 1.6- and 2.2-fold higher CSM, respectively, relative to Gleason 4 + 5. In addition, Gleason 5 + 4 and Gleason 5 + 5 were associated with 1.6- and 2.5-fold, and 1.5- and 2.1-fold higher CSM rates in the RP and EBRT subgroups, respectively, relative to Gleason 4 + 5 (all p < 0.001).CONCLUSIONS: For patients with biopsy GG 5 prostate cancer treated with RP or EBRT, there are important CSM differences by Gleason pattern (4 + 5 vs 5 + 4 vs 5 + 5). Ideally, the individual Gleason pattern should be considered in pretreatment risk stratification.PATIENT SUMMARY: For patients with grade 5 prostate cancer, we found differences in cancer-specific death rates according to the pattern of abnormal cells in the prostate, called the Gleason score. The highest death rate was found for a Gleason pattern score of 5 + 5, followed by Gleason 5 + 4 and then Gleason 4 + 5. These differences were observed for both patients who were treated with prostate removal and patients who underwent radiotherapy.

U2 - 10.1016/j.euf.2021.04.011

DO - 10.1016/j.euf.2021.04.011

M3 - SCORING: Journal article

C2 - 33933420

VL - 8

SP - 710

EP - 717

JO - EUR UROL FOCUS

JF - EUR UROL FOCUS

SN - 2405-4569

IS - 3

ER -