Change in the risk stratification of prostate cancer after Slide Review by a uropathologist: the experience of a reference center for the treatment of prostate cancer

Imagem de Miniatura
Arquivos
art_CAMARA-LOPES_Change_in_the_risk_stratification_of_prostate_cancer_2014.PDF (775.59 KB)
Citações na Scopus
1
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2014
DOI
SciELO
Scopus
Web of Science
PubMed
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
BRAZILIAN SOC UROL
Autores
CAMARA-LOPES, George
MARTA, Gustavo Nader
LEITE, Elton Trigo Teixeira
SIQUEIRA, Gabriela Silva Moreira de
HANNA, Samir Abdallah
SILVA, Joao Luis Fernandes da
CAMARA-LOPES, L. H.
Citação
INTERNATIONAL BRAZ J UROL, v.40, n.4, p.454-459, 2014
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
Introduction: Brachytherapy is an option for treating low-risk prostate cancer (PC). Biochemical control of low-risk disease can reach 95%. The practice advocated is that a review of prostate biopsies should be mandatory before choosing the best treatment for patients with PC. Our objective was to evaluate the change in PC risk after review of a prostate biopsy by an experienced uropathologist at a reference hospital. Materials and Methods: Between December 2003 and August 2012, 182 men were referred to our institution for brachytherapy to treat PC. Their slides were reviewed by the same uropathologist. Results and Discussion: Classification risk disagreement occurred in 71 (39%) cases, including one in which no tumor was observed. The main cause of risk change was related to the Gleason score (GS), with 57 (81.4%) cases upgraded to GS 7 or 8. Tumor volume was also compared, although only the number of fragments was reported in most original reports. The concordance of the number of cores affected by tumor was 43.9%, and in 49% of the cases, the number was decreased by the uropathologist. Perineural invasion (PNI) was reported in one quarter of original reports, and the agreement was 58%. Conclusion: Slide review by an uropathologist remains essential at reference radiotherapy centers for the treatment of PC. The change in PC risk evaluation is mainly due to the GS, but tumor volume and PNI, which are important for the characterization of tumor aggressiveness, are also misinterpreted and could drive a change in the therapy choice.
Palavras-chave
Prostatic Neoplasms, Brachytherapy, Androgens
URI
https://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/8863
Referências
  1. Albertsen PC, 1998, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V280, P975, DOI 10.1001/jama.280.11.975
  2. Antunes Alberto A, 2007, Int Braz J Urol, V33, P477, DOI 10.1590/S1677-55382007000400004
  3. Antunes AA, 2007, INT BRAZ J UROL, V33, P484
  4. Billis A, 2010, INT BRAZ J UROL, V36, P439, DOI 10.1590/S1677-55382010000400007
  5. Billis A, 2010, INT BRAZ J UROL, V36, P448
  6. Billis A, 2008, J UROLOGY, V180, P548, DOI 10.1016/j.juro.2008.04.018
  7. Billis A, 2008, J UROLOGY, V180, P552
  8. Blute ML, 2000, J UROLOGY, V164, P1591, DOI 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67035-8
  9. BOSTWICK DG, 1994, AM J SURG PATHOL, V18, P796, DOI 10.1097/00000478-199408000-00006
  10. Bottke D, 2013, EUR UROL, V64, P193, DOI 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.03.029
  11. Brimo F, 2010, J UROLOGY, V184, P126, DOI 10.1016/j.juro.2010.03.021
  12. Cheng L, 2005, J UROLOGY, V174, P898, DOI 10.1097/01.ju.0000169134.28610.66
  13. Cozzi G, 2013, SCAND J UROL, V47, P443, DOI 10.3109/21681805.2013.776106
  14. Crook J, 2011, CANCER RADIOTHER, V15, P230, DOI 10.1016/j.canrad.2011.01.004
  15. D'Amico AV, 2003, J CLIN ONCOL, V21, P2163, DOI 10.1200/JCO.2003.01.075
  16. D'Amico AV, 2000, J UROLOGY, V163, P1797, DOI 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67546-5
  17. D'Amico AV, 1998, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V280, P969, DOI 10.1001/jama.280.11.969
  18. D'Souza N, 2012, CAN J UROL, V19, P6256
  19. Epstein JI, 1996, AM J SURG PATHOL, V20, P851, DOI 10.1097/00000478-199607000-00008
  20. Epstein JI, 2000, AM J SURG PATHOL, V24, P477, DOI 10.1097/00000478-200004000-00001
  21. Epstein JI, 2005, AM J SURG PATHOL, V29, P1228, DOI 10.1097/01.pas.0000173646.99337.b1
  22. Glaessgen A, 2004, J UROLOGY, V171, P664, DOI 10.1097/01.ju.0000108198.98598.00
  23. Goodman M, 2012, PROSTATE, V72, P1389, DOI 10.1002/pros.22484
  24. Grimm P, 2012, BJU INT, V109, P22, DOI 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10827.x
  25. Gupta D, 2000, AM J SURG PATHOL, V24, P280, DOI 10.1097/00000478-200002000-00014
  26. Katz B, 2012, INT BRAZ J UROL, V38, P760, DOI 10.1590/1677-553820133806760
  27. Katz B, 2013, UROL ONCOL-SEMIN ORI, V31, P175, DOI 10.1016/j.urolonc.2010.11.008
  28. Kishimoto R, 2012, WORLD J UROL, V30, P375, DOI 10.1007/s00345-011-0738-4
  29. Leite KRM, 2009, INT J RADIAT ONCOL, V73, P353, DOI 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.04.039
  30. Loeb S, 2010, BJU INT, V105, P1510, DOI 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08845.x
  31. Mikami Y, 2003, HUM PATHOL, V34, P658, DOI 10.1016/S0046-8177(03)00191-6
  32. Ozdamar S. O., 1996, International Urology and Nephrology, V28, P73, DOI 10.1007/BF02550141
  33. Renshaw AA, 2003, ARCH PATHOL LAB MED, V127, P1007
  34. Sooriakumaran P, 2005, CLIN ONCOL-UK, V17, P655, DOI 10.1016/j.clon.2005.06.011
  35. Wurzer JC, 1998, CANCER, V83, P753, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19980815)83:4<753::AID-CNCR18>3.0.CO;2-R

Coleções
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - FM/MCG
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - HC/ICHC
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - LIM/55
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - ODS/03