Forskning
Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Region Hovedstaden - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital
Udgivet

Prognostic implications of 2005 Gleason grade modification. Population-based study of biochemical recurrence following radical prostatectomy

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

DOI

  1. Prognostic value of biochemical variables for survival after surgery for metastatic bone disease of the extremities

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  2. Importance of margin width in breast-conserving treatment of early breast cancer

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  3. Improved survival with early adjuvant chemotherapy after colonic resection for stage III colonic cancer: A nationwide study

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  4. Active surveillance for clinically localized prostate cancer--a systematic review

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  1. Active Surveillance Versus Radical Prostatectomy in Favorable-risk Localized Prostate Cancer

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  2. Risk of cardiovascular events in men treated for prostate cancer compared with prostate cancer-free men

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  3. Prostate Artery Embolization for Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms in Men Unfit for Surgery

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Vis graf over relationer

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of the 2005 modification of the Gleason classification on risk of biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP).

PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden (PCBaSe), 2,574 men assessed with the original Gleason classification and 1,890 men assessed with the modified Gleason classification, diagnosed between 2003 and 2007, underwent primary RP. Histopathology was reported according to the Gleason Grading Groups (GGG): GGG1 = Gleason score (GS) 6, GGG2 = GS 7(3 + 4), GGG3 = GS 7(4 + 3), GGG4 = GS 8 and GGG5 = GS 9-10. Cumulative incidence and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to assess difference in BCR.

RESULTS: The cumulative incidence of BCR was lower using the modified compared to the original classification: GGG2 (16% vs. 23%), GGG3 (21% vs. 35%) and GGG4 (18% vs. 34%), respectively. Risk of BCR was lower for modified versus original classification, GGG2 Hazard ratio (HR) 0.66, (95%CI 0.49-0.88), GGG3 HR 0.57 (95%CI 0.38-0.88) and GGG4 HR 0.53 (95%CI 0.29-0.94).

CONCLUSION: Due to grade migration following the 2005 Gleason modification, outcome after RP are more favourable. Consequently, outcomes from historical studies cannot directly be applied to a contemporary setting. J. Surg. Oncol. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftJournal of Surgical Oncology
Vol/bind114
Udgave nummer6
Sider (fra-til)664-670
ISSN0022-4790
DOI
StatusUdgivet - nov. 2016

ID: 48938098