SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

REFERENCES

  • 1
    Rubin MA, Bismar TA, Curtis S, Montie JE. Prostate needle biopsy reporting: how are the surgical members of the Society of Urologic Oncology using pathology reports to guide treatment of prostate cancer patients? Am J Surg Pathol 2004; 28: 94652
  • 2
    Epstein JI, Partin AW, Sauvageot J, Walsh PC. Prediction of progression following radical prostatectomy. A multivariate analysis of 721 men with long-term follow-up. Am J Surg Pathol 1996; 20: 28692
  • 3
    Dong F, Jones JS, Stephenson AJ, Magi-Galluzzi C, Reuther AM, Klein EA. Prostate cancer volume at biopsy predicts clinically significant upgrading. J Urol 2008; 179: 896900
  • 4
    Moussa AS, Li J, Soriano M, Klein EA, Dong F, Jones JS. Prostate biopsy clinical and pathological variables that predict significant grading changes in patients with intermediate and high grade prostate cancer. BJU Int 2009; 103: 438
  • 5
    Chun FK, Steuber T, Erbersdobler A et al. Development and internal validation of a nomogram predicting the probability of prostate cancer Gleason sum upgrading between biopsy and radical prostatectomy pathology. Eur Urol 2006; 49: 8206
  • 6
    Chun FK, Briganti A, Shariat SF et al. Significant upgrading affects a third of men diagnosed with prostate cancer: predictive nomogram and internal validation. BJU Int 2006; 98: 32934
  • 7
    Capitanio U, Karakiewicz PI, Valiquette L et al. Biopsy core number represents one of foremost predictors of clinically significant Gleason sum upgrading in patients with low-risk prostate cancer. Urology 2009; 73: 108791
  • 8
    Sakr WA, Tefilli MV, Grignon DJ et al. Gleason score 7 prostate cancer: a heterogeneous entity? Correlation with pathologic parameters and disease-free survival. Urology 2000; 56: 7304
  • 9
    Oesterling JE, Brendler CB, Epstein JI, Kimball AW Jr, Walsh PC. Correlation of clinical stage, serum prostatic acid phosphatase and preoperative Gleason grade with final pathological stage in 275 patients with clinically localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate. J Urol 1987; 138: 928
  • 10
    Schmid H, Oberpenning F, Pummer K. Diagnosis and staging of prostatic carcinoma: what is really necessary? Urol Int 1999; 63: 5761
  • 11
    Herman CM, Kattan MW, Ohori M, Scardino PT, Wheeler TM. Primary Gleason pattern as a predictor of disease progression in Gleason score 7 prostate cancer: a multivariate analysis of 823 men treated with radical prostatectomy. Am J Surg Pathol 2001; 25: 65760
  • 12
    Partin AW, Kattan MW, Subong EN et al. Combination of prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage, and Gleason score to predict pathological stage of localized prostate cancer. A multi-institutional update. JAMA 1997; 277: 144551
  • 13
    Fukagai T, Namiki T, Namiki H, Carlile RG, Shimada M, Yoshida H. Discrepancies between Gleason scores of needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens. Pathol Int 2001; 51: 36470
  • 14
    Altay B, Kefi A, Nazli O, Killi R, Semerci B, Akar I. Comparison of Gleason scores from sextant prostate biopsies and radical prostatectomy specimens. Urol Int 2001; 67: 148
  • 15
    Montesino SM, Jimenez AJ, Reparaz RB et al. Correlation between Gleason score on prostate biopsies diagnostic of adenocarcinoma and radical prostatectomy specimens. Arch Esp Urol 2004; 57: 51923
  • 16
    Arellano L, Castillo O, Metrebian E. Concordance of Gleason histological scoring for prostatic cancer in needle biopsies and the surgical piece obtained during radical prostatectomy. Rev Med Chil 2004; 132: 9718
  • 17
    Cookson MS, Fleshner NE, Soloway SM, Fair WR. Correlation between Gleason score of needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimen: accuracy and clinical implications. J Urol 1997; 157: 55962
  • 18
    Bostwick DG. Grading prostate cancer. Am J Clin Pathol 1994; 102: S3856
  • 19
    Di Loreto C, Fitzpatrick B, Underhill S et al. Correlation between visual clues, objective architectural features, and interobserver agreement in prostate cancer. Am J Clin Pathol 1991; 96: 705
  • 20
    Carlson GD, Calvanese CB, Kahane H, Epstein JI. Accuracy of biopsy Gleason scores from a large uropathology laboratory: use of a diagnostic protocol to minimize observer variability. Urology 1998; 51: 5259
  • 21
    San Francisco IF, DeWolf WC, Rosen S, Upton M, Olumi AF. Extended prostate needle biopsy improves concordance of Gleason grading between prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2003; 169: 13640
  • 22
    Mian BM, Lehr DJ, Moore CK et al. Role of prostate biopsy schemes in accurate prediction of Gleason scores. Urology 2006; 67: 37983
  • 23
    King CR, McNeal JE, Gill H, Presti JC Jr. Extended prostate biopsy scheme improves reliability of Gleason grading: implications for radiotherapy patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004; 59: 38691
  • 24
    Kojima M, Troncoso P, Babaian RJ. Use of prostate-specific antigen and tumor Volume in predicting needle biopsy grading error. Urology 1995; 45: 80712
  • 25
    D’Amico AV, Renshaw AA, Arsenault L, Schultz D, Richie JP. Clinical predictors of upgrading to Gleason grade 4 or 5 disease at radical prostatectomy: potential implications for patient selection for radiation and androgen suppression therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999; 45: 8416
  • 26
    King CR. Patterns of prostate cancer biopsy grading: trends and clinical implications. Int J Cancer 2000; 90: 30511
  • 27
    Gregori A, Vieweg J, Dahm P, Paulson DF. Comparison of ultrasound-guided biopsies and prostatectomy specimens: predictive accuracy of Gleason score and tumor site. Urol Int 2001; 66: 6671
  • 28
    King CR, Patel DA, Terris MK. Prostate biopsy Volume indices do not predict for significant Gleason upgrading. Am J Clin Oncol 2005; 28: 1259
  • 29
    Djavan B, Kadesky K, Klopukh B, Marberger M, Roehrborn CG. Gleason scores from prostate biopsies obtained with 18-gauge biopsy needles poorly predict Gleason scores of radical prostatectomy specimens. Eur Urol 1998; 33: 26170
  • 30
    O’Dowd GJ, Veltri RW, Orozco R, Miller MC, Oesterling JE. Update on the appropriate staging evaluation for newly diagnosed prostate cancer. J Urol 1997; 158: 68798