Localized prostate cancer and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a retrospective, comparative study between pre- and post-operative Gleason scores

References

• Center of disease control and prevention. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/dcpc/data/men.htm; Accessed 28.08.2016.
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. Global Health Observatory (GHO) data: cancer mortality and morbidity. Available from: http://www.who.int/gho/ncd/mortality_morbidity/cancer_text/en/; Accessed 28.08.2016.
   Google Scholar
• Gnanapragasam VJ, Lophatananon A, Wright KA, et al. Improving clinical risk stratification at diagnosis in primary prostate cancer: a prognostic modelling study. PLoS Med. 2016;13:e1002063.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D’Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, et al. Pretreatment nomogram for prostate-specific antigen recurrence after radical prostatectomy or external-beam radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:168–172.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Briers E, et al. EAU guidelines 2016: guidelines on prostate cancer.
   Google Scholar
• Patel VR, Tully AS, Holmes R, et al. Robotic radical prostatectomy in the community setting - the learning curve and beyond: initial 200 cases. J Urol. 2005;174:269–272.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patel VR, Palmer KJ, Coughlin G, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: perioperative outcomes of 1500 cases. J Endourol. 2008;22:2299–2305.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mottrie A, Van Migem P, de Naeyer G, et al. Robot-assisted Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: oncologic and functional results of 184 cases. Eur Urol. 2007;52:746–750.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Epstein J. An update of the gleason grading system. J Urol. 2010;183:433–440.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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;298:1533.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trpkov K, Zhang J, Chan M, et al. Prostate cancer with tertiary Gleason pattern 5 in prostate needle biopsy: clinicopathologic findings and disease progression. Am J Surg Pathol. 2009;33:233.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McHugh ML. Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic. Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2012;22:276–282.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159–174.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ilic D, Neuberger MM, Djulbegovic M, et al. Screening for prostate cancer. Cochrane Database of Syst Rev. 2013;1:CD004720.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schröder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, et al. Screening and prostate cancer mortality: results of the european randomised study of screening for prostate cancer (ERSPC) at 13 years of follow-up. Lancet. 2014;384:2027–2035.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jalón Monzón A, Escaf Barmadah S, Viño Alonso LM, et al. Current aspects of prostate cancer screening. Semergen. 2016;S1138–3593:30134–30134.
   Google Scholar
• Andriole GL, Crawford ED, Grubb RL, et al. Prostate cancer screening in the randomized prostate, lung, colorectal, and ovarian cancer screening trial: mortality results after 13 years of follow-up. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2012;104:125–132.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tavangar SM, Raz A, Mashayekhi R. Correlation between prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy Gleason gradings of 111 cases with prostatic adenocarcinoma. Urol J. 2004;1:246–249.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Shen BY, Tsui KH, Chang PL, et al. Correlation between the Gleason scores of needle biopsies and radical prostatectomy specimens. Chang Gung Med J. 2003;26:919–924.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pessoa RR, Viana PC, Mattedi RL, et al. Value of 3-tesla multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and targeted biopsy for improved risk stratification in patients considered for active surveillance. BJU Int. 2017;119:535–542.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Emberton M. An end to the phenomenon of ‘upgrading’ in early prostate cancer? BJU Int. 2017;119:506–507.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nassiri N, Margolis DJ, Natarajan S, et al. Targeted biopsy to detect Gleason score upgrading during active surveillance for men with low- vs. intermediate-risk prostate cancer. J Urol. 2017;197:632–639.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schoots IG, Petrides N, Giganti F, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in active surveillance of prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol. 2015;67:627–636.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khoddami M, Khademi Y, Aghdam MK, et al. Correlation between Gleason scores in needle biopsy and orresponding radical prostatectomy specimens: a twelve-year review. Iran J Pathol. 2016;11:120–126.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Köksal IT, Ozcan F, Kadioglu TC, et al. Discrepancy between Gleason scores of biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens. Eur Urol. 2000;37:670–674.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar