Heterogeneity of risk within Gleason 4 + 4, 4 + 5 and 5 + 4 prostate cancer

References

• D’Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA. 1998;280:969–974. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9749478
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bastian PJ, Boorjian SA, Bossi A, et al. High-risk prostate cancer: from definition to contemporary management. Eur Urol. 2012;61:1096–1106. Vol.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yossepowitch O, Eggener SE, Bianco FJ, et al. Radical prostatectomy for clinically localized, high risk prostate cancer: critical analysis of risk assessment methods. J Urol. 2007;178:493–499; discussion 499.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stephenson AJ, Kattan MW, Eastham JA, et al. Prostate cancer-specific mortality after radical prostatectomy for patients treated in the prostate-specific antigen era. JCO. 2009;27:4300–4305.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eggener SE, Scardino PT, Walsh PC, et al. Predicting 15-year prostate cancer specific mortality after radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2011;185:869–875. Available from: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=4058776&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moschini M, Sharma V, Zattoni F, et al. Risk stratification of pN + prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy from a large single institutional series with long-term follow-up. J Urol. 2015;195. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0022534715055299
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schröder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, et al. Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:1320–1328. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19297566
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooperberg MR, Cowan J, Broering JM, et al. High-risk prostate cancer in the United States, 1990-2007. World J Urol. 2008;26:2118. Available from: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2948572&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fossati N, Passoni NMNM, Moschini M, et al. Impact of stage migration and practice changes on high-risk prostate cancer: results from patients treated with radical prostatectomy over the last two decades. BJU Int. 2015;117. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25787671
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pierorazio PM, Ross AE, Han M, et al. Evolution of the clinical presentation of men undergoing radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2012;109:988–993. Available from: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=3235267&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joniau S, Briganti A, Gontero P, et al. Stratification of high-risk prostate cancer into prognostic categories: a European multi-institutional study. Eur Urol. 2015;67:157–164. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24486307
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sundi D, Wang VM, Pierorazio PM, et al. Very-high-risk localized prostate cancer: definition and outcomes. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2014;17:57–63. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24189998
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooperberg MR, Pasta DJ, Elkin EP, et al. The University of California, San Francisco Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment score: a straightforward and reliable preoperative predictor of disease recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2005;173:1938–1942.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moschini M, Spahn M, Mattei A, et al. Incorporation of tissue-based genomic biomarkers into localized prostate cancer clinics. BMC Med. 2016;14:67. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27044421
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spahn M, Boxler S, Joniau S, et al. What is the need for prostatic biomarkers in prostate cancer management? Curr Urol Rep. 2015;16:70. Available from: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=4534510&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moschini M, Fossati N, Abdollah F, et al. Determinants of long-term survival of patients with locally advanced prostate cancer: the role of extensive pelvic lymph node dissection. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2015;19:63–67. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26553644.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Epstein JI, Zelefsky MJ, Sjoberg DD, et al. A contemporary prostate cancer grading system: a validated alternative to the Gleason Score. Eur Urol. 2016;69:428–435. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0302283815005576
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mellinger GT, Gleason D, Bailar J. The histology and prognosis of prostatic cancer. J Urol. 1967;97:331
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gleason DF, Mellinger GT. Prediction of prognosis for prostatic adenocarcinoma by combined histological grading and clinical staging. J Urol. 1974;111:58
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Epstein JI, Allsbrook WC, Amin MB, et al. The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2005;29:1228–1242. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16096414
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Epstein JI, Egevad L, Amin MB, et al. The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma: definition of grading patterns and proposal for a new grading system. Am J Surg Pathol. 2016;40:244–252.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spratt DE, Cole AI, Palapattu G.S., et al. Independent surgical validation of the new prostate cancer grade grouping system. BJU Int. 2016;118:763–769. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/bju.13488.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spratt DE, Jackson WC, Abugharib A, et al. Independent validation of the prognostic capacity of the ISUP prostate cancer grade grouping system for radiation treated patients with long-term follow-up. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2016;19:292–297. Available from: http://www.nature.com/doifinder/10.1038/P.Ca.n.2016.18
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loeb S, Folkvaljon Y, Robinson D, et al. Evaluation of the 2015 Gleason Grade Groups in a nationwide population-based cohort. Eur Urol. 2016;69:1135–1141. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0302283815012075
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mathieu R, Moschini M, Beyer B, et al. Prognostic value of the new Grade Groups in Prostate Cancer: a multi-institutional European validation study. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Sabolch A, Feng FY, Daignault-Newton S, et al. Gleason Pattern 5 is the greatest risk factor for clinical failure and death from prostate cancer after dose-escalated radiation therapy and hormonal ablation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011;81:e351–60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nanda A, Chen MH, Renshaw AA, et al. Gleason Pattern 5 prostate cancer: further stratification of patients with high-risk disease and implications for future randomized trials. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009;74:1419–1423.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Makino T, Miwa S, Koshida K. Impact of Gleason Pattern 5 on outcomes of patients with prostate cancer and iodine-125 prostate brachytherapy. Prostate Int. 2016;4:152–155.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frandsen J, Orton A, SH.R.ieve D, et al. Risk of death from prostate cancer with and without definitive local therapy when Gleason Pattern 5 is present: a surveillance, epidemiology, and end results analysis. Cureus. 2017;9:e1453.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang C, Kishan AU, Kamrava M, et al. External beam radiation therapy with a brachytherapy boost versus radical prostatectomy in Gleason Pattern 5 prostate cancer: a population-based cohort study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017;98:1045–1052.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stroup SP, Moreira DM, Chen Z, et al. Biopsy detected Gleason Pattern 5 is associated with recurrence, metastasis and mortality in a cohort of men with high risk prostate cancer. J Urol. 2018;198:1309–1315.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ham WS, Chalfin HJ, Feng Z, et al. New prostate cancer grading system predicts long-term survival following surgery for Gleason Score 8–10 prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2017;71:907–912.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huynh MA, Chen M-H, Wu J, et al. Gleason Score 3 + 5 or 5 + 3 versus 4 + 4 prostate cancer: the risk of death. Eur Urol. 2016;69:976–979.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delahunt B, Egevad L, Grignon DJ, et al. Prostate cancer grading: recent developments and future directions. BJU Int. 2016;117:7–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horwitz EcM, et al. NCCN Guidelines - Prostate Cancer. 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Erickson A, Sandeman K, Lahdensuo K, et al. New prostate cancer grade grouping system predicts survival after radical prostatectomy. Hum Pathol. 2018;75:159–166.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grogan J, Gupta R, Mahon KL, et al. Predictive value of the 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology grading system for prostate cancer in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy with long-term follow-up. BJU Int. 2017;120:651–658.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dell'Oglio P, Karnes RJ, Gandaglia G, et al. The new prostate cancer grading system does not improve prediction of clinical recurrence after radical prostatectomy: results of a large, two-center validation study. Prostate. 2017;77:263–273.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gejerman G, Ciccone P, Goldstein M, et al. US preventive services task force prostate-specific antigen screening guidelines result in higher Gleason score diagnoses. Investig Clin Urol. 2017;58:423–428.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moyer VA, on behalf of the US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for prostate cancer: U.S. preventive services task force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2012;157:120–134. Jul
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar