Urology Journal

ISSN: 1735-1308

November-December2018
Vol. 15 No. 6 (2018)

Does the New Proposal for Prostate Cancer Grading Correlate With CAPRA Score?

Urology Journal, Vol. 15 No. 6 (2018), , Page 355-358
https://doi.org/10.22037/uj.v0i0.4607

Abstract

Purpose: To determine if there is a correlation between the newly proposed Gleason grading system by the International Society of Urological Pathology and the Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) score.
Material and Methods: The records of all patients that underwent radical prostatectomy at our hospital between 2007 and 2013 were retrospectively reviewed. The study parameters included patient demographics, the percentage of pre-operative prostate biopsies positive for PCa, biopsy Gleason Score (GS), and pre- and post-operative PSA values.
Result: The study included 146 patients with complete medical records and follow-up data. Mean age of the patients
was 66.6 ± 6.08 years. According to the newly proposed Gleason grading system, 97 (66.4%) patients were grade 1, 20 (13.7%) were grade 2, 8 (5.5%) were grade 3, 11 (7.5%) were grade 4, and 10 (6.8%) were grade 5. The distribution of CAPRA scores was as follows: 1: n = 43 (29.5%); 2: n = 53 (36.3%); 3: n = 22 (15.1%); 4: n = 14 (9.6%); 5: n = 8 (5.5%); 6: n = 4 (2.7%); 7: n = 1 (0.7%); 8: n = 1 (0.7%). Correlation analysis showed that the
CAPRA score was significantly correlated with GS based on the newly proposed Gleason grading system (Correlation
Coefficient=0.361, P < 0.001).
Conclusion: As a strong correlation was noted between these 2 independent grading systems, we think clinicians that seek to predict the prognosis in PCa patients should take into consideration both the newly proposed ISUP grading system and the CAPRA score.

How to Cite

Isikay, L., Tonyali, S., & Aydog, G. (2018). Does the New Proposal for Prostate Cancer Grading Correlate With CAPRA Score?. Urology Journal, 15(6), 355-358. https://doi.org/10.22037/uj.v0i0.4607

References

REFERENCES

Heidenreich A, Bastian PJ, Bellmunt J, et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent-update 2013. Eur Urol. 2014;65(1):124-37.

Johnson ME, Zaorsky NG, Martin JM, et al. Patient reported outcomes among treatment modalities for prostate cancer. Can J Urol. 2016;23(6):8535-45.

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(2):244-52.

Khochikar M. Newly Proposed Prognostic Grade Group System for Prostate Cancer: Genesis, Utility and its Implications in Clinical Practice. Curr Urol Rep. 2016;17(11):80.

Knuchel R. Gleason Score 6 - Prostate Cancer or Benign Variant? Oncol Res Treat. 2015;38(12):629-32.

Kattan MW, Eastham JA, Stapleton AM, Wheeler TM, Scardino PT. A preoperative nomogram for disease recurrence following radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1998;90(10):766-71.

D'Amico AV, Moul J, Carroll PR, Sun L, Lubeck D, Chen MH. Cancer-specific mortality after surgery or radiation for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer managed during the prostate-specific antigen era. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21(11):2163-72.

Cooperberg MR, Hilton JF, Carroll PR. The CAPRA-S score: A straightforward tool for improved prediction of outcomes after radical prostatectomy. Cancer. 2011;117(22):5039-46.

Prostate Cancer Risk Assessment and the UCSF-CAPRA Score [Available from: https://urology.ucsf.edu/research/cancer/prostate-cancer-risk-assessment-and-the-ucsf-capra-score.

Cooperberg MR. Implications of the new AUA guidelines on prostate cancer detection in the U.S. Curr Urol Rep. 2014;15(7):420.

Cooperberg MR. Prostate cancer risk assessment: choosing the sharpest tool in the shed. Cancer. 2008;113(11):3062-6.

Gleason DF. Histologic grading of prostate cancer: a perspective. Hum Pathol. 1992;23(3):273-9.

D'Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, et al. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA. 1998;280(11):969-74.

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(6):1938-42.

Cooperberg MR, Vickers AJ, Broering JM, Carroll PR. Comparative risk-adjusted mortality outcomes after primary surgery, radiotherapy, or androgen-deprivation therapy for localized prostate cancer. Cancer. 2010;116(22):5226-34.

Cooperberg MR, Broering JM, Carroll PR. Risk assessment for prostate cancer metastasis and mortality at the time of diagnosis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101(12):878-87.

May M, Knoll N, Siegsmund M, et al. Validity of the CAPRA score to predict biochemical recurrence-free survival after radical prostatectomy. Results from a european multicenter survey of 1,296 patients. J Urol. 2007;178(5):1957-62; discussion 62.

Cooperberg MR, Freedland SJ, Pasta DJ, et al. Multiinstitutional validation of the UCSF cancer of the prostate risk assessment for prediction of recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Cancer. 2006;107(10):2384-91.

  • Abstract Viewed: 709 times
  • PDF Downloaded: 177 times

Download Statastics

In case of persistent problems in registration, primary uploading of a submission or uploading of a revision, please send us the submission files on the journal email at:

urologyjournal@sbmu.ac.ir

and please attach the screenshot of the error or problem you encountered in uploading.

 

Make a Submission
Information
Keywords