Purpose: To survey urologic clinicians regarding interpretation of and practice patterns in relation to emerging aspects of prostate cancer grading, including quantification of high-grade disease, cribriform/intraductal carcinoma, and impact of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted needle biopsy. Materials and methods: The Genitourinary Pathology Society distributed a survey to urology and urologic oncology-focused societies and hospital departments. Eight hundred and thirty four responses were collected and analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results: Eighty percent of survey participants use quantity of Gleason pattern 4 on needle biopsy for clinical decisions, less frequently with higher Grade Groups. Fifty percent interpret “tertiary” grade as a minor/<5% component. Seventy percent of respondents would prefer per core grading as well as a global/overall score per set of biopsies, but 70% would consider highest Gleason score in any single core as the grade for management. Seventy five percent utilize Grade Group terminology in patient discussions. For 45%, cribriform pattern would affect management, while for 70% the presence of intraductal carcinoma would preclude active surveillance. Conclusion: This survey of practice patterns in relationship to prostate cancer grading highlights similarities and differences between contemporary pathology reporting and its clinical application. As utilization of Gleason pattern 4 quantification, minor tertiary pattern, cribriform/intraductal carcinoma, and the incorporation of magnetic resonance imaging-based strategies evolve, these findings may serve as a basis for more nuanced communication and guide research efforts involving pathologists and clinicians.
Practice patterns related to prostate cancer grading: results of a 2019 Genitourinary Pathology Society clinician survey / Fine, S.W., Trpkov, K., Amin, M.B., Algaba, F., Aron, M., Baydar, D.E., Beltran, A.L., Brimo, F., Cheville, J.C., Colecchia, M., Comperat, E., Costello, T., da Cunha, I.W., Delprado, W., Demarzo, A.M., Giannico, G.A., Gordetsky, J.B., Guo, C.C., Hansel, D.E., Hirsch, M.S., et al.. - In: UROLOGIC ONCOLOGY. - ISSN 1078-1439. - 39:5(2021), pp. 295-295.e8. [10.1016/j.urolonc.2020.08.027]
Practice patterns related to prostate cancer grading: results of a 2019 Genitourinary Pathology Society clinician survey
Colecchia M.;
2021-01-01
Abstract
Purpose: To survey urologic clinicians regarding interpretation of and practice patterns in relation to emerging aspects of prostate cancer grading, including quantification of high-grade disease, cribriform/intraductal carcinoma, and impact of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted needle biopsy. Materials and methods: The Genitourinary Pathology Society distributed a survey to urology and urologic oncology-focused societies and hospital departments. Eight hundred and thirty four responses were collected and analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results: Eighty percent of survey participants use quantity of Gleason pattern 4 on needle biopsy for clinical decisions, less frequently with higher Grade Groups. Fifty percent interpret “tertiary” grade as a minor/<5% component. Seventy percent of respondents would prefer per core grading as well as a global/overall score per set of biopsies, but 70% would consider highest Gleason score in any single core as the grade for management. Seventy five percent utilize Grade Group terminology in patient discussions. For 45%, cribriform pattern would affect management, while for 70% the presence of intraductal carcinoma would preclude active surveillance. Conclusion: This survey of practice patterns in relationship to prostate cancer grading highlights similarities and differences between contemporary pathology reporting and its clinical application. As utilization of Gleason pattern 4 quantification, minor tertiary pattern, cribriform/intraductal carcinoma, and the incorporation of magnetic resonance imaging-based strategies evolve, these findings may serve as a basis for more nuanced communication and guide research efforts involving pathologists and clinicians.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
