Расширенный поиск


Полный текст:


The authors provide the proceedings of the 2005 First International Society of Urological Pathology Consensus Conference and the basic provisions that differ the modified Gleason grading system from its original interpretation. In particular, we should do away with Gleason grade 1 (or 1 + 1 = 2) while assessing the needle biopsy specimens. Contrary to the recommendations by Gleason himself, the conference decided to apply stringent criteria for using Gleason grades 3 and 4. This is due to the fact that these grades are of special prognostic value so it is important to have clear criteria in defining each Gleason grade. Notions, such as secondary and tertiary Gleason patterns, are considered; detailed recommendations are given on the lesion extent sufficient to diagnose these components.

Об авторах

Н. А. Горбань
МРНЦ РАМН, Обнинск

А. Г. Кудайбергенова
ФГУ Российский научный центр радиологии и хирургических технологий Федерального агентства по высокотехнологичной медицинской помощи, Санкт-Петербург

Список литературы

1. Bailar J.C. 3rd, Mellinger G.T., Gleason D.F. Survival rates of patients with prostatic cancer, tumor stage, and differentiation: preliminary report. Cancer Chemother Rep 1966;50:129-36.

2. Gleason D.F. Classification of prostatic carcinomas. Cancer Chemother Rep 1966;50:125-8.

3. Mellinger G.T., Gleason D., Bailar J. 3rd. The histology and prognosis of prostatic cancer. J Urol 1967;97:331-7.

4. Gleason D.F., Mellinger G.T. Prediction of prognosis for prostatic adenocarcinoma by combined histological grading and clinical staging. J Urol 1974;11:58-64.

5. Epstein J.I., Algaba F., Allsbrook J. et al. Acinar adenocarcinoma. In: J.N. Eble, G. Sauter, J.I. Epstein et al., eds. World Health Organization Classification of Tumours. Pathology & Genetics: Tumours of the urinary system and male genital organs. Lyon, France: IARC Press, 2004. p. 179-84.

6. Amin M.B., Schultz D.S., Zarbo R.J. Analysis of cribriform morphology in prostatic neoplasia using antibody to high molecular-weight cytokeratin. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1994;118:260-4.

7. Epstein J.I., Allsbrook J., Amin M.B. et al. The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostate Carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 2005;29:1228-42.

8. Gleason D.F. Histological grading and clinical staging of prostatic carcinoma. In: M. Tannenbaum, ed. Urologic Pathology: The Prostate. Philadelphia: Lea & Feibiger, 1977. p. 171-98.

9. Epstein J.I. Gleason score 2-4 adenocarcinoma of the prostate on needle biopsy: a diagnosis that should not be made. Am J Surg Pathol 2000;24:477-8.

10. Steinberg D.M., Sauvageot J., Piantadosi S. et al. Correlation of prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy Gleason grade in academic and community settings. Am J Surg Pathol 1997;21: 566-76.

11. Nelson R.S., Epstein J.I. Prostatic carcinoma with abundant xanthomatous cytoplasm: foamy gland carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 1996;20:419-26.

12. Tran T.T., Sengupta E., Yang X.J. Prostatic foamy gland carcinoma with aggressive behavior: clinicopathologic, immunohistochemical, and ultrastructural analysis. Am J Surg Pathol 2001; 25:618-23.

13. Epstein J.I., Lieberman P.H. Mucinous adenocarcinoma of the prostate gland. Am J Surg Pathol 1985;9:299-308.

14. Ro J.Y., Grignon D.J., Ayala A.G. et al. Mucinous adenocarcinoma of the prostate: histochemical and immunohistochemical studies. Hum Pathol 1990;21:593-600.

15. Baisden B.L., Kahane H., Epstein J.I. Perineural invasion, mucinous fibroplasia, and glomerulations: diagnostic features of limited cancer on prostate needle biopsy. Am J Surg Pathol 1999;23:918-24.

16. Pacelli A., Lopez-Beltran A., Egan A.J. et al. Prostatic adenocarcinoma with glomeruloid features. Hum Pathol 1998;29:543-6.

17. Humphrey P.A., Kaleem Z., Swanson P.E. et al. Pseudohyperplastic prostatic adenocarcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 1998;22:1239-46.

18. Levi A.W., Epstein J.I. Pseudohyperplastic prostatic adenocarcinoma on needle biopsy and simple prostatectomy. Am J Surg Pathol 2000;24: 1039-46.

19. Brinker D.A., Potter S.R., Epstein J.I. Ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate diagnosed on needle biopsy: correlation with clinical and radical prostatectomy findings and progression. Am J Surg Pathol 1999;23: 1471-9.

20. DiBlasio C.J., Rhee A.C., Cho D. et al. Predicting clinical end points: treatment nomograms in prostate cancer. Semin Oncol 2003;30:567-86.

21. Partin A.W., Kattan M.W.,Subong E.N. et al. Combination of prostatespecific antigen, clinical stage, and Gleason score to predict pathological stage of localized prostate cancer: a multi-institutional update. JAMA 1997;277: 1445-51.

22. Mosse C.A., Magi-Galluzzi C.,Tsuzuki T. et al. The prognostic significance of tertiary Gleason pattern 5 in radical prostatectomy specimens. Am J Surg Pathol 2004;28:394-8.

23. Stamey T.A., McNeal J.E.,Yemoto C.M. et al. Biological determinants of cancer progression in men with prostate cancer. JAMA 1999;281:1395-400.

24. Cohen M.B., Soloway M.S.,Murphy W.M. Sampling of radical prostatectomy specimens: how much is adequate? Am J Clin Pathol 1994;101:250-2.

25. Sehdev A.E., Pan C.C., Epstein J.I. Comparative analysis of sampling methods for grossing radical prostatectomy specimens performed for nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostatic adenocarcinoma. Hum Pathol 2001;32:494-9.

26. Rubin M.A., Bismar T.A., Curtis S. et al. 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: 946-52.

Для цитирования:

Горбань Н.А., Кудайбергенова А.Г. СОВРЕМЕННЫЕ ПРЕДСТАВЛЕНИЯ О СИСТЕМЕ ГРАДАЦИИ ГЛИСОНА. Онкоурология. 2010;6(1):69-75.

For citation:

Gorban N.A., Kudaibergenova A.G. CURRENT VIEWS OF THE GLEASON GRADING SYSTEM. Cancer Urology. 2010;6(1):69-75. (In Russ.)

Просмотров: 392

Creative Commons License
Контент доступен под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

ISSN 1726-9776 (Print)
ISSN 1996-1812 (Online)