Factors associated with downgrading in patients with high grade prostate cancer

Jared M Whitson, Sima P. Porten, Janet E. Cowan, Jeff P. Simko, Matthew R. Cooperberg, Peter R. Carroll

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective:To determine the factors associated with downgrading between biopsy and prostatectomy in the contemporary era using extended-template biopsy techniques. Materials and methods:The UCSF Urologic Oncology Database was used to identify subjects diagnosed with high grade prostate cancer (primary pattern 4 or 5) in at least one core on extended-pattern biopsy. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent factors associated with downgrading at radical prostatectomy, defined as a change from primary pattern 4 or 5 to primary pattern 3. Results:Downgrading occurred in 68 (34%) of 202 subjects who met the study criteria. Fourteen (47%) of 30 subjects with ≤25% of cores that were high grade and 9 (43%) of 21 subjects with <10% of total tissue containing cancer were downgraded. In a multivariable model, patients with mixed grade cores had much higher odds of downgrading than those with all high grade cores (OR 3.0 95% 1.3-7.1), P < 0.01). The proportion (per 10% increment) of positive cores containing high grade cancer (OR 0.8 95% CI 0.7-0.9 P < 0.01) and the percent (per 10% increment) of total tissue containing cancer (OR 0.7 95% CI 0.6-0.9 P = 0.01) were significantly associated with lower odds of downgrading. Conclusions:Downgrading following radical prostatectomy is a common event. Biopsy over-grading may preclude men from active surveillance or lead to unnecessary lymphadenectomy, excess radiation, or prolonged hormone therapy. The proportion of positive biopsy cores that are high grade and the percent of total tissue containing cancer should be incorporated into decision making.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)442-447
Number of pages6
JournalUrologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations
Volume31
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2013
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Prostatic Neoplasms
Biopsy
Prostatectomy
Neoplasms
Lymph Node Excision
Decision Making
Logistic Models
Regression Analysis
Databases
Hormones
Radiation
Therapeutics

Keywords

  • Biopsy
  • Gleason score
  • Prostatic neoplasms
  • Tumor staging

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Urology

Cite this

Whitson, J. M., Porten, S. P., Cowan, J. E., Simko, J. P., Cooperberg, M. R., & Carroll, P. R. (2013). Factors associated with downgrading in patients with high grade prostate cancer. Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations, 31(4), 442-447. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2011.02.010

Factors associated with downgrading in patients with high grade prostate cancer. / Whitson, Jared M; Porten, Sima P.; Cowan, Janet E.; Simko, Jeff P.; Cooperberg, Matthew R.; Carroll, Peter R.

In: Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations, Vol. 31, No. 4, 05.2013, p. 442-447.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Whitson, Jared M ; Porten, Sima P. ; Cowan, Janet E. ; Simko, Jeff P. ; Cooperberg, Matthew R. ; Carroll, Peter R. / Factors associated with downgrading in patients with high grade prostate cancer. In: Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations. 2013 ; Vol. 31, No. 4. pp. 442-447.
@article{47ea516a638f488387be1eee64bca4d4,
title = "Factors associated with downgrading in patients with high grade prostate cancer",
abstract = "Objective:To determine the factors associated with downgrading between biopsy and prostatectomy in the contemporary era using extended-template biopsy techniques. Materials and methods:The UCSF Urologic Oncology Database was used to identify subjects diagnosed with high grade prostate cancer (primary pattern 4 or 5) in at least one core on extended-pattern biopsy. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent factors associated with downgrading at radical prostatectomy, defined as a change from primary pattern 4 or 5 to primary pattern 3. Results:Downgrading occurred in 68 (34{\%}) of 202 subjects who met the study criteria. Fourteen (47{\%}) of 30 subjects with ≤25{\%} of cores that were high grade and 9 (43{\%}) of 21 subjects with <10{\%} of total tissue containing cancer were downgraded. In a multivariable model, patients with mixed grade cores had much higher odds of downgrading than those with all high grade cores (OR 3.0 95{\%} 1.3-7.1), P < 0.01). The proportion (per 10{\%} increment) of positive cores containing high grade cancer (OR 0.8 95{\%} CI 0.7-0.9 P < 0.01) and the percent (per 10{\%} increment) of total tissue containing cancer (OR 0.7 95{\%} CI 0.6-0.9 P = 0.01) were significantly associated with lower odds of downgrading. Conclusions:Downgrading following radical prostatectomy is a common event. Biopsy over-grading may preclude men from active surveillance or lead to unnecessary lymphadenectomy, excess radiation, or prolonged hormone therapy. The proportion of positive biopsy cores that are high grade and the percent of total tissue containing cancer should be incorporated into decision making.",
keywords = "Biopsy, Gleason score, Prostatic neoplasms, Tumor staging",
author = "Whitson, {Jared M} and Porten, {Sima P.} and Cowan, {Janet E.} and Simko, {Jeff P.} and Cooperberg, {Matthew R.} and Carroll, {Peter R.}",
year = "2013",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1016/j.urolonc.2011.02.010",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "31",
pages = "442--447",
journal = "Urologic Oncology",
issn = "1078-1439",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Factors associated with downgrading in patients with high grade prostate cancer

AU - Whitson, Jared M

AU - Porten, Sima P.

AU - Cowan, Janet E.

AU - Simko, Jeff P.

AU - Cooperberg, Matthew R.

AU - Carroll, Peter R.

PY - 2013/5

Y1 - 2013/5

N2 - Objective:To determine the factors associated with downgrading between biopsy and prostatectomy in the contemporary era using extended-template biopsy techniques. Materials and methods:The UCSF Urologic Oncology Database was used to identify subjects diagnosed with high grade prostate cancer (primary pattern 4 or 5) in at least one core on extended-pattern biopsy. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent factors associated with downgrading at radical prostatectomy, defined as a change from primary pattern 4 or 5 to primary pattern 3. Results:Downgrading occurred in 68 (34%) of 202 subjects who met the study criteria. Fourteen (47%) of 30 subjects with ≤25% of cores that were high grade and 9 (43%) of 21 subjects with <10% of total tissue containing cancer were downgraded. In a multivariable model, patients with mixed grade cores had much higher odds of downgrading than those with all high grade cores (OR 3.0 95% 1.3-7.1), P < 0.01). The proportion (per 10% increment) of positive cores containing high grade cancer (OR 0.8 95% CI 0.7-0.9 P < 0.01) and the percent (per 10% increment) of total tissue containing cancer (OR 0.7 95% CI 0.6-0.9 P = 0.01) were significantly associated with lower odds of downgrading. Conclusions:Downgrading following radical prostatectomy is a common event. Biopsy over-grading may preclude men from active surveillance or lead to unnecessary lymphadenectomy, excess radiation, or prolonged hormone therapy. The proportion of positive biopsy cores that are high grade and the percent of total tissue containing cancer should be incorporated into decision making.

AB - Objective:To determine the factors associated with downgrading between biopsy and prostatectomy in the contemporary era using extended-template biopsy techniques. Materials and methods:The UCSF Urologic Oncology Database was used to identify subjects diagnosed with high grade prostate cancer (primary pattern 4 or 5) in at least one core on extended-pattern biopsy. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent factors associated with downgrading at radical prostatectomy, defined as a change from primary pattern 4 or 5 to primary pattern 3. Results:Downgrading occurred in 68 (34%) of 202 subjects who met the study criteria. Fourteen (47%) of 30 subjects with ≤25% of cores that were high grade and 9 (43%) of 21 subjects with <10% of total tissue containing cancer were downgraded. In a multivariable model, patients with mixed grade cores had much higher odds of downgrading than those with all high grade cores (OR 3.0 95% 1.3-7.1), P < 0.01). The proportion (per 10% increment) of positive cores containing high grade cancer (OR 0.8 95% CI 0.7-0.9 P < 0.01) and the percent (per 10% increment) of total tissue containing cancer (OR 0.7 95% CI 0.6-0.9 P = 0.01) were significantly associated with lower odds of downgrading. Conclusions:Downgrading following radical prostatectomy is a common event. Biopsy over-grading may preclude men from active surveillance or lead to unnecessary lymphadenectomy, excess radiation, or prolonged hormone therapy. The proportion of positive biopsy cores that are high grade and the percent of total tissue containing cancer should be incorporated into decision making.

KW - Biopsy

KW - Gleason score

KW - Prostatic neoplasms

KW - Tumor staging

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84876697948&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84876697948&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.urolonc.2011.02.010

DO - 10.1016/j.urolonc.2011.02.010

M3 - Article

C2 - 21478037

AN - SCOPUS:84876697948

VL - 31

SP - 442

EP - 447

JO - Urologic Oncology

JF - Urologic Oncology

SN - 1078-1439

IS - 4

ER -