Arch Iran Med. 2018;21(11):518-523.
PMID: 30551692
Scopus id: 85059265736
  Abstract View: 282
  PDF Download: 298

Original Article

Correlation of Prognostic Gleason Grade Grouping and Histopathological Parameters: Can the “New System” Reflect the Pathological Perspective for Prognosis?

Yelda Dere 1 * , Ayşegül Aksoy Altınboğa 2, Emel Yaldır 3, Kaan Bal 4, Kürşad Tosun 5, Ayşegül Sarı 3

1 Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University Faculty of Medicine, Department of Pathology, Muğla, Turkey
2 Ankara Ataturk Training and Research Hospital, Department of Pathology, Ankara, Turkey
3 İzmir Katip Çelebi University Ataturk Training and Research Hospital Department of Pathology, İzmir, Turkey
4 İzmir Katip Çelebi University Ataturk Training and Research Hospital Department of Urology, İzmir, Turkey
5 Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University Faculty of Medicine, Department of Biostatistics, Muğla, Turkey


Background: Gleason score is one of the strongest prognostic predictors of prostate cancer;however, a change was published which is a 5 step grouping system of prostatic adenocarcinomas according to their Gleason scores. The aim of this study is to determine the relationship between histopathological findings and prognosis of tumors subgrouped according to the new Gleason grade grouping system.

Methods: A total of 163 radical prostatectomies subgrouped into 5 prognostic groups were investigated for prognostic features such as pathological stage, extraprostatic extension, surgical margin status, involvement of seminal vesicles, perineural invasion, necrosis, vascular invasion, ganglionic involvement, concomitant high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HPIN) in addition to other microscopic features of tumors such as the presence of mucin and foamy cytoplasmic change between groups.

Results: The mean age of patients was 65.72 ± 6.67 (min = 46, max = 82). Among 131 patients who completed the study, the mean prostate specific antigen (PSA) value was 11.29 ± 10.88. The statistically significant factors were significantly related to both the original Gleason and the prognostic grade groups.The recurrence rate of grade group 4 patients (57%) was significantly higher than grade group 3 patients (8%) (P = 0.038). But no significant difference was found between grade group 4 and 5 (P = 0.25).

Conclusion: Grade grouping systems reflect prognostic differences but adapting this new system into routine evaluation of patients may confuse the clinicians; however, pathology reports stating both the traditional Gleason score and the new prognostic group may soften the transition.

Cite this article as: Dere Y, Altınboğa AA, Yaldır E, Bal K, Tosun K, Sarı A. Correlation of prognostic gleason grade grouping and histopathological parameters: can the “new system” reflect the pathological perspective for prognosis? Arch Iran Med. 2018;21(11):518–523.
First name
Last name
Email address
Security code

Article Viewed: 282

Your browser does not support the canvas element.

PDF Downloaded: 298

Your browser does not support the canvas element.

Submitted: 27 Feb 2018
Accepted: 07 Oct 2018
First published online: 01 Nov 2018
EndNote EndNote

(Enw Format - Win & Mac)

BibTeX BibTeX

(Bib Format - Win & Mac)

Bookends Bookends

(Ris Format - Mac only)

EasyBib EasyBib

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Medlars Medlars

(Txt Format - Win & Mac)

Mendeley Web Mendeley Web
Mendeley Mendeley

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Papers Papers

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

ProCite ProCite

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Reference Manager Reference Manager

(Ris Format - Win only)

Refworks Refworks

(Refworks Format - Win & Mac)

Zotero Zotero

(Ris Format - FireFox Plugin)