Abstract

Text-Size + –

• INTRODUCTION:

  Contemporary clinical guidelines utilize the highest Gleason sum (HGS) in any one core on prostate biopsy to determine prostate cancer treatment. Here, we present a large discrepancy between prostate cancer risk stratified as high risk on biopsy and their pathology after radical prostatectomy.

  MATERIALS AND METHODS:

  We retrospectively reviewed 1424 men who underwent either open or robotic-assisted prostatectomy between 2004 and 2015. We analyzed 148 men who were diagnosed with HGS 8 on prostate biopsy. Biopsy and prostatectomy pathology were compared in aggregate and over 1 year time intervals. Chi-squared test, Fisher?s exact test, Student?s t-test, and Wilcoxon Rank-Sum test were used for statistical analysis.

  RESULTS:

  A total of 61.5% (91/148) of clinical HGS 8 diagnoses were downgraded on prostatectomy, with 58.8% (87/148) downgraded to Gleason 7 (Gleason 4 + 3 n = 59; Gleason 3 + 4 n = 28). Factors associated with downgrading include lower prostate-specific antigen (PSA) at biopsy (median 6.8 ng/mL versus 9.1 ng/mL, p < 0.001), number of Gleason 8 biopsy cores (median 1 versus 2, p < 0.02), presence of Gleason pattern 3 on biopsy cores (67.9% versus 44.8%, p < 0.03), pT2 staging (72.4% versus 55.1%, p < 0.04), positive margins (53.9% versus 69.1%, p < 0.04), extracapsular extension (53.4% versus 74.1%, p < 0.02), and smaller percent tumor (median 10% versus 15%, p < 0.004).

  CONCLUSION:

  The large percentage of pathology downgrading of biopsy-diagnosed HGS 8 suggests suboptimal risk-stratification that may lead to suboptimal treatment strategies and much patient distress. Our study adds great urgency to the efforts refining prostate cancer clinical assessment.