Log in to MyKarger to check if you already have access to this content.

Buy FullText & PDF Unlimited re-access via MyKarger Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use read more

CHF 38.00 *
EUR 35.00 *
USD 39.00 *

Select

KAB

Buy a Karger Article Bundle (KAB) and profit from a discount!

If you would like to redeem your KAB credit, please log in.

Save over 20% compared to the individual article price.

Learn more

Rent via DeepDyve Unlimited fulltext viewing of this article Organize, annotate and mark up articles Printing and downloading restrictions apply

Start free trial

Subscribe Access to all articles of the subscribed year(s) guaranteed for 5 years Unlimited re-access via Subscriber Login or MyKarger Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use read more

Subcription rates

Select

* The final prices may differ from the prices shown due to specifics of VAT rules.

Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview

Received: October 08, 2022
Accepted: December 22, 2022
Published online: March 29, 2023

Number of Print Pages: 20
Number of Figures: 5
Number of Tables: 3

ISSN: 0042-1138 (Print)
eISSN: 1423-0399 (Online)

For additional information: https://www.karger.com/UIN

Abstract

Introduction: Previous studies have revealed that Gleason score upgrading (GSU) was closely related to an increased biochemical recurrence rate and adverse oncologic outcomes in patients with prostate cancer (PC). Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to determine the predictive factors for GSU following radical prostatectomy (RP). Methods: We performed an extensive literature search using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane in September 2022. In order to calculate the pooled odds ratio (OR), standardized mean difference (SMD), and 95% confidence intervals, a fixed effect or a DerSimonian and Laird random effect was applied. Results: Twenty-six studies included 18,745 PC patients that were available for further analysis. Our results revealed that GSU was significantly correlated with age (summary SMD = 0.13; p = 0.004), prostate volume (PV) (summary SMD = −0.19;p < 0.001), preoperative PSA (p-PSA) (summary SMD = 0.18; p < 0.001), PSA density (PSAD) (summary SMD = 0.40; p < 0.001), number of positive cores (summary SMD = 0.28; p = 0.001), percentage of positive cores (summary SMD = 0.36; p < 0.001), Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) scores (>3/≤3) (summary OR = 2.27; p = 0.001), clinical T stage (>T2/≤T2) (summary OR = 1.73; p < 0.001), positive surgical margins (PSM) (summary OR = 2.12; p < 0.001), extraprostatic extension (EPE) (summary OR = 2.73; p < 0.001), pathological T stage (>T2/≤T2) (summary OR = 3.45; p < 0.001), perineural invasion (PNI) (summary OR = 2.40; p = 0.008), and neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) (summary SMD = 0.50; p < 0.001). However, we found that GSU was not significantly correlated with body mass index (BMI) (summary SMD = −0.02; p = 0.602). Moreover, our sensitivity and subgroup analyses showed that the findings were reliable. Conclusions: Age, PV, p-PSA, PSAD, number of positive cores, percentage of positive cores, PI-RADS score, clinical T stage, PSM, EPE, pathological T stage, PNI, and NLR are independent factors predicting GSU following RP. The findings may be helpful in risk stratification and personalized treatment in PC patients.

© 2023 S. Karger AG, Basel

References Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: globocan estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209–49. Schroder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, Tammela TLJ, Zappa M, Nelen V, et al. Screening and prostate cancer mortality: results of the european randomised study of screening for prostate cancer (erspc) at 13 years of follow-up. Lancet. 2014 Dec 6;384(9959):2027–35. Kasivisvanathan V, Rannikko AS, Borghi M, Panebianco V, Mynderse LA, Vaarala MH, et al. Mri-targeted or standard biopsy for prostate-cancer diagnosis. N Engl J Med. 2018 May 10;378(19):1767–77. Cohen MS, Hanley RS, Kurteva T, Ruthazer R, Silverman ML, Sorcini A, et al. Comparing the gleason prostate biopsy and gleason prostatectomy grading system: the lahey clinic medical center experience and an international meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2008;54(2):371–81. Zhou J, Chen H, Wu Y, Shi B, Ding J, Qi J. Plasma il 6 and tnfα levels correlate significantly with grading changes in localized prostate cancer. Prostate. 2022;82(5):531–9. Jang WS, Koh DH, Kim J, Lee JS, Chung DY, Ham WS, et al. The prognostic impact of downgrading and upgrading from biopsy to radical prostatectomy among men with gleason score 7 prostate cancer. Prostate. 2019 Dec;79(16):1805–10. Haberal HB, Artykov M, Hazir B, Citamak B, Altan M, Yazici S, et al. Predictors of isup score upgrade in patients with low-risk prostate cancer. Tumori. 2021;107(3):254–60. Gershman B, Dahl DM, Olumi AF, Young RH, McDougal WS, Wu CL. Smaller prostate gland size and older age predict gleason score upgrading. Urol Oncol. 2013;31(7):1033–7. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche PC, Ioannidis JPA, et al. The prisma statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000100. Stang A. Critical evaluation of the newcastle-ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol. 2010;25(9):603–5. Li X, Wang ZX, Zhu YP, Wang J, Yin YS, Zeng XY. Clinicopathological factors associated with pathological upgrading from biopsy to prostatectomy in patients with ISUP grade group ≤2 prostate cancer. Asian J Androl. 2022 Sep–Oct;24(5):487–93. Salami SS, Tosoian JJ, Nallandhighal S, Jones TA, Brockman S, Elkhoury FF, et al. Serial molecular profiling of low-grade prostate cancer to assess tumor upgrading: a longitudinal cohort study. Eur Urol. 2021;79(4):456–65. Zhang B, Wu S, Zhang Y, Guo M, Liu R. Analysis of risk factors for gleason score upgrading after radical prostatectomy in a Chinese cohort. Cancer Med. 2021;10(21):7772–80. Karadağ S, Ekşi M, Ozdemir O, Akkaş F, Arikan Y, Ozlu DN, et al. Is neutrophile to lymphocyte ratio a predictor of gleason score upgrading according to risk classifications in patients with prostate cancer. Arch Esp Urol. 2021 Jul;74(6):599–605. Kim H, Kim JK, Hong SK, Jeong CW, Ku JH, Kwak C. Role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging to predict postoperative gleason score upgrading in prostate cancer with gleason score 3 + 4. World J Urol. 2021;39(6):1825–30. Wang X, Zhang Y, Zhang F, Ji Z, Yang P, Tian Y. Predicting gleason sum upgrading from biopsy to radical prostatectomy pathology: a new nomogram and its internal validation. Bmc Urol. 2021;21(1):3. Alqahtani S, Wei C, Zhang Y, Szewczyk-Bieda M, Wilson J, Huang Z, et al. Prediction of prostate cancer gleason score upgrading from biopsy to radical prostatectomy using pre-biopsy multiparametric mri pirads scoring system. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):7722. Barsky AR, Kraus RD, Carmona R, Santos PMG, Li C, Schwartz LE, et al. Investigating association of perineural invasion on prostate biopsy with gleason score upgrading at prostatectomy: a multi-institutional analysis. Cancer Med. 2020;9(10):3383–9. Pham DM, Kim JK, Lee S, Hong SK, Byun SS, Lee SE. Prediction of pathologic upgrading in gleason score 3+4 prostate cancer: who is a candidate for active surveillance? Investig Clin Urol. 2020;61(4):405–10. Ferro M, Musi G, Serino A, Cozzi G, Mistretta FA, Costa B, et al. Neutrophil, platelets, and eosinophil to lymphocyte ratios predict gleason score upgrading in low-risk prostate cancer patients. Urol Int. 2019;102(1):43–50. Verep S, Erdem S, Ozluk Y, Kilicaslan I, Sanli O, Ozcan F. The pathological upgrading after radical prostatectomy in low risk prostate cancer patients who are eligible for active surveillance: how safe is it to depend on bioptic pathology? Prostate. 2019;79(13):1523–9. Zhai L, Fan Y, Sun S, Wang H, Meng Y, Hu S, et al. Pi-rads v2 and periprostatic fat measured on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging can predict upgrading in radical prostatectomy pathology amongst patients with biopsy gleason score 3 + 3 prostate cancer. Scand J Urol. 2018;52(5–6):333–9. Song W, Bang SH, Jeon HG, Jeong BC, Seo SI, Jeon SS, et al. Role of pi-rads version 2 for prediction of upgrading in biopsy-proven prostate cancer with gleason score 6. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2018;16(4):281–7. Santok GDR, Abdel Raheem A, Kim LH, Chang K, Lum TG, Chung BH, et al. Prostate-specific antigen 10–20 ng/mL: a predictor of degree of upgrading to ≥8 among patients with biopsy gleason score 6. Investig Clin Urol. 2017;58(2):90–7. Porcaro AB, Petroziello A, Brunelli M, De Luyk N, Cacciamani G, Corsi P, et al. High testosterone preoperative plasma levels independently predict biopsy gleason score upgrading in men with prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy. Urol Int. 2016;96(4):470–8. Gao Y, Jiang CY, Mao SK, Cui D, Hao KY, Zhao W, et al. Low serum testosterone predicts upgrading and upstaging of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. Asian J Androl. 2016 Jul–Aug;18(4):639–43. Lotan TL, Carvalho FL, Peskoe SB, Hicks JL, Good J, Fedor H, et al. Pten loss is associated with upgrading of prostate cancer from biopsy to radical prostatectomy. Mod Pathol. 2015 Jan;28(1):128–37. Jo JK, Hong SK, Byun SS, Lee SE, Oh JJ. Comparison of clinical outcomes between upgraded pathologic gleason score 3 + 4 and non-upgraded 3 + 4 prostate cancer among patients who are candidates for active surveillance. World J Urol. 2015;33(11):1729–34. Hwang I, Lim D, Jeong YB, Park SC, Noh JH, Kwon DD, et al. Upgrading and upstaging of low-risk prostate cancer among Korean patients: a multicenter study. Asian J Androl. 2015 Sep–Oct;17(5):811–4. Vora A, Large T, Aronica J, Haynes S, Harbin A, Marchalik D, et al. Predictors of gleason score upgrading in a large african-american population. Int Urol Nephrol. 2013;45(5):1257–62. Fu Q, Moul JW, Bañez LL, Sun L, Mouraviev V, Xie D, et al. Association between percentage of tumor involvement and gleason score upgrading in low-risk prostate cancer. Med Oncol. 2012;29(5):3339–44. Oh JJ, Hong SK, Lee JK, Lee BK, Lee S, Kwon OS, et al. Prostate-specific antigen vs prostate-specific antigen density as a predictor of upgrading in men diagnosed with gleason 6 prostate cancer by contemporary multicore prostate biopsy. Bju Int. 2012;110(11 Pt B):E494–99. Epstein JI, Feng Z, Trock BJ, Pierorazio PM. Upgrading and downgrading of prostate cancer from biopsy to radical prostatectomy: incidence and predictive factors using the modified gleason grading system and factoring in tertiary grades. Eur Urol. 2012 May;61(5):1019–24. Davies JD, Aghazadeh MA, Phillips S, Salem S, Chang SS, Clark PE, et al. Prostate size as a predictor of gleason score upgrading in patients with low risk prostate cancer. J Urol. 2011;186(6):2221–7. Sooriakumaran P, Srivastava A, Christos P, Grover S, Shevchuk M, Tewari A. Predictive models for worsening prognosis in potential candidates for active surveillance of presumed low-risk prostate cancer. Int Urol Nephrol. 2012;44(2):459–70. Chun FKH, Steuber T, Erbersdobler A, Currlin E, Walz J, Schlomm T, et al. Development and internal validation of a nomogram predicting the probability of prostate cancer gleason sum upgrading between biopsy and radical prostatectomy pathology. Eur Urol. 2006;49(5):820–6. Boorjian SA, Karnes RJ, Crispen PL, Rangel LJ, Bergstralh EJ, Sebo TJ, et al. The impact of discordance between biopsy and pathological gleason scores on survival after radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2009;181(1):95–104; discussion 104. Heidenreich A, Bastian PJ, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, van der Kwast T, et al. Eau guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent—update 2013. Eur Urol. 2014;65(1):124–37. Sarici H, Telli O, Yigitbasi O, Ekici M, Ozgur BC, Yuceturk CN, et al. Predictors of gleason score upgrading in patients with prostate biopsy gleason score ≤6. Can Urol Assoc J. 2014;8(5–6):E342–46. Kundu SD, Roehl KA, Yu X, Antenor JAV, Suarez BK, Catalona WJ. Prostate specific antigen density correlates with features of prostate cancer aggressiveness. J Urol. 2007;177(2):505–9. Freedland SJ, Amling CL, Dorey F, Kane CJ, Presti JC, Terris MK, et al. Race as an outcome predictor after radical prostatectomy: results from the shared equal access regional cancer hospital (search) database. Urology. 2002 2002;60(4):670–4. Hong SK, Han BK, Lee ST, Kim SS, Min KE, Jeong SJ, et al. Prediction of Gleason score upgrading in low-risk prostate cancers diagnosed via multi (> or = 12)-core prostate biopsy. World J Urol. 2009;27(2):271–6. Freedland SJ, Isaacs WB, Platz EA, Terris MK, Aronson WJ, Amling CL, et al. Prostate size and risk of high-grade, advanced prostate cancer and biochemical progression after radical prostatectomy: a search database study. J Clin Oncol. 2005 Oct 20;23(30):7546–54. de Cobelli O, Terracciano D, Tagliabue E, Raimondi S, Galasso G, Cioffi A, et al. Body mass index was associated with upstaging and upgrading in patients with low-risk prostate cancer who met the inclusion criteria for active surveillance. Urol Oncol. 2015;33(5):201.e1–201.e8. Erdem S, Verep S, Bagbudar S, Ozluk Y, Sanli O, Ozcan F. The clinical predictive factors and postoperative histopathological parameters associated with upgrading after radical prostatectomy: a contemporary analysis with grade groups. Prostate. 2020;80(2):225–34. Ng JC, Koch MO, Daggy JK, Cheng L. Perineural invasion in radical prostatectomy specimens: lack of prognostic significance. J Urol. 2004;172(6 Pt 1):2249–51. Sun G, Huang R, Zhang X, Shen P, Gong J, Zhao J, et al. The impact of multifocal perineural invasion on biochemical recurrence and timing of adjuvant androgen-deprivation therapy in high-risk prostate cancer following radical prostatectomy. Prostate. 2017 Sep;77(12):1279–87. Grivennikov SI, Greten FR, Karin M. Immunity, inflammation, and cancer. Cell. 2010 Mar 19;140(6):883–99. Lee YS, Nam HS, Lim JH, Kim JS, Moon Y, Cho JH, et al. Prognostic impact of a new score using neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratios in the serum and malignant pleural effusion in lung cancer patients. Bmc Cancer. 2017;17(1):557. Gokce MI, Hamidi N, Suer E, Tangal S, Huseynov A, Ibiş A. Evaluation of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio prior to prostate biopsy to predict biopsy histology: results of 1836 patients. Can Urol Assoc J. 2015 Nov–Dec;9(11–12):E761–65. Ploussard G, Isbarn H, Briganti A, Sooriakumaran P, Surcel CI, Salomon L, et al. Can we expand active surveillance criteria to include biopsy gleason 3+4 prostate cancer? A multi-institutional study of 2, 323 patients. Urol Oncol. 2015;33(2):71.e1–71.e9. Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview

Received: October 08, 2022
Accepted: December 22, 2022
Published online: March 29, 2023

Number of Print Pages: 20
Number of Figures: 5
Number of Tables: 3

ISSN: 0042-1138 (Print)
eISSN: 1423-0399 (Online)

For additional information: https://www.karger.com/UIN