Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Prognostic Models for Patients With Gleason Score 9 Prostate Cancer: A Population-Based Study.
Qiu, Jianhui; Cai, Desheng; Wang, Zixin; Zhou, Jingcheng; Gong, Yanqing; Cai, Lin; Gong, Kan.
Afiliação
  • Qiu J; Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China.
  • Cai D; Institute of Urology, Peking University, Beijing, China.
  • Wang Z; National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China.
  • Zhou J; Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China.
  • Gong Y; Institute of Urology, Peking University, Beijing, China.
  • Cai L; National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China.
  • Gong K; Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China.
Front Oncol ; 11: 633312, 2021.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33981602
Purpose: Gleason score (GS) system is one of the most widely used histological grading methods for prostate cancer (PCa) all over the world. GS can be obtained by adding the primary Gleason pattern (GP) and secondary GP. Different proportions of GP 4 and GP 5 in prostate specimens can both lead to GS 9. In this study, we explored whether GP 5 + 4 or GP 4 + 5 was associated with different prognoses among patients with GS 9 PCa. Materials and methods: A retrospective population-based study was conducted on 10,124 subjects diagnosed with GS 9 PCa between 2004 and 2009 from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program. A 1:1 propensity-score matching (PSM) was performed to balance the baseline characteristics between the GP 4 + 5 and 5 + 4 groups and to compare the prognoses between the two groups. Cox regression analysis and Fine-Gray competing risk regression models were adopted to screen the covariates significantly associated with all-cause mortality (ACM) and cancer-specific mortality (CAM). Results: GP 5 + 4 was associated with higher risks of ACM and CSM before or after PSM than GP 4 + 5. In the original cohort, there were eight independent predictors for ACM, which were age at diagnosis, race, AJCC NM stage, PSA levels, treatments, GP, and marital status, confirmed by the Cox analysis; and nine independent predictors for CSM, which were age at diagnosis, race, AJCC TNM stage, PSA levels, treatments, GP, and marital status, confirmed by the competing-risk model. Conclusion: GP 5 + 4 was associated with a poorer overall survival and cancer-specific survival compared with GP 4 + 5.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Idioma: En Revista: Front Oncol Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: China

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Idioma: En Revista: Front Oncol Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: China