前列腺根治性切除术后Gleason分组高于活检Gleason分组的相关因素
Factors Associated with a Higher Gleason Group after Radical Prostatectomy Compared to the Biopsy Gleason Group
DOI: 10.12677/ACM.2023.13122738, PDF,   
作者: 张金满:石河子大学医学院,新疆 石河子;李九智*:新疆维吾尔自治区人民医院泌尿中心,新疆 乌鲁木齐
关键词: 前列腺癌Gleason评分病理升级Prostate Cancer Gleason Score Pathological Upgrading
摘要: 目的:探讨前列腺根治术后2014年国际泌尿病理协会病理分组升高的相关因素。方法:回顾性分析新疆维吾尔自治区人民医院2016年6月~2023年6月期间行前列腺根治切除术患者的临床资料,收集患者年龄、BMI、根治穿刺时间间隔、单核细胞计数、中性粒细胞计数、淋巴细胞计数、NLR、tPSA、fPSA、f/tPSA、PV、PSAD、穿刺术后Gleason评分、穿刺阳性针数、评分最高针肿瘤组织占比、根治术后Gleason评分、内分泌治疗史、高血压史和糖尿病史。分别在中体患者和活检Gleason分组 = 1亚组中分析根治术后Gleason分组升高的相关因素。结果:共纳入170名患者,在总体患者中,50 (29.4%)名根治术后Gleason分组高于活检Gleason分组,经过单因素分析与多因素logistics回归分析,仅活检Gleason分组(p = 0.000, OR = 0.575)是根治术后Gleason分组升高的独立危险因素。进一步用ROC曲线分析,AUC为0.316 (95%CI: 0.237~0.394)。活检Gleason分组 = 1亚组共57名患者,其中22 (38.6%)名患者根治术后Gleason分组上升。PSAD (0.024)及临床T分期(0.009)是根治术后Gleason评分升高的独立危险因素。其AUC分别为:0.806 (95%CI: 0.683~0.903)和0.786 (95%CI: 0.666~0.907)。结论:约29.4%的前列腺癌患者会出现根治术后Gleason分组升级,其中活检Gleason分组 ≤ 3的患者有较高的升级风险。在活检Gleason分组 = 1的患者中,PSAD和临床T分期是根治术后Gleason分组升高的预测因素,具有一定的预测价值。
Abstract: Objective: To investigate the factors related to the increase of the pathologic group of the Interna-tional Urological Pathology Association in 2014 after radical prostatectomy. Method: Clinical data of patients undergoing radical prostatectomy in the People’s Hospital of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region from June 2016 to June 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients’ age, BMI, radical puncture interval, monocyte count, neutrophil count, lymphocyte count, NLR, tPSA, fPSA, f/tPSA, PV, PSAD, Gleason score after puncture, number of positive needles, proportion of tumor tissue with the highest score, Gleason score after radical surgery, history of endocrine therapy, history of hyperten-sion and history of diabetes were collected. Factors associated with the elevation of Gleason group after radical surgery were analyzed in the middle body patients and in the biopsy Gleason group = 1 subgroup. Result: A total of 170 patients were included. Among the total number of patients, 50 (29.4%) had higher Gleason group after radical surgery than biopsy Gleason group. After univariate analysis and multi-factor logistics regression analysis, Biopsy Gleason group alone (p = 0.000, OR = 0.575) was an independent risk factor for increased Gleason group after radical surgery. Further ROC curve analysis showed that the AUC was 0.316 (95%CI: 0.237~0.394). The Gleason group of biopsy = 1 subgroup of 57 patients, of which 22 (38.6%) patients had increased Gleason group after radical surgery. PSAD (0.024) and clinical T stage (0.009) were independent risk factors for in-creased Gleason score after radical surgery. The AUC was 0.806 (95%CI: 0.683~0.903) and 0.786 (95%CI: 0.666~0.907), respectively. Conclusions: About 29.4% of prostate cancer patients will have Gleason group escalation after radical surgery, and patients with Gleason group ≤ 3 on biopsy have a higher risk of escalation. In patients with biopsy Gleason group = 1, PSAD and clinical T stage are predictors of increased Gleason group after radical surgery, and have some predictive value.
文章引用:张金满, 李九智. 前列腺根治性切除术后Gleason分组高于活检Gleason分组的相关因素[J]. 临床医学进展, 2023, 13(12): 19442-19451. https://doi.org/10.12677/ACM.2023.13122738

参考文献

[1] 郑荣寿, 孙可欣, 张思维, 等. 2015年中国恶性肿瘤流行情况分析[J]. 中华肿瘤杂志, 2019, 41(1): 19-28.
[2] Mottet, N., Van Den Bergh, R.C.N., Briers, E., et al. (2021) EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG Guide-lines on Prostate Cancer-2020 Update. Part 1: Screening, Diagnosis, and Local Treatment with Curative Intent. European Urology, 79, 243-262.
https://www.auajournals.org/doi/10.1097/JU.0000000000002757
[3] Eastham, J.A., Auffenberg, G.B., Barocas, D.A., et al. (2022) Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO Guideline, Part I: In-troduction, Risk Assessment, Staging, and Risk-Based Management. Journal of Urology, 208, 10-18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[4] 欧阳仪, 陈东, 李永红, 等. 根治性前列腺切除术后ISUP病理分级较前列腺穿刺病理分级升高的预测因素[J]. 中华泌尿外科杂志, 2020, 41(2): 114-119.
[5] 李晓东, 瞿根义, 许宁, 等. ISUP版Gleason评分在前列腺癌根治术后评分升级的影响因素分析[J]. 中华男科学杂志, 2016, 22(5): 415-419.
[6] 陈伟, 周鹏, 葛力源, 等. 前列腺癌根治术后Gleason评分升级相关危险因素分析[J]. 现代泌尿外科杂志, 2017, 22(6): 429-432.
[7] Schreiber, D., Wong, A.T., Rineer, J., et al. (2015) Prostate Biopsy Con-cordance in a Large Population-Based Sample: A Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Study. Journal of Clinical Pathology, 68, 453-457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[8] Zhang, B., Wu, S., Zhang, Y., Guo, M.Y. and Liu, R.L. (2021) Analysis of Risk Factors for Gleason Score Upgrading after Radical Prostatectomy in a Chinese Cohort. Cancer Medi-cine, 10, 7772-7780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[9] Liu, H., Tang, K., Xia, D., et al. (2020) Combined Multiple Clinical Characteristics for Prediction of Discordance in Grade and Stage in Prostate Cancer Patients Undergo-ing Systematic Biopsy and Radical Prostatectomy. Pathology—Research and Practice, 216, Article ID: 153235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[10] Thompson, D., Bensley, J.G., Tempo, J., et al. (2023) Long-Term Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review. European Urology Oncology, 6, 4-15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[11] Hamdy, F.C., Donovan, J.L., Lane, J.A., et al. (2016) 10-Year Outcomes after Monitoring, Surgery, or Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer. New England Journal of Medicine, 375, 1415-1424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[12] Walker, C.H., Marchetti, K.A., Singhal, U. and Morgan, T.M. (2022) Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: Selection Criteria, Guidelines, and Outcomes. World Journal of Urology, 40, 35-42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[13] 赵明, 滕晓东, 何向蕾, 等. 2014年国际泌尿病理协会前列腺癌分级系统新进展和新的预后分组[J]. 中华病理学杂志, 2016, 45(10): 673-675.
[14] Wang, X., Zhang, Y., Ji, Z., et al. (2020) Men with High Prostate Specific Antigen Have Higher Risk of Gleason Upgrading after Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Urology Journal, 18, 477-484.
[15] 王功伟, 沈丹华. 前列腺腺癌患者血清PSA水平对Gleason评分的预测价值[J]. 现代泌尿外科杂志, 2014, 19(10): 644-647, 657.
[16] Press, B.H., Khajir, G., Ghabili, K., et al. (2021) Utility of PSA Density in Predicting Upgraded Gleason Score in Men on Active Surveil-lance with Negative MRI. Urology, 155, 96-100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[17] 雷银, 吴汶钊, 李天杰, 等. 前列腺穿刺与前列腺癌根治术后Gleason评分的比较[J]. 现代泌尿生殖肿瘤杂志, 2020, 12(6): 338-342.
[18] 阚霖, 崔军, 宋永胜. 前列腺癌根治术后病理升级的预测模型[J]. 中国男科学杂志, 2022, 36(4): 36-41, 46.
[19] Wang, Y., Chen, X., Liu, K., et al. (2023) Predictive Factors for Gleason Score Upgrading in Patients with Prostate Cancer after Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Urologia Internationalis, 107, 460-479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[20] Tewari, A.K., Stockert, J.A., Yadav, S.S., Yadav, K.K. and Khan, I. (2018) Inflammation and Prostate Cancer. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology, 1095, 41-65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[21] Ferro, M., Musi, G., Serino, A., et al. (2019) Neutrophil, Plate-lets, and Eosinophil to Lymphocyte Ratios Predict Gleason Score Upgrading in Low-Risk Prostate Cancer Patients. Urologia Internationalis, 102, 43-50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[22] Karadağ, S., Ekşi, M., Özdemir, O., et al. (2021) Is Neutrophile to Lym-phocyte Ratio a Predictor of Gleason Score Upgrading According to Risk Classifications in Patients with Prostate Cancer. Archivos Espanoles De Urologia, 74, 599-605.