Author:
Lyu Jingcheng,Li Lu,Jiang Tianyu,Wang Zhipeng,Zhu Yichen
Abstract
Abstract
Background
The high incidence of Gleason score upgrading (GSU) made urologists underestimate the disease, leading to the inaccurate therapeutic decision. The study aimed to explore relevant laboratory examination evidence associated with GSU.
Methods
Patients diagnosed with prostate carcinoma undergoing radical prostatectomy in our center between January 2015 and December 2019 were included in this retrospective study. Patients were divided into GSU and NGSU groups according to the occurrence of GSU. Medical records were reviewed and analyzed between groups.
Results
A total of 130 patients were enrolled, including 52 patients diagnosed with GS = 6 (20 NGSU and 32 GSU) and 78 patients with GS = 7 (36 NGSU and 42 GSU). No significant differences in demographic characteristics were found between groups. An increased neutrophil count (OR = 1.326, 95% CI = 1.005–1.748) and a decreased percentage of lymphocytes (OR = 0.951, 95% CI = 0.904–1) were associated with GSU in the GS = 6 group, whereas a high HDL level (OR = 7.735, 95% CI = 0.998–59.957) was associated with GSU in GS = 7 group. Preoperative high neutrophile count and low lymphocyte percentage were correlated with GSU in patients with low-grade prostate cancer. In contrast, high HDL level was associated with GSU in patients with high-grade prostate cancer.
Conclusions
These laboratory examination data could provide urologists with information before making a therapeutic protocol.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Urology,Reproductive Medicine,General Medicine
Reference21 articles.
1. Pourmand G, Gooran S, Hossieni SR, Guitynavard F, Safavi M, Sharifi A, et al. Correlation of preoperative and radical prostatectomy gleason score: examining the predictors of upgrade and downgrade results. Acta Med Iran. 2017;55:249–53.
2. Turan T, Güçlüer B, Efiloğlu Ö, Şendoğan F, Atış RG, Çaşkurlu T, et al. The factors predicting upgrading of prostate cancer by using International Society for Urological Pathology (ISUP) 2014 Gleason grading system. Turk J Urol. 2019;45:36–41.
3. 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;54:371–81.
4. Qi F, Zhu K, Cheng Y, Hua L, Cheng G. How to pick out the “Unreal” Gleason 3 + 3 patients: a nomogram for more precise active surveillance protocol in low-risk prostate cancer in a Chinese population. J Invest Surg. 2019;6:1–8.
5. Prathibha S, Goyal K, Zynger D. Initial diagnosis of insignificant cancer, high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia, atypical small acinar proliferation, and negative have the same rate of upgrade to a Gleason score of 7 or higher on repeat prostate biopsy. Hum Pathol. 2018;79:116–21.