Prognostic significance of Gleason score 3+4 versus Gleason score 4+3 tumor at radical prostatectomy
Prognostic significance of Gleason score 3+4 versus Gleason score 4+3 tumor at radical prostatectomy
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/s0090-4295(00)00753-6
复制
发表时间：
2000-11-01
期刊：
影响因子：
2.1
通讯作者：
Epstein, JI
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Chan, TY;Partin, AW;Epstein, JI
目标.探讨Gleason评分3+4与4+3在胃癌根治术中的临床意义。在2390例由同一外科医生进行根治性直肠癌切除术的男性中，570例Gleason评分为7，无淋巴结转移、精囊浸润或三级Gleason模式5。评估患者生化复发（前列腺特异性抗原进展）和远处转移。80%的患者Gleason评分为3+4，20%为4+3。Gleason评分3+4和4+3的肿瘤在根治性前列腺切除术时的前列腺外扩展率分别为38.2%和52.7%（P = 0.008）。对无进展男性平均随访4.6年，Gleason评分为4+3的肿瘤进展风险增加，与分期和切缘状态无关（P
Objectives. To determine the clinical significance of Gleason score 3+4 versus 4+3 on radical prostatectomy.Methods. Of 2390 men who underwent radical prostatectomy by a single surgeon, 570 had Gleason score 7 tumors without lymph node metastasis, seminal vesicle invasion, or tertiary Gleason pattern 5. Patients were evaluated for biochemical recurrence (prostate-specific antigen progression) and distant metastases.Results. Eighty percent of patients had Gleason score 3+4, 20% had 4+3. The rate of established extraprostatic extension at radical prostatectomy for Gleason score 3+4 and 4+3 tumors was 38.2% and 52.7%, respectively (P = 0.008). With a mean follow-up of 4.6 years for men without progression, Gleason score 4+3 tumors had an increased risk of progression independent of stage and margin status (P