The validation of the 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grading system for patients with high-risk prostate cancer: a single-center retrospective study

• Published in: Cancer management and research Vol. 11; pp. 6521 - 6529
• Main Authors: Liu, Jiandong, Zhao, Jinge, Zhang, Mengni, Chen, Ni, Sun, Guangxi, Yang, Yaojing, Zhang, Xingming, Chen, Junru, Shen, Pengfei, Shi, Ming, Zeng, Hao
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: New Zealand Dove Medical Press Limited 01.01.2019; Taylor & Francis Ltd; Dove; Dove Medical Press
• Subjects: Antigens; Biochemical recurrence-free survival; Biochemistry; Cancer research; Cancer surgery; Cancer therapies; Carcinoma; Care and treatment; Health aspects; High-risk; ISUP grading system; Laparoscopy; Lymphatic system; Medical prognosis; Metastasis; Mortality; Original Research; Pathology; Patients; Professional associations; Prognosis; Prostate cancer; Radiation therapy; Radical prostatectomy; Risk factors; Surgery; Surgical outcomes; Urological surgery; Urology; China; prostate cancer; radical prostatectomy; high-risk; biochemical recurrence-free survival; ISUP grading system
• ISSN: 1179-1322; 1179-1322
• DOI: 10.2147/CMAR.S196286

Since the new 2014 grading system was recommended by the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP), it has been validated in patients with localized prostate cancer (PCa) and it has shown excellent prognostic value. However, its predictive power in high-risk PCa remains unclear. A total of 420 patients with high-risk PCa who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) were included in this study. Biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS) was set as the endpoint. Biochemical recurrence occurred in 84/420 (20.0%) patients at the end of follow-up. Compared to the three-tier grouping system, the five-tier grouping system could more effectively distinguish the BRFS of patients with higher predictive accuracy (C-index: 0.599 vs 0.646). The BRFS of patients with grade group (GG) 1 and GG 2 was similar ( =0.593). Also, the prognosis between those with GG 2 and GG 3 could be clearly distinguished ( =0.001). However, the discrimination capacity between patients with GG 3 and GG 4 was limited ( =0.681). When tertiary Gleason pattern (TGP5) and intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) were excluded, the HR value of the GG 4 group the GG 3 group increased from 1.15 (95% CI: 0.59-2.22) to 1.49 (95% CI: 0.72-3.10) and 1.36 (95% CI:0.65-2.83), respectively. This study is the first to validate the new 2014 ISUP grading system in patients with high-risk PCa who underwent RP. The 2014 system could effectively classify patients into five groups with high predictive accuracy. Notably, the existence of TGP5 and IDC-P needs to be routinely reported in clinical practice, which could help to support the predictive value of the new grading system.