Publication:
The 2019 Genitourinary Pathology Society (GUPS) white paper on contemporary grading of prostate cancer

dc.contributor.coauthorEpstein, Jonathan I.
dc.contributor.coauthorAmin, Mahul B.
dc.contributor.coauthorFine, Samson W.
dc.contributor.coauthorAlgaba, Ferran
dc.contributor.coauthorAron, Manju
dc.contributor.coauthorBeltran, Antonio Lopez
dc.contributor.coauthorBrimo, Fadi
dc.contributor.coauthorCheville
dc.contributor.coauthorJohn C.
dc.contributor.coauthorColecchia, Maurizio
dc.contributor.coauthorComperat, Eva
dc.contributor.coauthorCunha, Isabela Werneck da
dc.contributor.coauthorDelprado, Warick
dc.contributor.coauthorDeMarzo, Angelo M.
dc.contributor.coauthorGiannico, Giovanna A.
dc.contributor.coauthorGordetsky, Jennifer B.
dc.contributor.coauthorGuo, Charles C.
dc.contributor.coauthorHansel, Donna E.
dc.contributor.coauthorHirsch, Michelle S.
dc.contributor.coauthorHumphrey, Jiaoti HuangPeter A.
dc.contributor.coauthorJimenez, Rafael E.
dc.contributor.coauthorKhani, Francesca
dc.contributor.coauthorKong, Qingnuan
dc.contributor.coauthorN. Kryvenko, Oleksandr
dc.contributor.coauthorKunju, L. Priya
dc.contributor.coauthorLal, Priti
dc.contributor.coauthorLatour, Mathieu
dc.contributor.coauthorLotan, Tamara
dc.contributor.coauthorMaclean, Fiona
dc.contributor.coauthorMagi-Galluzzi, Cristina
dc.contributor.coauthorMehra, Rohit
dc.contributor.coauthorMenon, Santosh
dc.contributor.coauthorMiyamoto, Hiroshi
dc.contributor.coauthorMontironi, Rodolfo
dc.contributor.coauthorJ. Netto, George
dc.contributor.coauthorNguyen, Jane K.
dc.contributor.coauthorO. Osunkoya, Adeboye
dc.contributor.coauthorParwani, Anil
dc.contributor.coauthorRobinson, Brian D.
dc.contributor.coauthorRubin, Mark A.
dc.contributor.coauthorShah, Rajal B.
dc.contributor.coauthorSo, Jeffrey S.
dc.contributor.coauthorTakahashi, Hiroyuki
dc.contributor.coauthorTavora, Fabio
dc.contributor.coauthorTretiakova, Maria S.
dc.contributor.coauthorTrue, Lawrence
dc.contributor.coauthorWobker, Sara E.
dc.contributor.coauthorYang, Ximing J.
dc.contributor.coauthorZhou, Ming
dc.contributor.coauthorZynger, Debra L.
dc.contributor.coauthorTrpkov, Kiril
dc.contributor.kuauthorBaydar, Dilek Ertoy
dc.contributor.kuprofileFaculty Member
dc.contributor.schoolcollegeinstituteSchool of Medicine
dc.contributor.yokid8025
dc.date.accessioned2024-11-09T23:09:28Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.description.abstractContext.—Controversies and uncertainty persist in prostate cancer grading. Objective.—To update grading recommendations. Data Sources.—Critical review of the literature along with pathology and clinician surveys. Conclusions.—Percent Gleason pattern 4 (%GP4) is as follows: (1) report %GP4 in needle biopsy with Grade Groups (GrGp) 2 and 3, and in needle biopsy on other parts (jars) of lower grade in cases with at least 1 part showing Gleason score (GS) 4 þ 4 ¼ 8; and (2) report %GP4: less than 5% or less than 10% and 10% increments thereafter. Tertiary grade patterns are as follows: (1) replace ‘‘tertiary grade pattern’’ in radical prostatectomy (RP) with ‘‘minor tertiary pattern 5 (TP5),’’ and only use in RP with GrGp 2 or 3 with less than 5% Gleason pattern 5; and (2) minor TP5 is noted along with the GS, with the GrGp based on the GS. Global score and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)targeted biopsies are as follows: (1) when multiple undesignated cores are taken from a single MRI-targeted lesion, an overall grade for that lesion is given as if all the involved cores were one long core; and (2) if providing a global score, when different scores are found in the standard and the MRI-targeted biopsy, give a single global score (factoring both the systematic standard and the MRI-targeted positive cores). Grade Groups are as follows: (1) Grade Groups (GrGp) is the terminology adopted by major world organizations; and (2) retain GS 3 þ 5 ¼ 8 in GrGp 4. Cribriform carcinoma is as follows: (1) report the presence or absence of cribriform glands in biopsy and RP with Gleason pattern 4 carcinoma. Intraductal carcinoma (IDC-P) is as follows: (1) report IDC-P in biopsy and RP; (2) use criteria based on dense cribriform glands (.50% of the gland is composed of epithelium relative to luminal spaces) and/or solid nests and/or marked pleomorphism/necrosis; (3) it is not necessary to perform basal cell immunostains on biopsy and RP to identify IDC-P if the results would not change the overall (highest) GS/GrGp part per case; (4) do not include IDC-P in determining the final GS/GrGp on biopsy and/or RP; and (5) ‘‘atypical intraductal proliferation (AIP)’’ is preferred for an intraductal proliferation of prostatic secretory cells which shows a greater degree of architectural complexity and/or cytological atypia than typical high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia, yet falling short of the strict diagnostic threshold for IDC-P. Molecular testing is as follows: (1) Ki67 is not ready for routine clinical use; (2) additional studies of active surveillance cohorts are needed to establish the utility of PTEN in this setting; and (3) dedicated studies of RNA-based assays in active surveillance populations are needed to substantiate the utility of these expensive tests in this setting. Artificial intelligence and novel grading schema are as follows: (1) incorporating reactive stromal grade, percent GP4, minor tertiary GP5, and cribriform/intraductal carcinoma are not ready for adoption in current practice. © 2021 College of American Pathologists. All rights reserved.
dc.description.indexedbyWoS
dc.description.indexedbyScopus
dc.description.indexedbyPubMed
dc.description.issue4
dc.description.openaccessYES
dc.description.publisherscopeInternational
dc.description.volume145
dc.identifier.doi10.5858/arpa.2020-0015-ra
dc.identifier.issn0003-9985
dc.identifier.linkhttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85103392953&doi=10.5858%2farpa.2020-0015-ra&partnerID=40&md5=d987a6d7873cec506b1c67da022b0709
dc.identifier.quartileQ1
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85103392953
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2020-0015-ra
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14288/9309
dc.identifier.wos632474000013
dc.keywordsTumor marker
dc.keywordsCancer grading
dc.keywordsChemistry
dc.keywordsConsensus
dc.keywordsGenetics
dc.keywordsHuman
dc.keywordsImage guided biopsy
dc.keywordsImmunohistochemistry
dc.keywordsMale
dc.keywordsMolecular diagnosis
dc.keywordsNeedle biopsy
dc.keywordsNuclear magnetic resonance imaging
dc.keywordsPathology
dc.keywordsPractice guideline
dc.keywordsPredictive value
dc.keywordsProstate tumor
dc.keywordsBiomarkers
dc.languageEnglish
dc.publisherCollege of American Pathologists
dc.sourceArchives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine
dc.subjectProstate cancer
dc.subjectPathology
dc.titleThe 2019 Genitourinary Pathology Society (GUPS) white paper on contemporary grading of prostate cancer
dc.typeReview
dspace.entity.typePublication
local.contributor.authorid0000-0003-0784-8605
local.contributor.kuauthorBaydar, Dilek Ertoy

Files