Skip to main content

Gleason score and pretreatment prostate-specific antigen in survival among patients with stage D2 prostate cancer

World Journal of Urology volume 22, pages 425–430 (2004)Cite this article

Abstract

Although multiple studies have addressed the prognostic importance of tumor differentiation in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer, few data are available in patients with metastatic disease. We evaluated and compared survival data in two groups of men with Whitmore stage D2 metastatic prostate cancer initially treated with hormonal therapy. A series of 76 patients with D2 metastatic disease were evaluated and treated at the National Cancer Institute (NCI) in conjunction with an additional cohort of 141 patients from the Louisiana State University School of Medicine (LSU). Pathological specimens were classified according to the Gleason score. Fifty-two (25%) of the combined NCI/LSU specimens had a Gleason score of 6 or less, 71 (34%) had a value of 7, and remaining 87 (41%) had scores between 8 and 10. The median PSA at the time of diagnosis for the NCI patients was 294.2 ng/ml. Time to treatment failure was defined as the time that a greater than 50% increase above nadir PSA was noted. In neither group was Gleason score correlated with overall survival. There was no association between the time to progression following hormone therapy and primary tumor Gleason score. The PSA concentration at the time of diagnosis was not correlated with the Gleason score for the NCI patients; however, there was an inverse correlation between pretreatment PSA level and time to progression following hormonal ablation. Gleason score does not appear to impact survival in metastatic prostate cancer. PSA as a marker of the biological behavior in metastatic disease may also be limited. These findings should be reevaluated in larger, better matched cohorts. Novel techniques such as serum proteomics, microarrays, and metastatic cell isolation methods may better predict outcome in advanced prostate cancer.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1

References

  1. Ahram M, Best CJ, Flaig MJ, Gillespie JW, Leiva IM, Chuaqui RF, Zhou G, Shu H, Duray PH, Linehan WM, Raffeld M, Ornstein DK, Zhao Y, Petricoin EF, 3rd, Emmert-Buck MR (2002) Proteomic analysis of human prostate cancer. Mol Carcinog 33:9–15

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Albertsen PC, Hanley JA, Gleason DF, Barry MJ (1998) Competing risk analysis of men aged 55 to 74 years at diagnosis managed conservatively for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 280:975–980

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Arai Y, Yoshiki T, Yoshida O (1990) Prognostic significance of prostate specific antigen in endocrine treatment for prostatic cancer. J Urol 144:1415–1419

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Benaim EA, Pace CM, Roehrborn CG (2002) Gleason score predicts androgen independent progression after androgen deprivation therapy. Eur Urol 42:12–17

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Best CJ, Leiva IM, Chuaqui RF, Gillespie JW, Duray PH, Murgai M, Zhao Y, Simon R, Kang JJ, Green JE, Bostwick DG, Linehan WM, Emmert-Buck MR (2003) Molecular differentiation of high- and moderate-grade human prostate cancer by cDNA microarray analysis. Diagn Mol Pathol 12:63–70

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Chodak GW, Thisted RA, Gerber GS, Johansson JE, Adolfsson J, Jones GW, Chisholm GD, Moskovitz B, Livne PM, Warner J (1994) Results of conservative management of clinically localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 330:242–248

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Cooper EH (1992) Prostate specific antigen in diagnosis, staging, and follow-up of prostate cancer. Prostate Suppl 4:125–128

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. D’Amico AV (2002) How to compare results after surgery or radiation for localized prostate carcinoma. Cancer 95:2041–2043

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. D’Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, Cote K, Loffredo M, Schultz D, Chen MH, Tomaszewski JE, Renshaw AA, Wein A, Richie JP (2002) Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy or external beam radiation therapy for patients with clinically localized prostate carcinoma in the prostate specific antigen era. Cancer 95:281–286

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Dijkman GA, Janknegt RA, De Reijke TM, Debruyne FM (1997) Long-term efficacy and safety of nilutamide plus castration in advanced prostate cancer, and the significance of early prostate specific antigen normalization. International Anandron Study Group. J Urol 158:160–163

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Farkas A, Schneider D, Perrotti M, Cummings KB, Ward WS (1998) National trends in the epidemiology of prostate cancer, 1973 to 1994: evidence for the effectiveness of prostate-specific antigen screening. Urology 52:444–448$$;–

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ghossein RA, Bhattacharya S (2001) Molecular detection and characterization of circulating tumor cells and micrometastases in prostatic, urothelial, and renal cell carcinomas. Semin Surg Oncol 20:304–311

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Gleason DF (1977) The Veterans Administration Cooperative Research Group: histological grading and clinical staging of prostate carcinoma. In: Tannebaum (ed) Urologic pathology: the prostate. Lea and Febiger, Philadelphia, pp 171–174

  14. Grossfeld GD, Li YP, Lubeck DP, Broering JM, Mehta SS, Carroll PR (2002) Predictors of secondary cancer treatment in patients receiving local therapy for prostate cancer: data from cancer of the prostate strategic urologic research endeavor. J Urol 168:530–535

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Guinan P, Talluri K, Nagubadi S, Sharifi R, Ray V, Shaw M (1983) Evaluation of Gleason classification system in prostate cancer. Urology 21:458–460

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Han M, Partin AW, Pound CR, Epstein JI, Walsh PC (2001) Long-term biochemical disease-free and cancer-specific survival following anatomic radical retropubic prostatectomy. The 15-year Johns Hopkins experience. Urol Clin North Am 28:555–565

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Holmberg L, Bill-Axelson A, Helgesen F, Salo JO, Folmerz P, Haggman M, Andersson SO, Spangberg A, Busch C, Nordling S, Palmgren J, Adami HO, Johansson JE, Norlen BJ (2002) A randomized trial comparing radical prostatectomy with watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 347:781–789

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hull GW, Rabbani F, Abbas F, Wheeler TM, Kattan MW, Scardino PT (2002) Cancer control with radical prostatectomy alone in 1:000 consecutive patients. J Urol 167:528–534

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Iselin CE, Robertson JE, Paulson DF (1999) Radical perineal prostatectomy: oncological outcome during a 20-year period. J Urol 161:163–168

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kwak C, Jeong SJ, Park MS, Lee E, Lee SE (2002) Prognostic significance of the nadir prostate specific antigen level after hormone therapy for prostate cancer. J Urol 168:995–1000

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Lau WK, Blute ML, Bostwick DG, Weaver AL, Sebo TJ, Zincke H (2001) Prognostic factors for survival of patients with pathological Gleason score 7 prostate cancer: differences in outcome between primary Gleason grades 3 and 4. J Urol 166:1692–1697

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Lu-Yao GL, Yao SL (1997) Population-based study of long-term survival in patients with clinically localised prostate cancer. Lancet 349:906–910

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Matzkin H, Eber P, Todd B, van der Zwaag R, Soloway MS (1992) Prognostic significance of changes in prostate-specific markers after endocrine treatment of stage D2 prostatic cancer. Cancer 70:2302–2309

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. McGowan DG, Bain GO, Hanson J (1983) Evaluation of histological grading (Gleason) in carcinoma of the prostate: adverse influence of highest grade. Prostate 4:111–118

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. McLean M, Srigley J, Banerjee D, Warde P, Hao Y (1997) Interobserver variation in prostate cancer Gleason scoring: are there implications for the design of clinical trials and treatment strategies? Clin Oncol 9:222–225

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Meehan KL, Holland JW, Dawkins HJ (2002) Proteomic analysis of normal and malignant prostate tissue to identify novel proteins lost in cancer. Prostate 50:54–63

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Naaby-Hansen S, Nagano K, Gaffney P, Masters JR, Cramer R (2003) Proteomics in the analysis of prostate cancer. Methods Mol Med 81:277–297

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Oefelein MG, Ricchiuti VS, Conrad PW, Goldman H, Bodner D, Resnick MI, Seftel A (2002) Clinical predictors of androgen-independent prostate cancer and survival in the prostate-specific antigen era. Urology 60:120–124

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Omenn GS (2002) Genetic advances will influence the practice of medicine: examples from cancer research and care of cancer patients. Genet Med 4:15S–20S

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Ozdamar SO, Sarikaya S, Yildiz L, Atilla MK, Kandemir B, Yildiz S (1996) Intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility of WHO and Gleason histologic grading systems in prostatic adenocarcinomas. Int Urol Nephrol 28:73–77

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Palmberg C, Koivisto P, Visakorpi T, Tammela TL (1999) PSA decline is an independent prognostic marker in hormonally treated prostate cancer. Eur Urol 36:191–196

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Partin AW, Yoo J, Carter HB, Pearson JD, Chan DW, Epstein JI, Walsh PC (1993) The use of prostate specific antigen, clinical stage and Gleason score to predict pathological stage in men with localized prostate cancer. J Urol 150:110–114

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Ramaswamy S, Ross KN, Lander ES, Golub TR (2003) A molecular signature of metastasis in primary solid tumors. Nat Genet 33:49–54

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Roach M, 3rd, Lu J, Pilepich MV, Asbell SO, Mohiuddin M, Terry R, Grignon D (1999) Long-term survival after radiotherapy alone: radiation therapy oncology group prostate cancer trials. J Urol 161:864–868

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. San Francisco IF, DeWolf WC, Rosen S, Upton M, Olumi AF (2003) Extended prostate needle biopsy improves concordance of Gleason grading between prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy. J Urol 169:136–140

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Schwartz CB, Bekirov H, Melman A (1991) Gleason’s histologic grading as clinical prognostic marker in patients with advanced prostatic carcinoma. Urology 37:198–201

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Shipley WU, Thames HD, Sandler HM, Hanks GE, Zietman AL, Perez CA, Kuban DA, Hancock SL, Smith CD (1999) Radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer: a multi-institutional pooled analysis. JAMA 281:1598–1604

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Smith JA Jr, Lange PH, Janknegt RA, Abbou CC, deGery A (1997) Serum markers as a predictor of response duration and patient survival after hormonal therapy for metastatic carcinoma of the prostate. J Urol 157:1329–1334

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Sogani PC, Israel A, Lieberman PH, Lesser ML, Whitmore WF Jr (1985) Gleason grading of prostate cancer: a predictor of survival. Urology 25:223–227

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Stamey TA, McNeal JE, Yemoto CM, Sigal BM, Johnstone IM (1999) Biological determinants of cancer progression in men with prostate cancer. JAMA 281:1395–1400

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Steinberg DM, Sauvageot J, Piantadosi S, Epstein JI (1997) Correlation of prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy Gleason grade in academic and community settings. Am J Surg Pathol 21:566–576

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Thompson I, Tangen C, Tolcher A, Crawford E, Eisenberger M, Moinpour C (2001) Association of African-American ethnic background with survival in men with metastatic prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 93:219–225

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Vicini FA, Martinez A, Hanks G, Hanlon A, Miles B, Kernan K, Beyers D, Ragde H, Forman J, Fontanesi J, Kestin L, Kovacs G, Denis L, Slawin K, Scardino P (2002) An interinstitutional and interspecialty comparison of treatment outcome data for patients with prostate carcinoma based on predefined prognostic categories and minimum follow-up. Cancer 95:2126–2135

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Whitmore WF Jr (1956) Hormone therapy in prostate cancer. Am J Med 21:697–701

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Zagars GK, Ayala AG, von Eschenbach AC, Pollack A (1995) The prognostic importance of Gleason grade in prostatic adenocarcinoma: a long-term follow-up study of 648 patients treated with radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 31:237–245

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Zincke H, Oesterling JE, Blute ML, Bergstralh EJ, Myers RP, Barrett DM (1994) Long-term (15 years) results after radical prostatectomy for clinically localized (stage T2c or lower) prostate cancer. J Urol 152:1850–1857

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

This work supported by the United States Government.

Author information

Author notes

  1. James A. Eastham

    Present address: Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, N.Y., USA

  2. Eddie Reed

    Present address: West Virginia University, Morgantown, W.Va., USA

  3. Oliver Sartor

    Present address: Louisiana State University, New Orleans, La., USA

Affiliations

  1. Molecular Pharmacology Section, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 9000 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA

    William D. Figg & Michael C. Cox

  2. Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA

    Michael E. Franks & W. Marston Linehan

  3. Biostatistics and Data Management Section, Division of Clinical Sciences, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA

    David Venzon

  4. Laboratory of Pathology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA

    Paul Duray

  5. Medical School, Louisiana State University, Shreveport, LA, 71130, USA

    W. Van Bingham, James A. Eastham & Oliver Sartor

  6. Medicine Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA

    Eddie Reed

Authors
  1. William D. Figg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael E. Franks
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David Venzon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Paul Duray
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Michael C. Cox
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. W. Marston Linehan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. W. Van Bingham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. James A. Eastham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Eddie Reed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Oliver Sartor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to William D. Figg.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Figg, W.D., Franks, M.E., Venzon, D. et al. Gleason score and pretreatment prostate-specific antigen in survival among patients with stage D2 prostate cancer. World J Urol 22, 425–430 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-004-0443-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-004-0443-7

Keywords

  • Prostate
  • Carcinoma
  • Gleason
  • Differentiation