Urology Annals
About UA | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Archives | Instructions | Online submissionLogin 
Urology Annals
  Editorial Board | Subscribe | Advertise | Contact
Users Online: 1099   Home Print this page  Email this page Small font size Default font size Increase font size
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 13  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 119-124

A second opinion pathology review improves the diagnostic concordance between prostate cancer biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens


1 Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama University, Okayama, Japan
2 Department of Pathology, Graduate School of Medicine Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama University, Okayama, Japan

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Takuya Sadahira
2-5-1, Shikata-cho, Kita-ku, Okayama 700-8558
Japan
Login to access the Email id


DOI: 10.4103/UA.UA_81_20

Rights and Permissions

Objectives: The Gleason scoring system is an essential tool for determining the treatment strategy in prostate cancer (PCa). However, the Gleason grade group (GGG) often differs between needle-core biopsy (NCB) and radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens. We investigated the diagnostic value of a second opinion pathology review using NCB specimens in PCa. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 882 patients who underwent robot-assisted RP from January 2012 to September 2019. Of these, patients whose original biopsy specimens were obtained from another hospital and reviewed by the urological pathology expert at our institution were included in the study. Patients who received neoadjuvant hormonal therapy were excluded from the study. Weighted kappa (k) coefficients were used to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of each review. Results: A total of 497 patients were included in this study. Substantial agreement (weighted k = 0.783) in the GGG between initial- and second-opinion diagnoses based on NCB specimens was observed in 310 cases (62.4%). Although diagnoses based on a single opinion showed moderate agreement with the GGG of RP specimens (initial: 35.2%, weighted k = 0.522; second opinion; 38.8%, weighted k = 0.560), matching initial and second opinion diagnoses improved the concordance (42.9%, 133/310 cases) to substantial agreement (weighted k = 0.626). Conclusions: A second opinion of PCa pathology helps to improve the diagnostic accuracy of NCB specimens. However, over half of diagnoses that matched between the initial and second opinions differed from the diagnosis of RP specimens.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed641    
    Printed10    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded75    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal