摘要
目的：研究前列腺腺癌（PCa）Gleason评分重复性。方法：收集49例PCa病例,依据国际泌尿病理协会（（ISUP）修订的Gleason评分系统,采用组合和分组方法进行Gleason评分,观察重复性和差异性。结果：15位病理医生总体Gleason评分重复性较好（κ=0.642）;Gleason评分组合重复性62.2%,重复性最高者Gleason评分5＋5（81.2%）和5＋4（73.3%）;其次是4＋4（67.5%）、3＋3（64.0%）、4＋3（61.3%）及3＋4（44.0%）;最低者Gleason评分4＋5（38.9%）和Gleason评分3＋5（33.3%）。Gleason评分总分分组重复性71.4%,重复性最高者为Gleason评分9~10分（84.9%）,其次是Gleason评分7分（76.7%）,最低者为Gleason评分6分（64.0%）和8分（60.7%）。结论：PCa Gleason评分重复性还有待进一步提高,主要问题在于Gleason 3级癌和4级癌的认识。
Objective： To investigate the reproducibility of Gleason scores for prostate cancer. Methods： Based on the revised Gleason Scoring System of the International Society of Urological Pathology（ ISUP）,we analyzed the reproducibility and difference of Gleason scores in 49 cases of prostate cancer using the methods of combination and grouping. Results： The total reproducibility of Gleason scores among 15 pathologists was good（ κ = 0. 642）,62. 2% by the combination method,the highest in Gleason5 ＋ 5（ 81. 2%） and 5 ＋ 4（ 73. 3%）,then in Gleason 4 ＋ 4（ 67. 5%）,3 ＋ 3（ 64. 0%）,4 ＋ 3（ 61. 3%）,and 3 ＋ 4（ 44. 0%）,and the lowest in Gleason 4 ＋ 5（ 38. 9%） and 3 ＋ 5（ 33. 3%）. The total reproducibility of Gleason scores by the grouping method was71. 4%,the highest in Gleason 9- 10（ 84. 9%）,then in Gleason 7（ 76. 7%） and 6（ 64. 0%）,and the lowest in Gleason 8（ 60. 7%）. Conclusion： The reproducibility of Gleason scores remains to be further improved in prostate cancer,mainly concerning the understanding of Gleason 3 and 4 carcinoma.
出处
《中华男科学杂志》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2016年第1期37-41,共5页
National Journal of Andrology
