Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
194,164 studies31 sourcesUpdated 29 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BYCancers

Gleason Pattern 4 Burden and Adverse Pathology in ISUP Grade Group 2 Prostate Cancer: Implications for Active Surveillance Selection

4 affiliations
  1. 1Department of Urology, Vall d’Hebron University Hospital, Vall d’Hebron Research Institute (VHIR), 08025 Barcelona, Spain
  2. 2Department of Pathology, Vall d’Hebron University Hospital, 08025 Barcelona, Spain
  3. 3Department of Radiology, Institut de Diagnòstic per la Imatge (IDI), Hospital Universitari Vall d’Hebron, 08025 Barcelona, Spain
  4. 4Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Barcelona, Spain

Abstract

Background: Active surveillance (AS) is increasingly considered for selected patients with International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Grade Group (GG) 2 prostate cancer. However, candidate selection remains controversial due to histological heterogeneity and the risk of harboring adverse pathology (AP). We aimed to identify preoperative clinical, multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), and histological predictors of AP, biochemical recurrence (BCR), and postoperative PSMA PET/CT positivity in men with biopsy-confirmed ISUP GG 2 disease undergoing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 127 consecutive patients with biopsy-proven ISUP GG 2 prostate adenocarcinoma from a prospective single-center RARP database (2012–2024). All patients underwent pre-biopsy 3T mpMRI and systematic plus software-fusion targeted biopsies, with diagnostic specimens strictly lacking cribriform architecture or intraductal carcinoma. AP was defined as pathological stage ≥ pT3 and/or ISUP GG upgrading to ≥3 in the final surgical specimen. BCR was defined as two consecutive postoperative PSA measurements ≥ 0.2 ng/mL. Patients with BCR underwent PSMA PET/CT restaging. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses evaluated independent preoperative predictors of AP, incorporating separate models for ≥10% and ≥15 biopsy Gleason pattern 4 thresholds to prevent collinearity. Model performance was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and Hosmer–Lemeshow calibration tests. Results: Median patient age was 63.2 years, median PSA was 7.6 ng/mL, and median PSA density (PSAD) was 0.18 ng/mL. PI-RADS ≥ 4 lesions were identified in 71.6% of patients, and median biopsy pattern 4 proportion was 21.1%. Overall, AP occurred in 39 of 127 patients (30.7%), driven by ISUP upgrading to GG ≥ 3 in 21.3% (n = 27) and upstaging to ≥pT3 in 17.3% (n = 22). No undergrading was observed. On univariable analysis, PSA (p = 0.028), PSAD (p = 0.011), and biopsy pattern 4 proportion ≥ 10% (p = 0.042) and ≥15% (p = 0.027) were significantly associated with AP. On multivariable analysis, PSAD (OR 6.75, 95% CI 3.51–12.87, p = 0.005) and biopsy pattern 4 proportion ≥ 10% (OR 2.54, 95% CI 1.15–6.54, p = 0.036) or ≥15% (OR 2.74, 95% CI 1.06–6.06, p = 0.023) remained independent predictors of AP. The final multivariable model demonstrated solid discrimination (AUC = 0.78, 95% CI 0.71–0.85) and satisfactory calibration (p = 0.42). At a mean follow-up of 32.3 months, BCR occurred in 23 patients (18.1%; 3-year recurrence-free survival: 81.3%). Restaging PSMA PET/CT was positive in 8 of 23 recurrences (34.8%; three local, four regional nodal, one solitary bone). Neither clinical nor radiological parameters independently predicted BCR or PSMA PET/CT positivity. Conclusions: Biopsy Gleason pattern 4 extent (<10% and <15%) and PSAD are the strongest independent preoperative predictors of organ-confined, non-upgraded pathology in ISUP GG 2 prostate cancer. Combining a low pattern 4 burden (<10%, or up to 15% in highly selected cases) with a low PSAD provides objective parameters to refine “favorable intermediate-risk” stratification by identifying patients with a lower probability of adverse pathological features.

Related

  1. From Biopsy to Pathology: A Retrospective Cohort Study of Predictors of Gleason Score Upgrading in Grade Group 1 Prostate Cancer.
    Hsiao-Chun Su, Yung-Chun Su, Hsiang-Ying Lee +3
    Cancer diagnosis & prognosisPeer-reviewedCC BY-NC-NDFull textGeneral medicineEurope PMCPMC
  2. Factors associated with Gleason score upgrading in biopsy-proven Gleason 6 prostate cancer: a retrospective cohort study.
    Cheng-Hao Guo, Liang-Yong Zhu, Shu-Ping Chi +3
    BMC urologyPeer-reviewedCC BY-NC-NDFull textGeneral medicineEurope PMCPMC
  3. Active Surveillance in Low- and Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: Comparative Oncologic Safety, Patient Selection, and Predictors of Treatment Conversion in the Era of Multiparametric MRI: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Hubert Konieczny, Agata Kruk, Maciej Salagierski
    CancersPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0OncologyCrossref
  4. Histopathological Imaging and Artificial Intelligence for Cancer Diagnosis and Gleason Grading: A Brief Review of Prostate Cancer.
    Fatma Latifoğlu, Arzu Hanım Yay, Fırat Orhan Bulucu
    Journal of clinical practice and researchPeer-reviewedCC BY-NCFull textGeneral medicineEurope PMCPMC
  5. TexTNet: a texture-guided hierarchical architecture for prostate cancer Gleason segmentation in whole slide images
    Muhammad Arshad, Wang Chengliang, Muhammad Wajeeh Us Sima +3
    Frontiers in medicinePeer-reviewedCC BYFull textGeneral medicineEurope PMCPMCEurope PMC
BibTeX
@article{regis2026gleason,
  title = {{Gleason Pattern 4 Burden and Adverse Pathology in ISUP Grade Group 2 Prostate Cancer: Implications for Active Surveillance Selection}},
  author = {Lucas Regis and Clara Perez and Jacques Planas and Ana Celma and Merce Cuadras and Maria-Eugenia Semidey and Richard Mast and Juan Morote and Enrique Trilla},
  journal = {Cancers},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.3390/cancers18193222},
  url = {https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/PMC13664012},
  note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Gleason Pattern 4 Burden and Adverse Pathology in ISUP Grade Group 2 Prostate Cancer: Implications for Active Surveillance Selection
AU  - Lucas Regis
AU  - Clara Perez
AU  - Jacques Planas
AU  - Ana Celma
AU  - Merce Cuadras
AU  - Maria-Eugenia Semidey
AU  - Richard Mast
AU  - Juan Morote
AU  - Enrique Trilla
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/01
JO  - Cancers
DO  - 10.3390/cancers18193222
UR  - https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/PMC13664012
AB  - Background: Active surveillance (AS) is increasingly considered for selected patients with International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Grade Group (GG) 2 prostate cancer. However, candidate selection remains controversial due to histological heterogeneity and the risk of harboring adverse pathology (AP). We aimed to identify preoperative clinical, multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), and histological predictors of AP, biochemical recurrence (BCR), and postoperative PSMA PET/CT positivity in men with biopsy-confirmed ISUP GG 2 disease undergoing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 127 consecutive patients with biopsy-proven ISUP GG 2 prostate adenocarcinoma from a prospective single-center RARP database (2012–2024). All patients underwent pre-biopsy 3T mpMRI and systematic plus software-fusion targeted biopsies, with diagnostic specimens strictly lacking cribriform architecture or intraductal carcinoma. AP was defined as pathological stage ≥ pT3 and/or ISUP GG upgrading to ≥3 in the final surgical specimen. BCR was defined as two consecutive postoperative PSA measurements ≥ 0.2 ng/mL. Patients with BCR underwent PSMA PET/CT restaging. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses evaluated independent preoperative predictors of AP, incorporating separate models for ≥10% and ≥15 biopsy Gleason pattern 4 thresholds to prevent collinearity. Model performance was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and Hosmer–Lemeshow calibration tests. Results: Median patient age was 63.2 years, median PSA was 7.6 ng/mL, and median PSA density (PSAD) was 0.18 ng/mL. PI-RADS ≥ 4 lesions were identified in 71.6% of patients, and median biopsy pattern 4 proportion was 21.1%. Overall, AP occurred in 39 of 127 patients (30.7%), driven by ISUP upgrading to GG ≥ 3 in 21.3% (n = 27) and upstaging to ≥pT3 in 17.3% (n = 22). No undergrading was observed. On univariable analysis, PSA (p = 0.028), PSAD (p = 0.011), and biopsy pattern 4 proportion ≥ 10% (p = 0.042) and ≥15% (p = 0.027) were significantly associated with AP. On multivariable analysis, PSAD (OR 6.75, 95% CI 3.51–12.87, p = 0.005) and biopsy pattern 4 proportion ≥ 10% (OR 2.54, 95% CI 1.15–6.54, p = 0.036) or ≥15% (OR 2.74, 95% CI 1.06–6.06, p = 0.023) remained independent predictors of AP. The final multivariable model demonstrated solid discrimination (AUC = 0.78, 95% CI 0.71–0.85) and satisfactory calibration (p = 0.42). At a mean follow-up of 32.3 months, BCR occurred in 23 patients (18.1%; 3-year recurrence-free survival: 81.3%). Restaging PSMA PET/CT was positive in 8 of 23 recurrences (34.8%; three local, four regional nodal, one solitary bone). Neither clinical nor radiological parameters independently predicted BCR or PSMA PET/CT positivity. Conclusions: Biopsy Gleason pattern 4 extent (<10% and <15%) and PSAD are the strongest independent preoperative predictors of organ-confined, non-upgraded pathology in ISUP GG 2 prostate cancer. Combining a low pattern 4 burden (<10%, or up to 15% in highly selected cases) with a low PSAD provides objective parameters to refine “favorable intermediate-risk” stratification by identifying patients with a lower probability of adverse pathological features.
SN  - 2072-6694
ER  -