The Clinicopathological Study on Prostatic Carcinoma: The Evaluation of Prognosis by Gleason's Method.
- Author:
Seong CHOI
1
;
Moon Kee CHUNG
;
Jong Byung YOON
;
Su Kil LIM
;
Moon Soo YOON
;
Byung Kap MIN
;
Yang Il PARK
;
Young Kyung PARK
;
Sung Hyup CHOI
;
Jeong Gi KANG
;
Bo Hyun HAN
Author Information
1. Department of Urology, College of Medicine, Pusan National University, Pusan, Korea.
- Publication Type:Comparative Study ; Original Article
- Keywords:
prostatic carcinoma;
Gleason's score
- MeSH:
Busan;
Japan;
Mortality;
Prognosis*;
Survival Rate
- From:Korean Journal of Urology
1989;30(5):672-677
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
A clinicopathological study based on stages, Gleason's method and srvival rates was carried out in 149 cases of prostatic carcinoma treated at Pusan National University Hospital and five participating hospitals. 1. The distribution of each stage was:17 (11.4%) in stage A, 37 (24.8%) in stage B, 22 (14.8%) in stage C, and 73 cases (49.0%) in stage D. Of Gleason's score between primary and secondary pattern, the uniform cases were in 32%, the cases of 1 step differences were in 59 %, the cases of 2 step differences were in 9%, and none in more than 2 step differences. 2. The score sum of Gleason's method was inclined to be higher as the stage became higher. 3. The survival rates were declining as stages excluding cases between stage A and B became higher. As the Gleason's score (primary and secondary pattern, Gleason's sum, Gleason's category) became higher, the survival rates tended to decline. 4. Comparing the death rates of our cases to that of VACURG study of USA and that of Harada of Japan according to Gleason's score, there were no statistical differences (a>0.05). The prognosis of prostatic carcinoma depends on the histological factor, which in dictates the significance of Gleason's method. Also the authors believe that a common ground of basis such as Gleason's method is useful in comparative studies.
