Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Prostate biopsy grading errors: a sampling problem?

C R King1, J P Long

  • 1Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA 94305, USA. christopher@reyes.stanford.edu

International Journal of Cancer
|February 17, 2001
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Principles and Techniques of Expert Laparoscopic Surgical Dissection.

Journal of minimally invasive gynecology·2016
Same author

A polymorphism in the VKORC1 regulator calumenin predicts higher warfarin dose requirements in African Americans.

Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics·2010
Same author

Ability of VKORC1 and CYP2C9 to predict therapeutic warfarin dose during the initial weeks of therapy.

Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis : JTH·2009
Same author

Preparation, structure, and stability of Pt and Pd monolayer modified Pd and Pt electrocatalysts.

Physical chemistry chemical physics : PCCP·2009
Same author

Combination of human tumor necrosis factor-alpha (hTNF-alpha) gene delivery with gemcitabine is effective in models of pancreatic cancer.

Cancer gene therapy·2009
Same author

A 61-year-old man with pain in antecubital fossa after an elbow hyperextension injury.

British journal of sports medicine·2009
Same journal

Cancer Planners Forum: Positioning National Cancer Control Plans as Strategic Investments in the Future of Countries.

International journal of cancer·2026
Same journal

Geographical Pattern of Testicular Cancer Points to Maternal Exposures Behind Increasing Incidence.

International journal of cancer·2026
Same journal

High Endothelial Venules in Small Cell Lung Cancer: Prognostic Subtypes and Therapeutic Implications for Immunoradiotherapy.

International journal of cancer·2026
Same journal

Epigenetic Dysregulation of Somatostatin Receptors (SSTR) 1-5 and Therapeutic Implications in Neuroendocrine and Non-Neuroendocrine Malignancies.

International journal of cancer·2026
Same journal

Sex Hormone Receptors, HBV Integrations and Their Prognostic Predictive Value Among Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients.

International journal of cancer·2026
Same journal

MET Expression in Upper Gastrointestinal Adenocarcinoma: Prevalence, Prognostic Impact, and Implications for Anti-MET Antibody-Drug Conjugate Therapy.

International journal of cancer·2026
See all related articles

Increasing prostate biopsy cores significantly reduces grading errors, improving accuracy compared to standard methods. This enhanced sampling minimizes discrepancies between biopsy and surgical specimen Gleason scores.

Area of Science:

  • Urology
  • Pathology
  • Oncology

Background:

  • Discordance between biopsy and surgical specimen Gleason scores can arise from pathological interpretation bias and sampling effects.
  • Accurate Gleason grading is crucial for prostate cancer staging and treatment decisions.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the impact of sampling effects on Gleason score grading errors in prostate cancer.
  • To evaluate the accuracy of a systematic 18-core biopsy technique compared to pooled data.

Main Methods:

  • A prospective study comparing Gleason scores from 18-core prostate biopsies with matched surgical specimens in 28 patients.
  • Comparison with a pooled database (n=2,687) from 10 series representing standard biopsy accuracy.

Main Results:

Related Experiment Videos

  • The 18-core technique achieved an exact Gleason score match in 57% of cases, versus 42% in the pooled database (P=0.055).
  • 93% of cases were within 1 Gleason score point, compared to 78% in the pooled database (P=0.029).
  • For Gleason score 7, exact matches were 78% vs 63% (P=0.17), with 0% upgrading versus 20% (P=0.07).

Conclusions:

  • Minimizing sampling effects through a higher number of biopsy cores significantly reduces Gleason score grading errors.
  • This reduction is comparable to that achieved by consensus pathologic evaluation.
  • A systematic approach with more cores may prevent cancers from being missed, but optimal core number requires further study.