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 Video

Updated: Jun 23, 2026

Enhancing Prostate Tumor Biobanking Reliability with Improved Sampling Technique and Histological Characterization
07:34

Enhancing Prostate Tumor Biobanking Reliability with Improved Sampling Technique and Histological Characterization

Published on: November 17, 2023

Factors predicting prostatic biopsy Gleason sum under grading.

Danielle A Stackhouse1, Leon Sun, Florian R Schroeck

  • 1Division of Urologic Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina 27710, USA.

The Journal of Urology
|May 19, 2009
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

Beyond the bladder: case series of <i>Mycobacterium bovis</i> bacillus Calmette-Guérin infections following intravesical instillation.

ASM case reports·2026
Same author

Diagnostic performance of Cxbladder Triage Plus for the identification and stratification of patients at risk for urothelial carcinoma: The multicenter, prospective, observational DRIVE study.

Urologic oncology·2025
Same author

Comparative Economic Evaluation of Radical Prostatectomy, Radiation, and Ablative Techniques in the Management of Localized Prostate Cancer.

Cancers·2025
Same author

Integrating biomarkers and multi-parametric MRI to provide enhanced clinical diagnosis for prostate cancer.

Frontiers in urology·2025
Same author

Feasibility and outcomes of interventions to reduce cystoscopy discomfort: a multi-site pilot study.

BJU international·2025
Same author

Integration and evaluation of implementation strategies to improve guideline-concordant bladder cancer surveillance: a prospective observational study.

Implementation science communications·2025

Nearly half of prostate cancer cases are under graded. Clinical factors can predict this under grading, improving diagnosis accuracy and guiding treatment decisions for better patient outcomes.

Area of Science:

  • Urology
  • Oncology
  • Pathology

Background:

  • Accurate Gleason grading is crucial for prostate cancer management.
  • Under grading of prostate cancer biopsy Gleason sum is a known issue.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To identify clinical factors associated with under grading of biopsy Gleason sum compared to prostatectomy.
  • To develop a predictive model for the probability of Gleason sum under grading.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of 1,701 prostate cancer patients with biopsy and prostatectomy data.
  • Logistic regression to identify predictors of under grading.
  • Development and validation of a nomogram to predict under grading probability.

Main Results:

More Related Videos

Use of MRI-ultrasound Fusion to Achieve Targeted Prostate Biopsy
09:11

Use of MRI-ultrasound Fusion to Achieve Targeted Prostate Biopsy

Published on: April 9, 2019

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 23, 2026

Enhancing Prostate Tumor Biobanking Reliability with Improved Sampling Technique and Histological Characterization
07:34

Enhancing Prostate Tumor Biobanking Reliability with Improved Sampling Technique and Histological Characterization

Published on: November 17, 2023

Use of MRI-ultrasound Fusion to Achieve Targeted Prostate Biopsy
09:11

Use of MRI-ultrasound Fusion to Achieve Targeted Prostate Biopsy

Published on: April 9, 2019

  • Under grading occurred in 46.6% of the cohort.
  • Predictors included age, biopsy Gleason sum, PSA, prostate weight, core ratio, and cancer percentage.
  • The developed nomogram achieved 72.4% predictive accuracy.

    • Conclusions:

    • A nomogram can satisfactorily predict the risk of Gleason sum under grading.
    • Predicting under grading can enhance patient consultation and identify candidates for repeat biopsy.
    • Improved accuracy in prostate cancer diagnosis is facilitated by predicting under grading.