The association of the cribriform pattern with outcome for prostatic adenocarcinomas

Amin, 2005, Prognostic and predictive factors and reporting of prostate carcinoma in prostate needle biopsy specimens, Scand. J. Urol. Nephrol., 20, 10.1080/03008880510030923 Gleason, 1966, Classification of prostatic carcinomas, Cancer Chemother. Rep., 50, 125 Gleason, 1974, Prediction of prognosis for prostatic adenocarcinoma by combined histological grading and clinical staging, J. Urol., 111, 58, 10.1016/S0022-5347(17)59889-4 Qian, 1997, Detection of chromosomal anomalies and c-myc gene amplification in the cribriform pattern of prostatic intraepitelial neoplasia and carcinoma by fluorescence in situ hybridization, Mod. Pathol., 10, 1113 Epstein, 2005, ISUP grading committee: the 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma, Am. J. Surg. Pathol., 29, 1228, 10.1097/01.pas.0000173646.99337.b1 Egevad, 2002, Prognostic value of the Gleason score in prostate cancer, BJU Int., 89, 538, 10.1046/j.1464-410X.2002.02669.x Epstein, 2010, An update of the Gleason grading system, J. Urol., 183, 433, 10.1016/j.juro.2009.10.046 Lotan, 2010, Clinical implications of changing definitions within the Gleason grading system, Nat. Rev. Urol., 7, 136, 10.1038/nrurol.2010.9 Qian, 1997, The extent and multicentricity of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia in clinically localized prostatic adenocarcinoma, Hum. Pathol., 28, 143, 10.1016/S0046-8177(97)90097-6 Magi-Galluzzi, 2011, International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Handling and Staging of Radical Prostatectomy Specimens. Working group 3: extraprostatic extension, lymphovascular invasion and locally advanced disease, Mod. Pathol., 24, 26, 10.1038/modpathol.2010.158 Berney, 2011, International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Handling and Staging of Radical Prostatectomy Specimens. Working group 4: seminal vesicles and lymph nodes, Mod. Pathol., 24, 39, 10.1038/modpathol.2010.160 Tan, 2011, International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Handling and Staging of Radical Prostatectomy Specimens. Working group 5: surgical margins, Mod. Pathol., 24, 48, 10.1038/modpathol.2010.155 Martinez-Rodriguez, 2007, Analysis of cribriform Gleason grade 3 in prostatic carcinoma. A histopathological and immunohistochemical study of 32 cases, Histopathology, 51, 717, 10.1111/j.1365-2559.2007.02834.x Latour, 2008, Grading of invasive cribriform carcinoma on prostate needle biopsy: an interobserver study among experts in genitourinary pathology, Am. J. Surg. Pathol., 32, 1532, 10.1097/PAS.0b013e318169e8fd Iczkowski, 2011, Digital quantification of five high-grade prostate cancer patterns, including the cribriform pattern, and their association with adverse outcome, Am. J. Clin. Pathol., 136, 98, 10.1309/AJCPZ7WBU9YXSJPE Brimo, 2013, Contemporary grading for prostate cancer: implications for patient care, Eur. Urol., 63, 892, 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.10.015 Kryvenko, 2013, Gleason score 7 adenocarcinoma of the prostate with lymph node metastases: analysis of 184 radical prostatectomy specimens, Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med., 137, 610, 10.5858/arpa.2012-0128-OA Ross, 2012, Do adenocarcinomas of the prostate with Gleason score (GS) ≤6 have the potential to metastasize to lymph nodes?, Am. J. Surg. Pathol., 36, 1346, 10.1097/PAS.0b013e3182556dcd Dong, 2013, Architectural heterogeneity and cribriform pattern predict adverse clinical outcome for Gleason grade 4 prostatic adenocarcinoma, Am. J. Surg. Pathol., 37, 1855, 10.1097/PAS.0b013e3182a02169 Dong, 2012, Impact on the clinical outcome of prostate cancer by the 2005 international society of urological pathology modified Gleason grading system, Am. J. Surg. Pathol., 36, 838, 10.1097/PAS.0b013e3182486faf