Histologic Grading of Prostatic Adenocarcinoma Can Be Further Optimized
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Histologic grading remains the gold standard for prognosis in prostate cancer, and assessment of Gleason score plays a critical role in active surveillance management. We sought to optimize the prognostic stratification of grading and developed a method of recording and studying individual architectural patterns by light microscopic evaluation that is independent of standard Gleason grade. Some of the evaluated patterns are not assessed by current Gleason grading (eg, reactive stromal response). Individual histologic patterns were correlated with recurrence-free survival in a retrospective postradical prostatectomy cohort of 1275 patients represented by the highest-grade foci of carcinoma in tissue microarrays. In univariable analysis, fibromucinous rupture with varied epithelial complexity had a significantly lower relative risk of recurrence-free survival in cases graded as 3+4=7. Cases having focal "poorly formed glands," which could be designated as pattern 3+4=7, had lower risk than cribriform patterns with either small cribriform glands or expansile cribriform growth. In separate multivariable Cox proportional hazard analyses of both Gleason score 3+3=6 and 3+4=7 carcinomas, reactive stromal patterns were associated with worse recurrence-free survival. Decision tree models demonstrate potential regrouping of architectural patterns into categories with similar risk. In summary, we argue that Gleason score assignment by current consensus guidelines are not entirely optimized for clinical use, including active surveillance. Our data suggest that focal poorly formed gland and cribriform patterns, currently classified as Gleason pattern 4, should be in separate prognostic groups, as the latter is associated with worse outcome. Patterns with extravasated mucin are likely overgraded in a subset of cases with more complex epithelial bridges, whereas stromogenic cancers have a worse outcome than conveyed by Gleason grade alone. These findings serve as a foundation to facilitate optimization of histologic grading and strongly support incorporating reactive stroma into routine assessment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".