
To investigate the reproducibility of Gleason scores for prostate cancer.Based on the revised Gleason Scoring System of the International Society of Urological Pathology ( ISUP) , we analyzed the reproducibility and difference of Gleason scores in 49 cases of prostate cancer using the methods of combination and grouping.The total reproducibility of Gleason scores among 15 pathologists was good (κ = 0.642), 62.2% by the combination method, the highest in Gleason 5 + 5 (81.2%) and 5 +4 (73.3%), then in Gleason 4 + 4 (67.5%), 3 + 3 (64.0%), 4 +3 (61.3%), and 3 + 4 (44.0%), and the lowest in Gleason 4 + 5 (38.9%) and 3 + 5 (33.3%). The total reproducibility of Gleason scores by the grouping method was 71.4%, the highest in Gleason 9-10 (84.9%) , then in Gleason 7 (76.7%) and 6 (64.0%), and the lowest in Gleason 8 (60.7%).The reproducibility of Gleason scores remains to be further improved in prostate cancer, mainly concerning the understanding of Gleason 3 and 4 carcinoma.
Male, Carcinoma, Humans, Prostatic Neoplasms, Reproducibility of Results, Neoplasm Grading
Male, Carcinoma, Humans, Prostatic Neoplasms, Reproducibility of Results, Neoplasm Grading
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
