|
|
|
| Predictive Value of Gleason Score Combined with Clinicopathological Features for the Prognosis of Patients with Prostate Cancer |
| JIANG Xiufang |
| Department of Pathology, Jian'ou Municipal Hospital, Jian'ou Fujian 353100 |
|
|
|
|
Abstract 【Objective】 To investigate the predictive value of the Gleason score combined with clinicopathological features for the prognosis of patients with prostate cancer. 【Methods】 A total of 98 patients with prostate cancer admitted to our hospital from January 2022 to June 2023 were followed up for 2 years. According to survival outcomes, the patients were divided into a survival group (74 cases) and a death group (24 cases). Clinical characteristics of the two groups were collected and compared. Univariate analysis was performed to screen indicators with significant differences between groups, and multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify independent risk factors. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted to evaluate the predictive efficacy of the Gleason score combined with clinicopathological features for patient prognosis. 【Results】 The proportions of patients with TNM stage Ⅲ-Ⅳ prostate cancer, lymph node metastasis, poorly to moderately differentiated tumors, and Gleason scores in the death group were significantly higher than those in the survival group (P<0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that TNM stage, lymph node metastasis, and Gleason score were independent risk factors for death in patients with prostate cancer(P<0.05), whereas degree of differentiation was an independent protective factor (P<0.05). The area under the curve (AUC) of the regression model was 0.907, with a sensitivity of 75.0% and a specificity of 91.9%. 【Conclusion】 Gleason score combined with clinicopathological features such as TNM stage and lymph node metastasis has high predictive value for the prognosis of patients with prostate cancer and may serve as an important reference indicator for clinical prognostic evaluation.
|
|
Received: 22 December 2025
|
|
|
|
|
|
[1] 陈艾琪,陈守康,杜小萌,等. 基于多参数MRI及临床指标的前列腺癌风险预测模型建立及其与PI-RADS的比较[J].中国CT和MRI杂志,2025,23(10):139-142.
[2] 兰乐健,尤升杰,桂志红,等. 碱性磷酸酶、乳酸脱氢酶及Gleason分级用于评估低风险转移性激素敏感型前列腺癌预后的价值[J].中国性科学,2024,33(4):34-37.
[3] 田琦,万婷,田艳芳,等. 癌症家族史及前列腺癌家族史对腹腔镜下前列腺癌根治术后患者预后的影响[J].肿瘤综合治疗电子杂志,2025,11(4):91-97.
[4] 程丽,汪秀玲,孙小伶. 多参数磁共振成像技术预测前列腺癌患者手术预后的价值分析[J].中国CT和MRI杂志,2024,22(5):130-133.
[5] 智雅婧,李晶,韩永安,等. 前列腺癌组织中SNRPA1、SYF2表达水平与患者病理特征、预后的关系[J].转化医学杂志,2025,14(8):30-35.
[6] 彭正伟,李玲,聂瑚玮,等. 术前血浆纤维蛋白原联合炎症相关标志物评分与非转移性结直肠癌患者病理特征及预后的相关性分析[J].实用医院临床杂志,2023,20(4):68-72.
[7] 武永峰,陈辉,代允义. MR扩散加权成像联合Gleason评分对前列腺癌骨转移的评估价值[J].中华生物医学工程杂志,2021,27(6):692-696.
[8] TAN E H, BURN E, BARCLAY N L, et al. Incidence, prevalence, and survival of prostate cancer in the UK[J].JAMA Netw Open,2024, 7(9): e2434622.
[9] HUANG T H, LI W M, KE H L, et al. The factors impacting on Gleason score upgrading in prostate cancer with initial low Gleason scores[J].J Formos Med Assoc,2025, 124(2): 145-150.
[10] 秦京黎,王莹,于春虎,等. 前列腺癌组织miR-330-5p和整合素α5表达水平与临床病理特征及预后的关系[J].中国性科学,2025,34(8):41-47.
[11] 田琦,万婷,田艳芳,等. 癌症家族史及前列腺癌家族史对腹腔镜下前列腺癌根治术后患者预后的影响[J].肿瘤综合治疗电子杂志,2025,11(4):91-97.
[12] 叶洲杰,宋勇,邵金鹏,等. 前列腺前脂肪垫淋巴结转移阳性与机器人根治性前列腺切除术预后关系研究[J].中华男科学杂志,2025,31(3):216-221.
[13] 马佳宁,胡尘翰,乔晓梦,等. 双参数MRI影像组学预测前列腺癌根治性切除术后Gleason评分升级[J].中国介入影像与治疗学,2025,22(1):47-51.
[14] 吴昊宇,熊天宇,张彦宁,等. Gleason分级4级占比对ISUP分级2～3级非转移性前列腺癌术后不良病理特征和生化复发的预测价值[J].中华泌尿外科杂志,2025,46(4):267-274.
[15] 郭晓翔,朱海松,张超,等. 血清前列腺特异性抗原和α-甲酰辅酶A消旋酶水平对前列腺癌根治术后患者预后的预测价值[J].新乡医学院学报,2023,40(11):1056-1060. |
|
|
|
2026, Vol. 43 
