Current practice of diagnosis and reporting of prostate cancer on needle biopsy among genitourinary pathologists.

As there is a lack of hard data in the literature about many of the issues relating to diagnosing and reporting prostate cancer, we sought to survey current practices. A questionnaire was sent to 93 genitourinary pathologists with a response rate of 69%. Almost all respondents (95%) used formalin as fixative for needle biopsies.

Update on the Gleason grading system for prostate cancer: results of an international consensus conference of urologic pathologists.

The Gleason system for prostate cancer was based on a study of 270 patients from the Minneapolis Veterans Administration Hospital in 1966-1967. In 1974, Gleason and the Veterans Administrative Cooperative Urological Research Group expanded this study to 1032 men. These studies formed the basis of the Gleason grading system, which is now endorsed as the primary grading system for prostate cancer by the World Health Organization, the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology Fascicle on prostate cancer, the Association of Directors of Anatomic and Surgical Pathology, and the College of American Pathologists.

Current practice of diagnosis and reporting of prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and glandular atypia among genitourinary pathologists.

The criteria for diagnosing prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN) and lesions suspicious for cancer are described in the literature. However, it is unknown how these are applied in practice by experts in genitourinary (GU) pathology. A questionnaire was sent to 93 GU pathologists in countries around the world with the purpose of surveying current practices.

A comparison of interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma in Japan and the United States.

Context: Gleason grading is now the sole prostatic carcinoma grading system recommended by the World Health Organization. It is imperative that there be good interobserver reproducibility within this system worldwide. To our knowledge, there are no studies, using the same specimens, that compare the interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading in Japan and the United States.