|
If cancer
is found in your biopsy sample, it is assigned a "grade"
based on how abnormal the cancer cells appear compared with normal
prostate cells when viewed under the microscope.
The system
most widely used to "grade" prostate cancer cells is
the Gleason system, devised by Dr. Donald F. Gleason.
The Gleason
system is based exclusively on the architectural pattern of the
glands of the prostate tumor. It evaluates how effectively the
cells of a cancer are able to structure themselves into glands
resembling those of the normal prostate.
Normal prostate
cells are perfectly differentiated. Once they become malignant,
however, prostate cells become less differentiated. Cancer cells
that are very different in appearance and function than healthy
cells are associated with more aggressive forms of cancer.
The Gleason
system assigns cells a grade from 1 to 5. Lower Gleason scores
describe a tumor whose structure is nearly normal (well differentiated)
that will probably not be very aggressive. Higher scores describe
poorly-differentiated, more aggressive tumors.
The
5 Gleason Grades
| Gleason
Grade 1 |
A
compact mass of pale, well-formed cells, with evenly placed,
uniform "glands" |
| Gleason
Grade 2 |
Cells
are similar to those in Grade 1 but they do not form a circumscribed
mass. There may be slight variation in size, shape, and spacing
of the glands. |
| Gleason
Grade 3 |
Most
common grade by far and also considered well differentiated.
Malignant glands show slight variation in size and shape.
Glandular contours are round and somewhat uniform. |
| Gleason
Grade 4 |
A
big jump in loss of architecture. Disruption and loss of the
normal individual gland unit. Fusion of glands forming a network
punctuated by glandular lumens. |
| Gleason
Grade 5 |
Shows
a variety of patterns, all of which demonstrate no evidence
of any attempt to form gland units. The cancer cells form
solid sheets and clusters or may infiltrate the prostate as
individual cells. |
A Gleason
"grade" for cancer cells should not be confused with
your "Gleason score," which can range from 2 to 10.
The Gleason
score is written as the sum of the two Gleason "grades"
given to the two most predominant or prevalent cell patterns found
when your biopsy sample was examined under the microscope.
If your Gleason
score is an even number, ie. 2, 4, 6, 8 or 10, that indicates
that 95 percent or more of the tumor was composed of a single
predominant cell pattern, so the dominant pattern was counted
twice.
But if your
Gleason score is an odd number, the component numbers are an important
part of the score -- because not all scores of 5, or 7, are in
fact equal.
A Gleason
score of 3+4=7, for example, would mean that the most prevalent
cell pattern was 3 (moderately differentiated) and the second
most prevalent pattern was 4 (poorly-differentiated). This would
be better than a Gleason score of 4+3=7, where the most prevalent
cell pattern was 4 (poorly-differentiated) and the second-most
prevalent pattern 3 (moderately differentiated).
Gleason
Scores
| 1+1=2 |
Lowest
possible Gleason score, where both the primary and secondary
patterns have a Gleason grade of 1 |
| 1+2=3 |
|
| 2+1=3 |
|
| 2+2=4 |
|
| 2+3=5 |
Very
typical Gleason score. |
| 3+2=5 |
|
| 3+3=6 |
Most
commonly observed Gleason score. |
| 3+4=7 |
|
| 4+3=7 |
Very
typical Gleason score. |
| 4+4=8 |
|
| 4+5=9 |
|
| 5+4=9 |
|
| 5+5=10 |
Highest
possible Gleason score, when the primary and secondary patterns
both have the most disordered Gleason grades of 5. |
In general, the survival time for a patient following a diagnosis
of prostate cancer is related to the Gleason score. The lower
the score, the better the patient is likely to do. In one study,
a Gleason score of 2 to 4 indicated about a 95 percent chance
of survival at 15 years without aggressive treatment.
However, general
principles do not always apply to individual patients. Statistics
tell us only what happens to men as a large group. Men with low
Gleason scores have been known to do poorly, and men with high
Gleason scores have been known to do well.
It also should
be obvious that that assigning Gleason grades is not an exact
science. Seeking a second opinion of the same biopsy samples from
a different pathologist is highly recommended.
|