https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2025.13925
Should pathologists and clinicians continue to consider Grade Group 1 (Gleason score ≤6) prostate cancer as a true carcinoma? Let’s hear from patient advocates
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Published: 10 June 2025
To the Editor,
The current grading system for prostate cancer (PCA) includes 5 Grade Groups (GG): GG1 (Gleason score ≤ 6); GG2 (Gleason score 3+4); GG3 (Gleason score 4+3); GG4 (Gleason score 4+4; or 3+5; or 5+3); GG5 (Gleason scores 4+5/5+4/5+5). The GG system is one of the most important predictors of outcome in PCA patients...
Downloads
Montironi R, Cheng L, Cimadamore A, et al. Narrative review of prostate cancer grading systems: will the Gleason scores be replaced by the Grade Groups? Transl Androl Urol. 2021; 10:1530-1540. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/tau-20-853
Mazzucchelli R, Barbisan F, Scarpelli M, et al. Is incidentally detected prostate cancer in patients undergoing radical cystoprostatectomy clinically significant? Am J Clin Pathol. 2009; 131:279-283. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1309/AJCP4OCYZBAN9TJU
Shah RB, Paner GP, Cheng L, et al. Genitourinary Pathology Society and International Society of Urological Pathology white paper on defining indolent prostate cancer: call for a multidisciplinary approach. Eur Urol. 2025:S0302-2838(25)00150-2. Online ahead of print.
Epstein JI, Kibel AS. Renaming Gleason score 6 prostate to noncancer: a flawed idea scientifically and for patient care. J Clin Oncol. 2022;40:3106-3109. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.22.00926
Ross HM, Kryvenko ON, Cowan JE, et al. Do adenocarcinomas of the prostate with Gleason score (GS) =6 have the potential to metastasize to lymph nodes? Am J Surg Pathol. 2012; 36:1346-1352. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0b013e3182556dcd
Anderson BB, Oberlin DT, Razmaria AA, et al. Extraprostatic extension is extremely rare for contemporary gleason score 6 prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2017; 72:455-460. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.11.028
Lokman U, Erickson AM, Vasarainen H, et al. PTEN loss but not ERG expression in diagnostic biopsies is associated with increased risk of progression and adverse surgical findings in men with prostate cancer on active surveillance. Eur Urol Focus. 2018; 4:867-873. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2017.03.004
Carter HB, Helfand B, Mamawala M, et al. Germline mutations in ATM and BRCA1/2 are associated with grade reclassification in men on active surveillance for prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2019; 75:743-749. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2018.09.021
Zhou M, Amin A, Fine SW, et al. Should grade group 1 prostate cancer be reclassified as "non-cancer"? A pathology community perspective. Urol Oncol. 2023; 41:62-64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2022.09.028
Saoud R, Woranisarakul V, Paner GP, et al. Physician perception of grade group 1 prostate cancer. Eur Urol Focus. 2023;9:966-973. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2023.04.002
How to Cite
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
PAGEPress has chosen to apply the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) to all manuscripts to be published.