Effect of pathologic revision and Ki67 and ERG immunohistochemistry on predicting radical prostatectomy outcome in men initially on active surveillance

The relevance of ERG immunoexpression intensity for prostatic adenocarcinoma in radical prostatectomy of 635 samples

Prostate cancer is the world's most frequently diagnosed malignancy in men. Recent work suggests that patients with high ERG expression intensity are significantly more likely to develop biochemical relapse and metastasis, and die of prostate cancer. The objective of this study was to determine the relationship between the intensity of ERG protein expression and the staging of prostate cancer and the formation of metastases in 635 samples. A retrospective cohort analysis was performed using immunohistochemistry reactions in tissue microarray samples taken from non-neoplastic and neoplastic prostate tissue from patients who underwent radical prostatectomies at a reference hospital from 2009 to 2016. For the ERG marker analysis, the samples were scored for the presence or absence of nuclear signals. Weak, moderate, or strong intensity of the nuclei of the observable tumor cells was considered to be positive markers. All told, 635 samples were evaluated, and the ERG expression was inconclusive in 9% of cases, while 30% were positive and 61% were negative. Of the samples with positive result: 25.8% were weak and focal, 53.2% were moderate, and 21% were strong. Finally, 21% of the cases with a positive ERG had a high Gleason score. Metastasis was detected in 41% of the patients who were ERG positive, and of these, the majority had moderate marking and were aged older than 60 years, although there was no statistically significant difference between the older and younger age groups. Patients with moderate to strong ERG staining had higher staging compared to the others, and no increase in metastasis was detected in patients with more intense ERG expression. More studies should be carried out to corroborate these results and to reach a consensus on the intensity and scoring of the expression levels of ERG markers.

Evaluation of ERG Expression in Prostate Adenocarcinoma and Its Prognostic Impact in Patients Survival Rate

Background & Objective:

Some certain markers, including prostatic specific antigen (PSA), are being used to screen prostate cancer (PC), but none of them have sufficient sensitivity and specificity for evaluation of prognosis. Currently, genetic variants have found their place in the prognosis of PC. ETS-related gene (ERG) expression and its intensity have contradictory evidence regarding ERG expression with PC incidence or associating outcome. Our purpose was to survey the relationship of ERG expression and its intensity with PC and relative clinical outcome.

Methods:

We studied the immunohistochemichal (IHC) expression of ERG in 101 radical prostatectomy specimens with PC of different histologic grades. All samples were chosen from pathology department of Sina hospital in Tehran-Iran from 2011 to 2018. Positive ERG expression and its association with Gleason score, preoperative PSA, metastasis status, stage and grade of tumors was evaluated.

Results:

In total, ERG expression was observed in 42 cases (41.58%) and of these, 7 (16.66%) were categorized as weak, 13 (30.95%) moderate and 22(52.38%) as strong. There was no significant correlation between ERG expression and age, preoperative PSA, Gleason score, lymph node involvement, metastatic pattern, stage, and grade of the tumor (P>0.05). ERG expression frequency in the two groups of survived and expired patients was 42.85% and 0%, respectively; despite the noticeable difference, it was not statistically significance (P=0.264).

Conclusion:

Evaluation of ERG expression and its intensity may have no essential role as an acceptable prognostic factor in Iranian’s population for anticipating whether PC itself or the outcomes accompanied. This relation is vigorously under the influence of geographical/ethnical features.

Immunohistochemistry for Prostate Biopsy-Impact on Histological Prostate Cancer Diagnoses and Clinical Decision Making

BACKGROUND

To test the value of immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining in prostate biopsies for changes in biopsy results and its impact on treatment decision-making.

METHODS

Between January 2017-June 2020, all patients undergoing prostate biopsies were identified and evaluated regarding additional IHC staining for diagnostic purpose. Final pathologic results after radical prostatectomy (RP) were analyzed regarding the effect of IHC at biopsy.

RESULTS

Of 606 biopsies, 350 (58.7%) received additional IHC staining. Of those, prostate cancer (PCa) was found in 208 patients (59.4%); while in 142 patients (40.6%), PCa could be ruled out through IHC. IHC patients harbored significantly more often Gleason 6 in biopsy (p < 0.01) and less suspicious baseline characteristics than patients without IHC. Of 185 patients with positive IHC and PCa detection, IHC led to a change in biopsy results in 81 (43.8%) patients. Of these patients with changes in biopsy results due to IHC, 42 (51.9%) underwent RP with 59.5% harboring ≥pT3 and/or Gleason 7-10.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with IHC stains had less suspicious characteristics than patients without IHC. Moreover, in patients with positive IHC and PCa detection, a change in biopsy results was observed in >40%. Patients with changes in biopsy results partly underwent RP, in which 60% harbored significant PCa.

The 2019 Genitourinary Pathology Society (GUPS) White Paper on Contemporary Grading of Prostate Cancer

CONTEXT.—

Controversies and uncertainty persist in prostate cancer grading.

OBJECTIVE.—

To update grading recommendations.

DATA SOURCES.—

Critical review of the literature along with pathology and clinician surveys.

CONCLUSIONS.—

Percent Gleason pattern 4 (%GP4) is as follows: (1) report %GP4 in needle biopsy with Grade Groups (GrGp) 2 and 3, and in needle biopsy on other parts (jars) of lower grade in cases with at least 1 part showing Gleason score (GS) 4 + 4 = 8; and (2) report %GP4: less than 5% or less than 10% and 10% increments thereafter. Tertiary grade patterns are as follows: (1) replace "tertiary grade pattern" in radical prostatectomy (RP) with "minor tertiary pattern 5 (TP5)," and only use in RP with GrGp 2 or 3 with less than 5% Gleason pattern 5; and (2) minor TP5 is noted along with the GS, with the GrGp based on the GS. Global score and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsies are as follows: (1) when multiple undesignated cores are taken from a single MRI-targeted lesion, an overall grade for that lesion is given as if all the involved cores were one long core; and (2) if providing a global score, when different scores are found in the standard and the MRI-targeted biopsy, give a single global score (factoring both the systematic standard and the MRI-targeted positive cores). Grade Groups are as follows: (1) Grade Groups (GrGp) is the terminology adopted by major world organizations; and (2) retain GS 3 + 5 = 8 in GrGp 4. Cribriform carcinoma is as follows: (1) report the presence or absence of cribriform glands in biopsy and RP with Gleason pattern 4 carcinoma. Intraductal carcinoma (IDC-P) is as follows: (1) report IDC-P in biopsy and RP; (2) use criteria based on dense cribriform glands (>50% of the gland is composed of epithelium relative to luminal spaces) and/or solid nests and/or marked pleomorphism/necrosis; (3) it is not necessary to perform basal cell immunostains on biopsy and RP to identify IDC-P if the results would not change the overall (highest) GS/GrGp part per case; (4) do not include IDC-P in determining the final GS/GrGp on biopsy and/or RP; and (5) "atypical intraductal proliferation (AIP)" is preferred for an intraductal proliferation of prostatic secretory cells which shows a greater degree of architectural complexity and/or cytological atypia than typical high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia, yet falling short of the strict diagnostic threshold for IDC-P. Molecular testing is as follows: (1) Ki67 is not ready for routine clinical use; (2) additional studies of active surveillance cohorts are needed to establish the utility of PTEN in this setting; and (3) dedicated studies of RNA-based assays in active surveillance populations are needed to substantiate the utility of these expensive tests in this setting. Artificial intelligence and novel grading schema are as follows: (1) incorporating reactive stromal grade, percent GP4, minor tertiary GP5, and cribriform/intraductal carcinoma are not ready for adoption in current practice.