Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate: a critical re-appraisal

Cribriform versus Intraductal: How to Determine the Difference

Over the years, our understanding of cribriform and intraductal prostate cancer (PCa) has evolved significantly, leading to substantial changes in their classification and clinical management. This review discusses the histopathological disparities between intraductal and cribriform PCa from a diagnostic perspective, aiming to aid pathologists in achieving accurate diagnoses. Furthermore, it discusses the ongoing debate surrounding the different recommendations between ISUP and GUPS, which pose challenges for practicing pathologists and complicates consensus among them. Recent studies have shown promising results in integrating these pathological features into clinical decision-making tools, improving predictions of PCa recurrence, cancer spread, and mortality. Future research efforts should focus on further unraveling the biological backgrounds of these entities and their implications for clinical management to ultimately improve PCa patient outcomes.

Unveiling the Genomic Landscape of Intraductal Carcinoma of the Prostate Using Spatial Gene Expression Analysis

Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDCP) has recently attracted increasing interest owing to its unfavorable prognoses. To effectively identify the IDCP-specific gene expression profile, we took a novel approach of characterizing a typical IDCP case using spatial gene expression analysis. A formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded sample was subjected to Visium CytAssist Spatial Gene Expression analysis. IDCP within invasive prostate cancer sites was recognized as a distinct cluster separate from other invasive cancer clusters. Highly expressed genes defining the IDCP cluster, such as MUC6, MYO16, NPY, and KLK12, reflected the aggressive nature of high-grade prostate cancer. IDCP sites also showed increased hypoxia markers HIF1A, BNIP3L, PDK1, and POGLUT1; decreased fibroblast markers COL1A2, DCN, and LUM; and decreased immune cell markers CCR5 and FCGR3A. Overall, these findings indicate that the hypoxic tumor microenvironment and reduced recruitment of fibroblasts and immune cells, which reflect morphological features of IDCP, may influence the aggressiveness of high-grade prostate cancer.

Recent insights on the clinical, pathological, and molecular features of intraductal carcinoma of the prostate

Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate, a unique histopathologic entity that is often observed (especially in advanced prostate cancer), is characterized by the proliferation of malignant cells within normal acini or ducts surrounded by a basement membrane. Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate is almost invariably associated with an adjacent high-grade carcinoma and is occasionally observed as an isolated subtype. Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate has been demonstrated to be an independent poor prognostic factor for all stages of cancer, whether localized, de novo metastatic, or castration-resistant. It also has a characteristic genetic profile, including high genomic instability. Recognizing and differentiating it from other pathologies is therefore important in patient management, and morphological diagnostic criteria for intraductal carcinoma of the prostate have been established. This review summarizes and outlines the clinical and pathological features, differential diagnosis, molecular aspects, and management of intraductal carcinoma of the prostate, as described in previous studies. We also present a discussion and future perspectives regarding intraductal carcinoma of the prostate.

Molecular complexity of intraductal carcinoma of the prostate

Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) is an aggressive subtype of prostate cancer characterized by the growth of tumor cells within the prostate ducts. It is often found alongside invasive carcinoma and is associated with poor prognosis. Understanding the molecular mechanisms driving IDC-P is crucial for improved diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment strategies. This review summarizes the molecular characteristics of IDC-P and their prognostic indications, comparing them to conventional prostate acinar adenocarcinoma, to gain insights into its unique behavior and identify potential therapeutic targets.

Intraductal Carcinoma of the Prostate: To Grade or Not to Grade

Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) is a distinct tumor type characterized by an expansile growth of atypical glandular epithelial cells within pre-existing prostate glands and ducts and has significant implications on clinical outcomes and patient management. There is an agreement that isolated IDC-P should not be graded, and IDC-P should be reported with a comment on its clinical significance. However, whether IDC-P should be factored into Grade Group (GG) in the presence of concurrent prostate cancer (PCa) has been debated vigorously. The contradicting opinions were promulgated when the Genitourinary Pathology Society (GUPS) and the International Society of Urological Pathologists (ISUP) published their recommendations for this issue. When IDC-P is present with PCa, the ISUP recommends incorporating it in the GG for the entire case, whereas the GUPS recommends excluding it from the final GG. Consequently, pathologists and clinicians are faced with the conundrum of conflicting recommendations. In this review article, the authors evaluate the magnitude of discrepant GG between the two grading methods, explore the rationales behind the differing views of the two urological societies, present the current reporting practices for IDC-P, and propose a provisional and pragmatic guide to alleviate the dilemma of which recommendation to follow.

PTEN loss in intraductal carcinoma of the prostate has low incidence in Japanese patients

Clinical and genomic features of prostate cancer (PCa) vary considerably between Asian and Western populations. PTEN loss is the most frequent abnormality in intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) in Western populations. However, its prevalence and significance in Asian populations have not yet been well studied. In the present study, we evaluated PTEN expression in IDC-P in a Japanese population and its association with ERG expression. This study included 45 and 59 patients with PCa with and without IDC-P, respectively, who underwent radical prostatectomy. PTEN loss was observed in 10 patients with PCa with IDC-P (22%) and nine patients with PCa without IDC-P (17%). ERG expression was relatively frequent in patients with PCa with PTEN loss, although a significant difference was not observed. The co-occurrence of PTEN loss and ERG expression was observed in four patients with PCa with IDC-P and one without IDC-P. PTEN loss and ERG expression did not affect progression-free survival, regardless of the presence of IDC-P. The frequency of PTEN loss in IDC-P is lower in Asian patients than in Western patients. Our results indicate that mechanisms underlying IDC-P in Asian populations are different from those of Western populations.

Appl1, Sortilin and Syndecan-1 immunohistochemistry on intraductal carcinoma of the prostate provides evidence of retrograde spread

The presence of intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDCP) correlates with late-stage disease and poor outcomes for patients with prostatic adenocarcinoma, but the accurate and reliable staging of disease severity remains challenging. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) has been utilised to overcome problems in assessing IDCP morphology, but the current markers have only demonstrated limited utility in characterising the complex biology of this lesion. In a retrospective study of a cohort of patients who had been diagnosed with IDCP, we utilised IHC on radical prostatectomy sections with a biomarker panel of Appl1, Sortilin and Syndecan-1, to interpret different architectural patterns and to explore the theory that IDCP occurs from retrograde spread of high-grade invasive prostatic adenocarcinoma. Cribriform IDCP displayed strong Appl1, Sortilin and Syndecan-1 labelling patterns, while solid IDCP architecture had high intensity Appl1 and Syndecan-1 labelling, but minimal Sortilin labelling. Notably, the expression pattern of the biomarker panel in regions of IDCP was similar to that of adjacent invasive prostatic adenocarcinoma, and also comparable to prostate cancer showing perineural and vascular invasion. The Appl1, Sortilin, and Syndecan-1 biomarker panel in IDCP provides evidence for the model of retrograde spread of invasive prostatic carcinoma into ducts/acini, and supports the inclusion of IDCP into the five-tier Gleason grading system.

A Case of Prostatic Signet-Ring Cell-like Carcinoma with Pagetoid Spread and Intraductal Carcinoma and Long-Term Survival: PD-L1 and Mismatch Repair System Proteins (MMR) Immunohistochemical Evaluation with Systematic Literature Review

Prostatic adenocarcinoma (PA) is the second most common malignancy in men globally. Signet-ring cell-like adenocarcinoma (SRCC) is a very rare PA subtype, with around 200 cases reported in the English literature. Histologically, the tumor cells show a vacuole compressing the nucleus to the periphery. Pagetoid spread in acini and ducts is usually related to metastases from urothelial or colorectal carcinomas, less commonly associated with intraductal carcinoma (IC); histologically, the tumor cells grow between the acinar secretory and basal cell layers. To our knowledge, we report the first prostatic SRCC (Gleason score 10, stage pT3b) associated with IC and pagetoid spread to prostatic acini and seminal vesicles. To our systematic literature review (PRISMA guidelines), it is the first tested case for both PD-L1 (<1% of positive tumor cells, clone 22C3) and mismatch repair system proteins (MMR) (MLH1+/MSH2+/PMS2+/MSH6+). We found no SRCC previously tested for MMR, while only four previous cases showed high expression of another PD-L1 clone (28-8). Finally, we discussed the differential diagnoses of prostatic SRCC.

Cribriform pattern in prostate tissues: Predictor for intraductal carcinoma of the prostate based on biopsy and radical prostatectomy pathology

Objectives

This study aims to investigate whether a cribriform pattern on prostate biopsy may be a factor in suspicion of intraductal carcinoma of the prostate after radical prostatectomy.

Methods

This retrospective study assessed 100 men who underwent prostatectomy from 2015 to 2019. Participants were grouped as 76 patients with Gleason pattern 4 and 24 patients without this pattern. All 100 participants underwent retrograde radical prostatectomy and limited lymph node dissection. The same pathologist evaluated all specimens. The cribriform pattern was evaluated with haematoxylin and eosin counterstaining, and intraductal carcinoma of the prostate was evaluated with immunohistochemical analysis of cytokeratin 34βE12.

Results

Patients with intraductal carcinoma of the prostate on immunohistochemical analysis showed a significant tendency to relapse in the postoperative period, and those with the cribriform pattern on biopsy had a significant recurrence rate. In univariate and multivariate analyses, intraductal carcinoma of the prostate confirmed in biopsy tissue was an independent predictor of biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy. The rate of intraductal carcinoma of the prostate confirmation was 28% of cases with a cribriform pattern in biopsy tissue, which was increased to 62% in prostatectomy tissues.

Conclusion

The cribriform pattern in the biopsy tissue may be a predictor for intraductal carcinoma of the prostate.

Updates of Prostate Cancer from the 2022 World Health Organization Classification of the Urinary and Male Genital Tumors

Prostate cancer is a heterogeneous disease with a wide spectrum of pathological, clinical, and molecular features. The diagnosis and classification of prostate cancer have been constantly modified with the incorporation of new data. The 5th edition of the World Health Organization (WHO) Classification of Urinary and Genital Tumors was recently published six years after the 4th edition. In this new edition, the classification of prostate cancer has been refined in the diagnostic criteria, grading, nomenclature, and genomics. This paper reviews significant updates to the new WHO classification of prostate cancer, including high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia, acinar adenocarcinoma, intraductal carcinoma, ductal carcinoma, and neuroendocrine tumors. Controversial issues in the Gleason grading are discussed, such as intraductal carcinoma and tertiary grade. We also highlight distinct genetic and epigenetic alterations in prostate cancer that may contribute to its diverse clinicopathologic features. Overall, the 5th edition of the WHO classification provides a comprehensive assessment of prostate cancer with morphologic, immunohistochemical, genomic, and clinical data, which may represent an optimal paradigm for diagnosing and treating prostate cancer.

The Clinical Impact of Comedonecrosis Within Intraductal Carcinoma of the Prostate

CONTEXT.—

Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) is considered a distinct form of aggressive prostate cancer where comedonecrosis, a grade 5 pattern, is occasionally present. Meanwhile, assigning a Gleason grade to IDC-P remains controversial.

OBJECTIVE.—

To assess the clinical significance of necrosis associated with IDC-P.

DESIGN.—

We compared radical prostatectomy (RP) findings and oncologic outcomes in men with prostate cancer exhibiting IDC-P with (IDC-P+/N+) versus without (IDC-P+/N-) comedonecrosis.

RESULTS.—

Of the 558 RPs examined, IDC-P was present in 213 cases (38.2%), including 167 (78.4%) with IDC-P+/N- and 46 (21.6%) with IDC-P+/N+. When comparing IDC-P+/N- versus IDC-P+/N+ cases, the presence of necrosis was significantly associated with higher tumor grade, higher incidence of pT3/pT3b or pN1 disease, and larger estimated tumor volume. Outcome analysis revealed a significantly higher risk of disease progression in IDC-P+/N+ patients than in IDC-P+/N- patients (P < .001). Significant differences in progression-free survival between IDC-P+/N- and IDC-P+/N+ patients were also seen in subgroups, such as those without (P = .01) or with (P = .03) adjuvant therapy immediately after RP, those with pN0 disease (P < .001), and, more interestingly, those exhibiting conventional Gleason pattern 5 component (P = .02). Multivariate analysis showed significance for IDC-P+/N+ when IDC-P (grade 4) and IDC-P+/N+ (grade 5) were (hazard ratio, 1.768; P = .049) or were not (hazard ratio, 2.000; P = .008) incorporated into the Gleason score.

CONCLUSIONS.—

IDC-P+/N+ was found to be associated with worse histopathologic features on RP and poorer prognosis as an independent predictor. Pathologists may thus need to report the presence or absence of not only IDC-P but also comedonecrosis within IDC-P.

The 2022 World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of the Urinary System and Male Genital Organs-Part B: Prostate and Urinary Tract Tumors

The 2022 World Health Organization (WHO) classification of the urinary and male genital tumors was recently published by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. This fifth edition of the WHO "Blue Book" offers a comprehensive update on the terminology, epidemiology, pathogenesis, histopathology, diagnostic molecular pathology, and prognostic and predictive progress in genitourinary tumors. In this review, the editors of the fifth series volume on urologic and male genital neoplasms present a summary of the salient changes introduced to the classification of tumors of the prostate and the urinary tract.

Cribriform Patterned Lesions in the Prostate Gland with Emphasis on Differential Diagnosis and Clinical Significance

Simple Summary

A cribriform structure is defined as a continuous proliferation of cells with intermingled lumina. Various entities may have a cribriform morphology within the prostate gland, ranging from normal, to benign, to borderline and even to malignant lesions. This review summarizes the morphologic features of entities that have a cribriform morphology within the prostate gland, with an emphasis on their differential diagnosis, molecular profile and clinical significance. The basic aim is to assist the pathologist with challenging and controversial cases and inform the clinician on the clinical implications of cribriform morphology.

Abstract

Cribriform glandular formations are characterized by a continuous proliferation of cells with intermingled lumina and can constitute a major or minor part of physiologic (normal central zone glands), benign (clear cell cribriform hyperplasia and basal cell hyperplasia), premalignant (high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia), borderline (atypical intraductal cribriform proliferation) or clearly malignant (intraductal, acinar, ductal and basal cell carcinoma) lesions. Each displays a different clinical course and variability in clinical management and prognosis. The aim of this review is to summarize the current knowledge regarding the morphological features, differential diagnosis, molecular profile and clinical significance of the cribriform-patterned entities of the prostate gland. Areas of controversy regarding their management, i.e., the grading of Intaductal Carcinoma, will also be discussed. Understanding the distinct nature of each cribriform lesion leads to the correct diagnosis and ensures accuracy in clinical decision-making, prognosis prediction and personalized risk stratification of patients.

MRI-detectability and histological factors of prostate cancer including intraductal carcinoma and cribriform pattern

BACKGROUND

Histopathological characteristics affecting the detectability of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) remain unclear. This study aimed to compare the histopathology between MRI-detectable and MRI-undetectable cancers, emphasizing intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) and predominant Gleason pattern 4 subtype.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective study enrolled 153 consecutive patients with 191 lesions who underwent preoperative multiparametric MRI and subsequent radical prostatectomy. MRI/histopathological findings and area fractions of histological components (cancer cells, stroma, and luminal spaces) of MRI-detectable and MRI-undetectable cancers were compared. Data were analyzed using Fisher's exact, independent t, or Mann-Whitney U tests.

RESULTS

Overall, 148 (77%) and 43 (23%) cancers were MRI-detectable and MRI-undetectable, respectively. MRI-detectable cancers were significantly larger than MRI-undetectable cancers (p = 0.03). The percentage of lesions in Grade Group 3 or higher was significantly higher among MRI-detectable cancers than among MRI-undetectable cancers (p = 0.02). MRI detectability of csPCa was associated with increases in relative area fractions of cancer cells (p < 0.001) and decreases in those of stroma (p < 0.001) and luminal spaces (p < 0.001) in prostate cancer (PCa) than the percentage of Gleason pattern 4 (p = 0.09). The percentage of lesions containing IDC-P was similar for MRI-detectable and MRI-undetectable cancers (40% vs. 33%; p = 0.48). The distribution of cribriform gland subtypes was not significantly different between MRI-detectable and MRI-undetectable Gleason pattern 4 subtype cancers (p > 0.99). Contrarily, the ratio of fused gland subtype was significantly higher in MRI-detectable than in MRI-undetectable cancers (p = 0.03). Furthermore, the ratio of poorly-formed gland subtype was significantly higher in MRI-undetectable than in MRI-detectable cancers (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

MRI detectability of csPCa is strongly associated with the relative area fractions of cancer cells, stroma, and luminal spaces in PCa rather than conventional histopathological parameters. Neither the presence nor the percentage of IDC-P affected MRI detectability.

Diagnostic significance of reassessment of prostate biopsy specimens by experienced urological pathologists at a high-volume institution

In prostate cancer, accurate diagnosis and grade group (GG) decision based on biopsy findings are essential for determining treatment strategies. Diagnosis by experienced urological pathologists is recommended; however, their contribution to patient benefits remains unknown. Therefore, we analyzed clinicopathological information to determine the significance of reassessment by experienced urological pathologists at a high-volume institution to identify factors involved in the agreement or disagreement of biopsy and surgical GGs. In total, 1325 prostate adenocarcinomas were analyzed, and the GG was changed in 452/1325 (34.1%) cases (359 cases were upgraded, and 93 cases were downgraded). We compared the highest GG based on biopsy specimens, with the final GG based on surgical specimens of 210 cases. The agreement rate between the surgical GG performed and assessed in our institute and the highest biopsy GG assessed by an outside pathologist was 34.8% (73/210); the agreement rate increased significantly to 50% (105/210) when biopsy specimens were reevaluated in our institute (chi-square test, P < 0.01). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that only the length of the lesion in the positive core with the highest GG in the biopsy was a significant factor for determining the agreement between biopsy GG and surgical GG, with an odds ratio of 1.136 (95% confidence interval: 1.057-1.221; P < 0.01). Thus, reassessment by experienced urological pathologists at high-volume institutions improved the agreement rate. However, it should be noted there is a high probability of discordance between a small number of lesions or short lesions and surgical GG.

Genomic Features and Clinical Implications of Intraductal Carcinoma of the Prostate

Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) is a rare and unique form of aggressive prostate carcinoma, which is characterized by an expansile proliferation of malignant prostatic epithelial cells within prostatic ducts or acini and the preservation of basal cell layers around the involved glands. The vast majority of IDC-P tumors result from adjacent high-grade invasive cancer via the retrograde spreading of tumor cells into normal prostatic ducts or acini. A subset of IDC-P tumors is rarely derived from the de novo intraductal proliferation of premalignant cells. The presence of IDC-P in biopsy or surgical specimens is significantly associated with aggressive pathologic features, such as high Gleason grade, large tumor volume, and advanced tumor stage, and with poor clinical courses, including earlier biochemical recurrence, distant metastasis, and worse survival outcomes. These architectural and behavioral features of IDC-P may be driven by specific molecular properties. Notably, IDC-P possesses distinct genomic profiles, including higher rates of TMPRSS2–ERG gene fusions and PTEN loss, increased percentage of genomic instability, and higher prevalence of germline BRCA2 mutations. Considering that IDC-P tumors are usually resistant to conventional therapies for prostate cancer, further studies should be performed to develop optimal therapeutic strategies based on distinct genomic features, such as treatment with immune checkpoint blockades or poly (adenosine diphosphate–ribose) polymerase inhibitors for patients harboring increased genomic instability or BRCA2 mutations, as well as genetic counseling with genetic testing. Patient-derived xenografts and tumor organoid models can be the promising in vitro platforms for investigating the molecular features of IDC-P tumor.

Intraductal Carcinoma of the Prostate: Extreme Nuclear Size Is Not a Diagnostic Parameter

High-grade prostatic adenocarcinoma involving duct/acinar structures is labeled intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDCP). As numerous studies have shown that IDCP is associated with high stage disease with a significant negative impact on cancer-specific survival, accurate diagnosis is crucial to ensure appropriate patient management. The definition of IDCP recommended by 2016 World Health Organization (WHO) classification suggests that cases of IDCP with micropapillary or loose cribriform architecture without comedonecrosis should have cells with ≥6× nuclear enlargement. It is unclear how this size criterion was derived and which of the parameters of nuclear size (nuclear diameter, nuclear surface area, or nuclear perimeter) it relates to. To evaluate the extent of nuclear enlargement in IDCP, we performed morphometric analyses relating to each of these parameters in 100 radical prostatectomy specimens. One hundred nuclei from foci of IDCP and 50 nuclei from foci of normal luminal epithelium were examined for each patient. Diagnosis of IDCP was based on cells with definite features of carcinoma present within duct/acinar structures. Comparing the means of each of the parameters between IDCP cells and benign luminal cells, there was a statistically significant enlargement in nuclear perimeter (P<0.0005), nuclear area (P<0.0005), and nuclear diameter (P<0.0005); however, the difference in mean nuclear size was limited to factors of 1.3×, 1.6×, and 1.3×, respectively. Three patients each had rare large nuclei (largest perimeter 45, 45, and 44 μm; maximum nuclear area 135, 136, and 136 μm2; and the largest diameter 18 µm in each). For these rare cells, the nuclear size difference, when compared with benign nuclei was; nuclear perimeter 2.0×, 2.1×, and 2.1×; nuclear area 3.6×, 3.8×, and 3.8×; and nuclear maximum diameter 3.0×, 2.5×, and 2.5×. The definition of nuclear enlargement of ≥6× was not reached in any of our cases, all of which clearly showed features of duct invasive carcinoma. In these cases, reliance on nuclear size criteria would have resulted in underdiagnosis of IDCP. This is of concern as failure to recognize IDCP, particularly in needle biopsies, could lead to delays in the timely treatment of aggressive high-grade prostate cancer, resulting in cancer progression and suboptimal patient oncological outcomes.

Contemporary Grading of Prostate Cancer: The Impact of Grading Criteria and the Significance of the Amount of Intraductal Carcinoma

(1) Background: Prognostic grade group (PGG) is an important prognostic parameter in prostate cancer that guides therapeutic decisions. The cribriform pattern and intraductal carcinoma (IDC) are two histological patterns, that have additional prognostic significance. However, discrepancies exist regarding the handling of IDC according to the guidelines published by two international genitourinary pathology societies. Furthermore, whether, in addition to its presence, the amount of IDC is also of importance has not been studied before. Lastly, the handling of tertiary patterns has also been a matter of debate in the literature. (2) Methods: A total of 129 prostatectomy cases were retrieved and a detailed histopathologic analysis was performed. (3) Results: Two cases (1.6%) upgraded their PGG, when IDC was incorporated in the grading system. The presence and the amount of IDC, as well as the presence of cribriform carcinoma were associated with adverse pathologic characteristics. Interestingly, in six cases (4.7%) there was a difference in PGG when using the different guidelines regarding the handling of tertiary patterns. In total, 6.2% of the cases would be assigned a different grade depending on the guidelines followed. (4) Conclusions: These findings highlight a potential area of confusion among pathologists and clinicians and underscore the need for a consensus grading system.

Clinicopathological Analysis of the ISUP Grade Group And Other Parameters in Prostate Cancer: Elucidation of Mutual Impact of the Various Parameters

Background

Prostate cancer has become increasingly common worldwide. Although Grade group (GG) is widely accepted as an indicator of prostate cancer grade, there are malignancies that cannot be defined by GG alone. Moreover, the relationship between GG and other parameters remains unclear. Herein, we aimed to explore the biological characteristics of prostate cancer.

Methods

This study included 299 radical prostatectomy cases. The Chi-square test and analysis of variance were used to analyze the association of GG with binary and continuous variables. We then conducted morphological analyses. Multivariate analyses were performed to extract the data on risk factors for biochemical recurrence (BCR) and lymph node metastasis.

Results

The lymphatic, venous, perineural, and seminal vesicle invasion rates were 37/299 (12.4%), 25/299 (8.4%), 280/299 (93.6%), and 23/299 (7.7%), respectively. The extraprostatic extension (EPE), positive surgical margin, tertiary Gleason pattern 5, intraductal carcinoma of the prostate gland, and lymph node metastasis rates were 89/299 (29.8%), 106/299 (35.5%), 33/260 (12.7%), 56/299 (18.7%), and 23/299 (7.7%), respectively. As GG increased, various parameters became easier to visualize; however, there were differences between the parameters. Postoperative BCR was observed in 31/242 (12.8%) cases without preoperative hormone therapy; GG2, GG3, GG4, and GG5 accounted for 4, 7, 7, and 13 cases, respectively. Multivariate analyses revealed that GG and tumor diameter were significant risk factors for early BCR, whereas lymphatic invasion, EPE, and seminal vesicle invasion were significant risk factors for lymph node metastasis. For BCR, the odds ratios (ORs) for GG and tumor diameter were 2.253 (95% confidence interval (CI]): 1.297–3.912; P=0.004) and 1.074 (95% CI: 1.011–1.142; P=0.022), respectively. For lymph node metastasis, ORs for the presence of lymphatic invasion, EPE, and seminal vesicle invasion were 7.425 (95% CI: 1.688–22.583; P=0.004), 4.391 (95% CI: 1.037–18.589; P=0.044), and 5.755 (95% CI: 1.308–25.316; P=0.021), respectively.

Conclusions

We summarized various parameters correlating with each GG. Through multivariate analyses, we established the independent risk factors for early BCR and lymph node metastasis. In addition to GG, other important indices of malignancy were determined and weighted to provide a basis for future investigations.

Current Understanding and Management of Intraductal Carcinoma of the Prostate

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review will discuss current understanding and management approaches of Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P). IDC-P is a histological finding characterized by neoplastic cells that expand but do not invade prostate ducts.

RECENT FINDINGS

The presence of IDC-P on a prostate biopsy is almost always associated with an invasive disease component and is independently associated with worse clinical outcomes in both early and late disease. These tumors are enriched for mutations in homologous DNA recombination repair (HRR) leading to high genomic instability. Multiparametric MRI with targeted biopsy may aid in diagnosis. Given the poor clinical outcomes associated with this histologic entity, its presence in biopsies should warrant consideration of aggressive management.

Intraductal Carcinoma of the Prostate: A Guide for the Practicing Pathologist

Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate gland (IDCP) is characterized by an expansile, architecturally, and cytologically atypical proliferation of prostatic epithelial cells within preexisting prostatic ducts and acini. There has been a wider recognition of IDCP by practicing pathologists since its recognition as a separate category in the World Health Organization (WHO) 2016 classification of tumours of the prostate gland. However, there is also a lack of clarity regarding the diagnosis and reporting of IDCP, which has been compounded by divergent expert recommendations regarding the grading of invasive prostate cancers associated with an intraductal component. The International Society of Urological Pathologists (ISUP) recommends that the IDCP component should be incorporated into the Gleason score, while the Genitourinary Pathology Society (GUPS) recommends excluding it when grading prostate cancer. This review seeks to clarify some of these issues and outline a pragmatic approach to reporting IDCP, particularly in needle biopsies. Diagnostic issues and terminology for lesions falling short of IDCP but exceeding that of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia are discussed. The management of patients whose prostate biopsies show only IDCP without an associated invasive component is controversial. Some experts recommend radical therapy, while others recommend prompt repeat biopsy. An alternative clinicopathologic approach that takes into consideration the extent, histomorphology, and location (with respect to a radiologic abnormality) of IDCP, as well as radiologic features, is outlined.

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.

The visibility of prostate cancer concerning underlying histopathological variances: A single-center multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging study

PURPOSE

To investigate whether prostate cancer (PCa) lesions regarding histopathological composition exhibit different morphological features on multiparametric prostate MRI (mpMRI).

METHODS

We investigated men with PCa with available mpMRI and whole-mount specimens between June 2015 to December 2020.The acquisition protocol consistent with the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS). Two observers evaluated the images following the PI-RADS v2.1. guideline before biopsy and radical prostatectomy. The discrepancies were resolved in a joint meeting. A genitourinary pathologist reviewed the whole-digitalized mount specimens, and the lesions with Gleason score of 7 and above (3 + 4 and above), and/or cancers with a maximum diameter of 6 mm and more, and/or extraprostatic extension were accepted as clinically significant PCa. The PI-RADS scores and the diameter of the clinically significant PCa on mpMRI concerning histopathological components (i.e., cribriform component, intraductal pattern, or without cribriform component or intraductal pattern) were investigated. The clinically significant PCa foci with PI-RADS score <3 was accepted as an invisible lesion on mpMRI.

RESULTS

In all, 58 men with a total of 112 clinically significant PCa foci, were enrolled in the study. The intraductal pattern, cribriform pattern, or none of these patterns were observed in 28/112 (25 %), 43/112 (38.05 %), and 41/112 (36.60 %) tumor foci. Six out of 28 (21.42 %), 17/43 (39.53 %), and 18/41 (42.8 %) foci with an intraductal pattern, cribriform component, or without any of them, respectively, were invisible on mpMRI (P = 0.111).

CONCLUSION

Though it was not reached a statistical significance, clinically significant PCa with the cribriform component and without any intraductal or cribriform component are more likely to manifests mpMRI invisible foci than the intraductal pattern. Further multi-center studies are warranted to precisely elucidate mpMRI features of PCa regarding histopathological composition.

Histological and immunohistochemical investigation of canine prostate carcinoma with identification of common intraductal carcinoma component

A limited number of species, including men and dogs, spontaneously develop prostate cancer (PC). The histological and molecular relevance of canine PC as a model for the disease in men remains controversial. To address this challenge, this study aimed to assess the histomorphology and expression of basal cell, urothelial and neuroendocrine markers [p63, high molecular weight cytokeratin (HMWCK), Uroplakin 3 (UPIII), neuron‐specific enolase (NSE)] in canine PC (n = 41). Based on histomorphology, 10/41 (24%), 21/41 (51%) and 9/41 (22%) were classified as adenocarcinoma (AC), urothelial carcinoma (UC), and mixed carcinoma, respectively. Tumour inflammation was common, frequently severe [20/41 (49%)], and associated with neutering (p < .02) and urothelial differentiation (p < .02). Most (36/40, 90%) cancers contained only rare cells with basal cell marker expression or were negative. The expression of UPIII was absent or weak in the majority (33/38, 87%) of tumours, with moderate to strong staining in the remaining cases. NSE expression in PC was rare and limited to 2/14 (14%) cases. Tumour extension into benign ducts and glands was a common finding with presence in 17/39 (44%) of carcinomas with and without urothelial differentiation. In conclusion, we confirm that canine PC is characterized by absent or weak expression of basal cell and urothelial markers. Although rare, NSE expression, potentially indicating neuroendocrine differentiation, is reported for the first time in canine PCa. Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate with concurrent invasive PCa (IDCP‐inv) is a frequent, not previously described, finding in dogs with PC.

Optimizing the diagnosis and management of ductal prostate cancer

Ductal adenocarcinoma (DAC) is the most common variant histological subtype of prostate carcinoma and has an aggressive clinical course. DAC is usually characterized and treated as high-risk prostatic acinar adenocarcinoma (PAC). However, DAC has a different biology to that of acinar disease, which often poses a challenge for both diagnosis and management. DAC can be difficult to identify using conventional diagnostic modalities such as serum PSA levels and multiparametric MRI, and the optimal management for localized DAC is unknown owing to the rarity of the disease. Following definitive therapy for localized disease with radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy, the majority of DACs recur with visceral metastases at low PSA levels. Various systemic therapies that have been shown to be effective in high-risk PAC have limited use in treating DAC. Although current understanding of the biology of DAC is limited, genomic analyses have provided insights into the pathology behind its aggressive behaviour and potential future therapeutic targets.

Similarities and Differences in the 2019 ISUP and GUPS Recommendations on Prostate Cancer Grading: A Guide for Practicing Pathologists

Contemporary subspecialization of practice in prostate pathology has seen a transition to complex, nuanced reporting, where a growing number of histopathologic parameters may signal differences in patient management. In this context, the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) and the Genitourinary Pathology Society (GUPS) both published proceedings papers on the grading of prostate cancer in 2019. Overall, the 2 prostate cancer grading manuscripts reached many of the same conclusions and recommendations. Yet, each consensus was conducted somewhat differently, and in a couple of key areas, each reached different conclusions and recommendations. Herein, sourced from the experience and viewpoints of members of both societies, we provide the practicing pathologist a summary of the shared recommendations, and of the discordances. It is anticipated that these 2 documents will inform future iterations of recommendations and guidelines for reporting prostate cancer by organizations such as the College of American Pathologists, the Royal College of Pathologists, and the European Society of Pathology, which will promote best practices for their respective constituents. Our goal is to provide the practicing pathologist a useful catalog of the main points of both, allowing each practitioner to make informed decisions and understand any divergent opinions as may arise between observers for individual cases.

Perspective: a critical assessment of PI-RADS 2.1

PURPOSE

In this article we take a critical look at the key changes of the newest edition of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2.1 (v2.1) and indicate future directions for further development of the system.

CONCLUSION

PI-RADS v2.1 addresses some of the shortcomings of its widely embraced precursor version 2, largely to simplify interpretation and improve interobserver agreement without changing the fundamental acquisition and scoring guidelines. Biparametric MRI is acknowledged in the newest version, but multiparametric MRI including dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging is still recommended for most scenarios. Management recommendations and guidance on evaluation of follow-up MRI's are still not included in the system.

Intraductal Carcinoma of the Prostate: Pathogenesis and Molecular Perspectives

Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P), a clinicopathological entity characterized by malignant prostatic epithelial cells growing within ducts and/or acini, has a distinct architectural pattern, cytological features, and biological behavior. Whereas most IDC-P tumors could be derived from adjacent high-grade invasive cancer via retrograde spreading of cancer cells along benign ducts and acini, a small subset of IDC-P may arise from the transformation and intraductal proliferation of precancerous cells induced by various oncogenic events. These isolated IDC-P tumors possess a distinct mutational profile and may function as a carcinoma in situ lesion with de novo intraductal outgrowth of malignant cells. Further molecular characterization of these two types of IDC-P and better understanding of the mechanisms underlying IDC-P formation and progression could be translated into valuable biomarkers for differential diagnosis and actionable targets for therapeutic interventions. PATIENT SUMMARY: Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate is an aggressive type of prostate cancer associated with high risk for local recurrence and distant metastasis. In this review, we discussed pathogenesis, biomarkers, differential diagnoses, and therapeutic strategies for this tumor.

Head to head: should the intraductal component of invasive prostate cancer be graded?

The reporting of intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDCP) is controversial, with conflicting recommendations having recently been published by the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) and the Genitourinary Pathology Society (GUPS). Both recommend that isolated (pure) IDCP should not be graded. However, the ISUP recommends incorporating the IDCP component of invasive prostate cancer in the Gleason score, whereas the GUPS recommends reporting IDCP as a comment, independently of the Gleason score. The arguments for and against incorporating the IDCP component of invasive prostate cancer in the Gleason score are discussed in detail.

Reporting Practices and Resource Utilization in the Era of Intraductal Carcinoma of the Prostate: A Survey of Genitourinary Subspecialists

Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) has been recently recognized by the World Health Organization classification of prostatic tumors as a distinct entity, most often occurring concurrently with invasive prostatic adenocarcinoma (PCa). Whether documented admixed with PCa or in its rare pure form, numerous studies associate this entity with clinical aggressiveness. Despite increasing clinical experience and requirement of IDC-P documentation in protocols for synoptic reporting, the specifics of its potential contribution to assessment of grade group (GG) and cancer quantitation of PCa in both needle biopsies (NBx) and radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens remain unclear. Moreover, there are no standard guidelines for incorporating basal cell marker immunohistochemistry (IHC) in the diagnosis of IDC-P, either alone or as part of a cocktail with AMACR/racemase. An online survey containing 26 questions regarding diagnosis, reporting practices, and IHC resource utilization, focusing on IDC-P, was undertaken by 42 genitourinary subspecialists from 9 countries. The degree of agreement or disagreement regarding approaches to individual questions was classified as significant majority (>75%), majority (51% to 75%), minority (26% to 50%) and significant minority (≤25%). IDC-P with or without invasive cancer is considered a contraindication for active surveillance by the significant majority (95%) of respondents, although a majority (66%) also agreed that the clinical significance/behavior of IDC-P on NBx or RP with PCa required further study. The majority do not upgrade PCa based on comedonecrosis seen only in the intraductal component in NBx (62%) or RP (69%) specimens. Similarly, recognizable IDC-P with GG1 PCa was not a factor in upgrading in NBx (78%) or RP (71%) specimens. The majority (60%) of respondents include readily recognizable IDC-P in assessment of linear extent of PCa at NBx. A significant majority (78%) would use IHC to confirm or exclude intraductal carcinoma if other biopsies showed no PCa, while 60% would use it to confirm IDC-P with invasive PCa in NBx if it would change the overall GG assignment. Nearly half (48%, a minority) would use IHC to confirm IDC-P for accurate Gleason pattern 4 quantitation. A majority (57%) report the percentage of IDC-P when present, in RP specimens. When obvious Gleason pattern 4 or 5 PCa is present in RP or NBx, IHC is rarely to almost never used to confirm the presence of IDC-P by the significant majority (88% and 90%, respectively). Most genitourinary pathologists consider IDC-P to be an adverse prognostic feature independent of the PCa grade, although recommendations for standardization are needed to guide reporting of IDC-P vis a vis tumor quantitation and final GG assessment. The use of IHC varies widely and is performed for a multitude of indications, although it is used most frequently in scenarios where confirmation of IDC-P would impact the GG assigned. Further study and best practices recommendations are needed to provide guidance with regards to the most appropriate indications for IHC use in scenarios regarding IDC-P.

Grading of prostate cancer: the impact of including intraductal carcinoma on the overall Grade Group assigned in diagnostic biopsies

AIMS

The Gleason score/Grade Group (GrG) is a key parameter for clinical decision-making in prostate cancer. The World Health Organization currently recommends that intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDCP) should not be factored into the GrG; however, grading of IDCP is controversial, with variability among genitourinary pathologists. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of grading of the IDCP component on the final GrG in prostate biopsies.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The study included 123 prostate biopsies (12 cores +/- additional MRI-targeted cores) with GrG1-GrG4 invasive carcinoma and IDCP. All cases were graded by a genitourinary pathologist using two different methods: (i) grading of invasive carcinoma only; and (ii) grading of both invasive carcinoma and IDCP. The overall GrG, excluding the IDCP component, was GrG1 in 3% (n = 4) of cases, GrG2 in 37% (n = 45), GrG3 in 52% (n = 64), and GrG4 in 8% (n = 10). When the IDCP component was included in grading, the overall GrG changed in 28 cases (23%). The GrG increased by one grade in 15 of 28 cases (54%), and by two or more grades in 13 of 28 cases (46%). Upgrading was due to comedonecrosis (39%, 11/28), solid growth (4%, 1/28), or an increased proportion of Gleason grade 4 (57%, 16/28).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the GrG was unchanged in the majority of cases, grading of IDCP altered the final GrG in a significant minority of biopsies in this series, and often by more than one grade, which may have important implications for risk categorisation of individual patients. These findings highlight the need for consensus on grading of IDCP in routine practice, and the optimal method of incorporating IDCP into clinical risk models for patient management.

Isolated Intraductal Carcinoma of the Prostate in Prostatectomy Specimens: Report of 2 Cases and Review of the Literature

Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDCp) is a distinct neoplastic entity, and although recognized for some time, it was included for the first time in the histologic classification of prostate cancer in the 2016 publication of World Health Organization. IDCp represents an intraductal or intra-acinar proliferation of malignant cells, with preservation of the basal cell layer. Even though IDCp is usually accompanied by a high-grade invasive component, low-grade invasive carcinoma can rarely be seen adjacent to the lesion. Even rarer is the incidence of isolated IDCp in needle biopsies, while a few such cases have been reported in prostatectomy specimens. We report 2 cases with isolated IDCp without any invasive component. A review of the literature is performed including the diagnostic challenges of IDCp and its morphologic mimics, immunohistochemical markers, molecular aspects, and prognostic implications. Even though it is not yet clear whether IDCp represents an intraductal spread of invasive cancer or a precursor of invasive carcinoma, the existence of isolated IDCp reinforces the idea that, at least in some of the cases, IDCp is a precancerous lesion. Further molecular studies need to be performed in order to clarify its pathogenesis.