Contemporary prognostic indicators for prostate cancer incorporating International Society of Urological Pathology recommendations

Extracellular vesicle-derived biomarkers in prostate cancer care: Opportunities and challenges

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most prevalent cancer in men worldwide, presenting a significant global public health challenge that necessitates early detection and personalized treatment. Recently, non-invasive liquid biopsy methods have emerged as promising tools to provide insights into the genetic landscape of PCa and monitor disease progression, aiding decision-making at all stages. Research efforts have concentrated on identifying liquid biopsy biomarkers to improve PCa diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment prediction. This article reviews recent research advances over the last five years utilizing extracellular vesicles (EVs) as a natural biomarker library for PCa, and discusses the clinical translation of EV biomarkers, including ongoing trials and key implementation challenges. The findings underscore the transformative role of liquid biopsy, particularly EV-based biomarkers, in revolutionizing PCa diagnosis, prediction, and treatment.

Clinical Management of Intraductal Carcinoma of the Prostate

Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) has emerged as a distinct entity with significant clinical implications in prostate cancer (PCa) management. Despite historically being considered an extension of invasive PCa, IDC-P shows unique biological characteristics that challenge traditional diagnostic and therapeutic settings. This review explores the clinical management of IDC-P. While the diagnosis of IDC-P relies on specific morphological criteria, its detection remains challenging due to inter-observer variability. Emerging evidence underscores the association of IDC-P with aggressive disease and poor clinical outcomes across various PCa stages. However, standardized management guidelines for IDC-P are lacking. Recent studies suggest considering adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapies in specific patient cohorts to improve outcomes and tailor treatment strategies based on the IDC-P status. However, the current level of evidence regarding this is low. Moving forward, a deeper understanding of the pathogenesis of IDC-P and its interaction with conventional PCa subtypes is crucial for refining risk stratification and therapeutic interventions.

Comparison of molecular analysis results determined by next-generation sequencing to immunohistochemical indicators and clinicopathological parameters in prostate adenocarcinomas

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer is a common cancer in males, frequently leading to mortality. Multiple genetic factors play roles in prostate cancer pathogenesis. Demonstration of pathological pathways and customised treatment options have been possible with next-generation sequencing.

AIM

In this study, we aimed to evaluate the relationships of the changes in the prostate cancer pathways genes with the pathological, immunohistochemical and the clinical parameters.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cross-sectional study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Among the prostate needle biopsy materials investigated in Adnan Menderes University Faculty of Medicine, Department of Pathology, thirty-one cases, who had been analysed using the next-generation sequencing system, were included in this study.

RESULTS

As a result of statistical analysis, a significant relationship was found between the pathogenic mutation detected in androgen receptor and Breast Cancer Gene 2 genes and tumour volume. In all cases with a pathogenic mutation in the androgen receptor gene, a pathogenic mutation in the Protein Tyrosine Phosphatase and Tensin Homolog gene was also observed and a significant relationship was found between them. Castration resistance was observed in cases with high tumour volume, and a statistically significant difference was found. A statistically significant relationship was found between tumour volume and Ki-67 expression. In addition, a significant relationship was observed between the castration resistance and Ki-67, c-erbB2 expressions. A statistically significant relationship was found between Ki-67 and c-erbB2.

CONCLUSION

Regarding prognosis prediction and treatment, identifying the molecular changes in genes playing roles in prostate cancer with next-generation sequencing is very important.

Detection of extraprostatic extension by transperineal multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion targeted combined with systemic template prostate biopsy

BACKGROUND

Extraprostatic extension (EPE) of prostate cancer (PCa) on transrectal (TR) needle core biopsy (Bx) is a rare histopathological finding that can help in clinical decision-making. The detection efficiency of the transperineal (TP) approach is yet to be explored.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 2848 PCa cases using concomitant systemic template biopsy (SBx) and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-ultrasound fusion-targeted biopsy (TBx) using the TR (n = 1917) or TP (n = 931) approach at our institution between January 2015 and July 2022. We assessed and compared clinical, MRI, and biopsy characteristics using different approaches (TP and TR) and methods (SBx and TBx).

RESULTS

In total, 40 EPE cases were identified (40/2848, 1.4%). TP showed a significantly higher EPE detection rate compared to TR in SBx (TR:0.7% vs. TP:1.6%; p = 0.028) and TBx (TR:0.5% vs. TP:1.2%; p = 0.033), as well as the combined methods (2.1% vs. 1.1%, p = 0.019). A significantly higher incidence of EPEs was found at non-base sites in TP than in TR (76.7% vs. 50%, p = 0.038). SBx showed a higher EPE detection rate than TBx; however, the difference was not statistically significant. TP showed higher prostate-specific antigen density (0.35 vs. 0.17, p = 0.005), higher frequency of GG4-5 in the cores with EPE (65.0% vs. 50.0%, p = 0.020), and more PCa-positive SBx cores (10 vs. 8, p = 0.023) compared to the TR.

CONCLUSIONS

TP may improve EPE detection compared with TR and should be applied to patients with adverse pre-biopsy features.

Modified the 8th AJCC staging system for patients with advanced prostate cancer: a study based on SEER database

Background

The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) 8th staging system of prostate cancer may be insufficient in predicting the prognosis of some staged patients. This study aimed to modify the AJCC 8th staging system in patients with advanced prostate cancer.

Methods

Data of patients with advanced prostate cancer from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database between 2004 and 2016 were enrolled in this cohort study. All patients were divided into the training set and the testing set with a ratio of 6:4. Multivariate Cox survival model was utilized to obtain the nomogram score for each stage variable. The modified staging system was based on the total nomogram score. The C-index and Kaplan-Meier (K-M) curves were used to show the prognostic prediction effect of patients with different staging systems.

Results

A total of 28,006 patients were included for analysis. T stage, N stage, M stage, primary Gleason pattern score, secondary Gleason pattern score, and PSA level were included as stage variables. Patients with AJCC stage III C [hazard ratio (HR) = 4.17, 95% confidence interval (CI), 3.39–5.13] and AJCC stage IV B (HR = 3.19, 95%CI, 1.79–5.69) were associated with worse prognosis compared with those of AJCC stage III B, while no statistical significance was found in patients with stage IV A (P > 0.05). In terms of the modified staging system, patients with modified stage III C (HR = 2.06, 95%CI, 1.46–2.92), modified stage IV A (HR = 6.91, 95%CI, 4.81–9.94), and modified stage IV B (HR = 21.89, 95%CI, 14.76–32.46) were associated with a poorer prognosis compared with patients with modified stage III B. The prognostic ability (C-index) of the modified staging system (0.789; 95%CI, 0.777–0.801) was better than that of the AJCC 8th edition system (0.762; 95%CI, 0.748–0.776) (0.789 vs. 0.762, P = 0.004). The K-M curves indicated that the modified staging system may be distinguished prognostic differences in patients with different stages.

Conclusion

Modified staging system may be better than AJCC 8th staging system for predicting prognosis in prostate cancer patients. The AJCC 8th staging system should be further optimized.

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.

PTEN Protein Phosphatase Activity Is Not Required for Tumour Suppression in the Mouse Prostate

Loss PTEN function is one of the most common events driving aggressive prostate cancers and biochemically, PTEN is a lipid phosphatase which opposes the activation of the oncogenic PI3K-AKT signalling network. However, PTEN also has additional potential mechanisms of action, including protein phosphatase activity. Using a mutant enzyme, PTEN Y138L, which selectively lacks protein phosphatase activity, we characterised genetically modified mice lacking either the full function of PTEN in the prostate gland or only lacking protein phosphatase activity. The phenotypes of mice carrying a single allele of either wild-type Pten or Pten^Y138L in the prostate were similar, with common prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN) and similar gene expression profiles. However, the latter group, lacking PTEN protein phosphatase activity additionally showed lymphocyte infiltration around PIN and an increased immune cell gene expression signature. Prostate adenocarcinoma, elevated proliferation and AKT activation were only frequently observed when PTEN was fully deleted. We also identify a common gene expression signature of PTEN loss conserved in other studies (including Nkx3.1, Tnf and Cd44). We provide further insight into tumour development in the prostate driven by loss of PTEN function and show that PTEN protein phosphatase activity is not required for tumour suppression.

WHO Classification of Tumours fifth edition: evolving issues in the classification, diagnosis, and prognostication of prostate cancer

The fifth edition of the WHO Classification of Tumours of the Urinary and Male Genital Systems encompasses several updates to the classification and diagnosis of prostatic carcinoma as well as incorporating advancements in the assessment of its prognosis, including recent grading modifications. Some of the salient aspects include: (1) recognition that prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN)-like carcinoma is not synonymous with a pattern of ductal carcinoma, but better classified as a subtype of acinar adenocarcinoma; (2) a specific section on treatment-related neuroendocrine prostatic carcinoma in view of the tight correlation between androgen deprivation therapy and the development of prostatic carcinoma with neuroendocrine morphology, and the emerging data on lineage plasticity; (3) a terminology change of basal cell carcinoma to "adenoid cystic (basal cell) cell carcinoma" given the presence of an underlying MYB::NFIB gene fusion in many cases; (4) discussion of the current issues in the grading of acinar adenocarcinoma and the prognostic significance of cribriform growth patterns; and (5) more detailed coverage of intraductal carcinoma of prostate (IDC-P) reflecting our increased knowledge of this entity, while recommending the descriptive term atypical intraductal proliferation (AIP) for lesions falling short of IDC-P but containing more atypia than typically seen in high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN). Lesions previously regarded as cribriform patterns of HGPIN are now included in the AIP category. This review discusses these developments, summarising the existing literature, as well as the emerging morphological and molecular data that underpins the classification and prognostication of prostatic carcinoma.

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.

Percentage of Gleason pattern 4 and tumor volume predict adverse pathological stage and margin status at radical prostatectomy in grade Group 2 and grade Group 3 prostate cancers

BACKGROUND

Increasing percentages of Gleason pattern 4 (GP4%) in radical prostatectomy (RP) correlate with an increased likelihood of nonorgan-confined disease and earlier biochemical recurrence (BCR). However, there are no detailed RP studies assessing the impact of GP4% and corresponding tumor volume (TV) on extraprostatic extension (EPE), seminal vesicle (SV) invasion (SV+), and positive surgical margin (SM) status (SM+).

METHODS

In 1301 consecutive RPs, we analyzed each tumor nodule (TN) for TV, Grade Group (GG), presence of focal versus nonfocal EPE, SV+ , and SM+. Using GG1 (GP4% = 0) TNs as a reference, we recorded GP4% for all GG2 or GG3 TNs. We performed a multivariable analysis (MVA) using a mixed effects logistic regression that tested significant variables for risk of EPE, SV+, and SM+, as well as a multinomial logistic regression model that tested significant variables for risks of nonorgan-confined disease (pT2+, pT3a, and pT3b) versus organ-confined disease (pT2).

RESULTS

We identified 3231 discrete TNs ranging from 1 to 7 (median: 2.5) per RP. These included GG1 (n = 2115), GG2 (n = 818), GG3 (n = 274), and GG4 (n = 24) TNs. Increasing GP4% weakly paralleled increasing TV (tau = 0.07, p < .001). In MVA, increasing GP4% and TV predicted a greater likelihood of EPE (odds ratio [OR]: 1.03 and 4.41), SV+ (OR: 1.03 and 3.83), and SM+ (1.01, p = .01 and 2.83), all p < .001. Our multinomial logistic regression model demonstrated an association between GP4% and the risk of EPE (i.e., pT3a and pT3b disease), as well as an association between TV and risk of upstaging (all p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Both GP4% and TV are independent predictors of adverse pathological stage and margin status at RP. However, the risks for adverse outcomes associated with GP4% are marginal, while those for TV are strong. The prognostic significance of GP4% on BCR-free survival has not been studied controlling for TV and other adverse RP findings. Whether adverse pathological stage and margin status associated with larger TV could decrease BCR-free survival to a greater extent than increasing RP GP4% remains to be studied.

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.

Clinical and oncologic findings of extraprostatic extension on needle biopsy in de novo metastatic prostate cancer

This study aimed to explore the clinical and oncologic findings in patients with de novo metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) and extraprostatic extension (EPE) on biopsy. We retrospectively evaluated data on 630 patients with de novo mPCa between January 2009 and December 2017 in the West China Hospital (Chengdu, China), including evaluating the relationships between EPE and other variables and the association of EPE with survival outcomes by the Chi-square test, Kaplan-Meier curves, and the Cox proportional-hazards model. EPE was found in 70/630 patients, making a prevalence of 11.1%. The presence of EPE on biopsy was associated with higher Gleason scores and higher incidence of neuroendocrine differentiation (NED), intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P), and perineural invasion (PNI). Compared with those without EPE, patients with EPE had shorter castration-resistant prostate cancer-free survival (CFS; median: 14.1 vs 17.1 months, P = 0.015) and overall survival (OS; median: 43.7 vs 68.3 months, P = 0.032). According to multivariate analysis, EPE was not an independent predictor for survival. Subgroup analyses demonstrated that patients with favorable characteristics, including negative NED or IDC-P status, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score <2, and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) <50 ng ml^-1, had worse prognoses if EPE was detected. In patients with PSA <50 ng ml^-1, EPE was a negative independent predictor for OS (hazard ratio [HR]: 4.239, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.218-14.756, P = 0.023). EPE was strongly associated with other aggressive clinicopathological features and poorer CFS and OS. These data suggest that EPE may be an indicator of poor prognosis, particularly in patients, otherwise considered likely to have favorable survival outcomes.

Comparative study of immunohistochemical expression of ERG and MAGI2 in prostatic carcinoma

Diagnosis of Prostatic adenocarcinoma (PAC) is still a problematic issue. The objective of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic and prognostic value of ERG immunohistochemical (IHC) expression compared to MAGI2.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was conducted on 56 cases of PAC and 29 cases of nodular prostatic hyperplasia (NPH). IHC staining for ERG and MAGI2 was applied to archival formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded blocks. Semi-quantitative scoring was compared and correlated with clinicopathologic parameters and the Ki-67 index.

RESULTS

Revealed positive ERG in 51.8% of PAC while all NPH cases were negative. On the other hand, MAGI2 was detected in 91.1% of PAC versus 17.2% of NPH. Using ROC curve, the ERG showed 53.6% sensitivity, 100% specificity, 76.5% diagnostic accuracy (DA) and area under the ROC curve 0.768 in comparison to MAGI2 that showed (91.1%, 86.2%, 88.25% and 0.948 respectively). Analysis of the combined use of the two markers revealed 95% sensitivity, 100% specificity, and 94% DA when tested synchronously. Moreover, a statistically significant inverse relationship could be detected between ERG expression and the Gleason grading group (P = 0.01) and Ki-67 index (P < 0.001). In addition, high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN) adjacent to carcinoma; showed positive expressions in (1/11 cases, 9.11%) for ERG and (6/11 cases, 54%) for MAGI2.

CONCLUSION

This study recommends using both ERG and MAGI2 in a cocktail for better diagnostic validity of PAC. Only ERG expression could be a good prognostic indicator.

Urinary proteomic profiles of prostate cancer with different risk of progression and correlation with histopathological features

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common tumor in men with extremely variable outcome, varying from latent or indolent form to very aggressive behavior. High grade tumors, expansions exceeding the prostatic capsule into the surrounding soft tissues and spreading through lymph vascular channels, represent the most consistent unfavorable prognostic factors. However, accuracy in the prediction of the disease progression is sometimes difficult. Along with new molecular diagnostic techniques and more accurate histopathological approaches, proteomic studies challenge to identify potential biomarkers predictive of PCa progression. In our study we analyzed the urinary proteomes of 42 patients affected by PCa through two-dimensional electrophoresis associated with mass spectrometry. Proteomic profiles were correlated to histopathological features including pTNM stage and tumor differentiation in order to provide new promising markers able to define more accurately the PCa aggressiveness and driving new therapeutic approaches.

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.

[Reports of prostate needle biopsies-what pathologists provide and urologists want]

BACKGROUND

The prostate biopsy report is key for risk stratification of prostate cancer patients and subsequent therapeutic decision-making. However, due to the inclusion of a multitude of additional parameters its interpretation is becoming more challenging.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to determine how urologists currently interpret prostate biopsy reports, in particular how they consider different histopathological parameters for therapy decision-making.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A survey was sent to all urology practices in Germany with the help of the BDU (Berufsverband der Deutschen Urologen e. V.). In total, there were 106 complete responses that could be included for further analyses.

RESULTS

Most urologists consider the number of positive cores and relative tumor burden (%) per core as crucial for the assessment of tumor extension. In case of targeted biopsies, the majority of urologists prefers a separate statement of positive cores per random biopsy scheme and per region of interest, respectively. The core with the highest Gleason score is mostly the basis for therapy decision-making (versus the overall Gleason score). Proportion of Gleason 4 pattern also seems to be critical for prostate cancer management. Only half of the urologists demand reporting of the new ISUP/WHO (International Society of Urological Pathology/World Health Organization) grade groups. Additional parameters claimed are Ki67, prostate-specific membrane antigen status, presence of intraductal or neuroendocrine component of the tumor.

CONCLUSIONS

Our survey shows that there is no standardized reporting for prostate biopsies and that the interpretation of prostate biopsy reports varies among urologists. Further studies and guideline recommendations are necessary to establish a standardized reporting scheme for prostate biopsies.

The Prevalence of Zinc Deficiency among Men with and without Prostate Cancer in Port Harcourt, Nigeria

Background: Zinc deficiency is reportedly common and influences prostate cancer (PCa) incidence among elderly males. Hence, this study was designed to determine the prevalence of zinc deficiency among Nigerian males with PCa.Materials and Methods: This was a descriptive case-control study among 220 PCa patients and 220 age-matched controls. Clinical and laboratory variables were obtained and evaluated among both study groups. Analysis of serum PSA and plasma zinc was done under standard protocols.Results: No age difference (cases: 69.73 ± 7.72 vs controls: 68.97 ± 7.32; P > 0.05) was observed among both study groups. Prevalence of zinc deficiency among PCa and control groups was 69.1% and 21.8%, respectively. Zinc deficiency was more prevalent among the elderly PCa patients (n = 119; 78.3%) compared to elderly controls. Higher proportion (n = 136; 89.5%) of zinc-deficient PCa patients presented with moderate-severe PCa disease. Elderly PCa patients (n = 119; 81.0%) predominated among those exhibiting moderate-severe PCa disease. Inverse relationship between zinc and age was more pronounced among the PCa patients (Beta= -0.454; P < 0.001) than the controls (Beta= -0.343; P ≤ 0.001).Conclusion: The study findings indicate a significant burden of zinc deficiency associated with adverse outcome of PCa among elderly males with the disease. Zinc deficiency may serve as a therapeutic target or diagnostic marker in elderly males with PCa.

The impact of plasma zinc status on the severity of prostate cancer disease

Purpose

The severity of prostate cancer (PCa), which determines the disease progression, is theorized to be a function of zinc status. Hence, this study was structured to determine the impact of zinc status on the severity and progression of PCa disease.

Materials and Methods

This was a descriptive cross-sectional study of 220 histologically-confirmed PCa patients and 220 age-matched controls, conducted prospectively in a Nigerian tertiary hospital. Plasma zinc, prostate-specific antigen, creatinine, fasting glucose, and estimated glomerular filtration rate were determined for both study groups. The International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grades and the American Joint Committee on Cancer clinical staging were employed as indices for PCa severity (grade) and progression (stage) respectively.

Results

The PCa patients had markedly reduced plasma zinc status compared to controls (cases: 9.42±3.02 µmol/L versus controls: 15.23±4.47 µmol/L; p<0.001). Low zinc status was more pronounced within the severe grade and advanced PCa disease subgroups (p<0.001). Inverse relationships existed between zinc status and ISUP grades among the entire PCa patient (p<0.001) and the categorized PCa grade and stage subgroups (p<0.001). Low zinc status had significant impact of predicting severe (crude=odds ratio [OR], 8.714; p<0.001; age-adjusted=OR, 11.152; p<0.001) and advanced (crude=OR, 17.160; p<0.001; age-adjusted=OR, 18.927; p<0.001) PCa disease.

Conclusions

This study suggests that low plasma zinc status is associated with severe grade and advanced PCa disease. However, further well-designed studies with large sample sizes are warranted to confirm these associations.

Grading of prostate cancer: a work in progress

Grading of prostate cancer has evolved substantially over time, not least because of major changes in diagnostic approach and concomitant shifts from late- to early-stage detection since the adoption of PSA testing from the late 1980s. After the conception of the architecture-based nine-tier Gleason grading system more than 50 years ago, several changes were made in order to increase its prognostic impact, to reduce interobserver variation and to improve concordance between prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy grading. This eventually resulted in the current five-tier grading system, with a much more detailed description of the individual architectural patterns constituting the remaining three Gleason patterns (i.e. grades 3-5). Nevertheless, there is room for improvement. For instance, distinction of common grade 4 subpatterns such as ill-formed and fused glands from the grade 3 pattern is challenging, blurring the division between low-risk patients who could be eligible for deferred therapy and those who need curative therapy. The last few years have witnessed the publication of several studies on the prognostic impact of individual architectural subpatterns showing that, in particular, the cribriform pattern exceeded the prognostic impact of other grade 4 subpatterns. This review provides an overview of the changes in prostate cancer grading over time and provides a thorough description of the various Gleason subpatterns, the current evidence of their prognostic impact and areas of contention. Potential practical ways for improvements of the current grading system are also put forward.

Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate: a critical re-appraisal

Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate gland (IDCP), which is now categorised as a distinct entity by WHO 2016, includes two biologically distinct diseases. IDCP associated with invasive carcinoma (IDCP-inv) generally represents a growth pattern of invasive prostatic adenocarcinoma while the rarely encountered pure IDCP is a precursor of prostate cancer. This review highlights issues that require further discussion and clarification. The diagnostic criterion “nuclear size at least 6 times normal” is ambiguous as “size” could refer to either nuclear area or diameter. If area, then this criterion could be re-defined as nuclear diameter at least three times normal as it is difficult to visually compare area of nuclei. It is also unclear whether IDCP could also include tumours with ductal morphology. There is no consensus whether pure IDCP in needle biopsies should be managed with re-biopsy or radical therapy. A pragmatic approach would be to recommend radical therapy only for extensive pure IDCP that is morphologically unequivocal for high-grade prostate cancer. Active surveillance is not appropriate when low-grade invasive cancer is associated with IDCP, as such patients usually have unsampled high-grade prostatic adenocarcinoma. It is generally recommended that IDCP component of IDCP-inv should be included in tumour extent but not grade. However, there are good arguments in favour of grading IDCP associated with invasive cancer. All historical as well as contemporary Gleason outcome data are based on morphology and would have included an associated IDCP component in the tumour grade. WHO 2016 recommends that IDCP should not be graded, but it is unclear whether this applies to both pure IDCP and IDCP-inv.

Evolution, controversies and the future of prostate cancer grading

Histological grading of prostate cancer is one of the most important tissue-based parameters for prediction of outcome and treatment response. Gleason grading remains the foundation of prostate cancer grading, but has undergone a series of changes in the past 30 years, often initiated by consensus conference decisions. This review summarizes the most important modifications that were introduced by the 2005 and 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) revisions of Gleason grading and discusses the impact that these have had on current grading practices. A considerable inflation in Gleason scores has been observed, especially following the ISUP 2005 revision, and the effects of this are discussed. ISUP 2014 grading recommendations are described, including the reporting of ISUP grades 1-5. Controversial issues include methods for reporting of grades on needle biopsies, reporting of percent Gleason grades 4/5 and grading of cribriform and intraductal carcinoma of the prostate. Educational programs developed recently to promote standardization of grading are described and their results assessed.

Urologic Pathology: Key Parameters from a Urologist's Perspective

Prostate cancer, bladder cancer, and kidney cancer represent the 3 most common urologic malignancies, and form a heterogenous group of disease processes, with a wide range of pathologic features. As a urologist, a strong understanding of the pathologic features of urologic malignancies is essential to prognosticate and counsel patients and to determine the most effective course of treatment. This review discusses the pathologic features of prostate, bladder, and kidney cancer, and examines how detailed pathologic reporting is critical to today's practicing urologist.

Contemporary prostate biopsy reporting: insights from a survey of clinicians’ use of pathology data

Aim

To determine how clinicians use data in contemporary prostate biopsy reports.

Methods

A survey was circulated to members of the British Association of Urological Surgeons and the British Uro-oncology Group.

Results

Responses were received from 114 respondents (88 urologists, 26 oncologists). Ninety-seven (94%) use the number of positive cores from each side and 43 (42%) use the % number of positive cores. When determining the number and percentage of positive cores, 72 (71%) would not differentiate between targeted and non-targeted samples. If multiple Gleason Scores (GS) were included in a report, 77 (78%) would use the worst GS even if present in a core with very little tumour, 12% would use the global GS and 10% the GS in the core most involved by tumour. Fifty-five (55%) either never or rarely used perineural invasion for patient management.

Conclusions

The number of positive cores is an important parameter for patient management but may be difficult to determine in the laboratory due to core fragmentation so the biopsy taker must indicate the number of biopsies obtained. Multiple biopsies taken from a single site are often interpreted by clinicians as separate cores when determining the number of positive cores so pathologists should also report the number of sites positive. Clinicians have a non-uniform approach to the interpretation of multiple GS in prostate biopsy reports so we recommend that pathologists also include a single ‘bottom-line’ GS for each case to direct the clinician’s treatment decision.