Incidence of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer After a Diagnosis of Atypical Small Acinar Proliferation, High-grade Prostatic Intraepithelial Neoplasia, or Benign Tissue

The current recommendation for the management of isolated high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the current predictive value of isolated high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN) for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection in repeat biopsies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A cohort of 293 men with isolated HGPIN detected in previous biopsies performed without multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), and who underwent repeat biopsy within 1 to 3 years, was analysed. Pre-repeat biopsy mpMRI and guided biopsies to suspicious lesions (Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System [PI-RADS] ≥3) and/or and systematic biopsies were performed. Persistent prostate cancer (PCa) suspicion, defined as sustained serum prostate-specific antigen level >4 ng/mL and/or abnormal digital rectal examination, was present in 248 men (84.6%), and was absent in 45 men (15.4%). A control group of 190 men who had no previous HGPIN, atypical small acinar proliferation or HGPIN with atypia who were scheduled to undergo repeat biopsy due to persistent PCa suspicion were also analysed. csPCa was defined as tumours of Grade Group ≥2.

RESULTS

In the subset of 45 men with isolated HGPIN, in whom PCa suspicion disappeared, only one csPCa (2.2%) and one insignificant PCa (iPCa) were detected. csPCa was detected in 34.7% of men with persistent PCa suspicion and previous HGPIN, and in 28.4% of those without previous HGPIN (P =0.180). iPCa was detected in 12.1% and 6.3%, respectively (P =0.039). Logistic regression analysis showed that the risk of csPCa detection was not predicted by previous HGPIN: odds ratio (OR) 1.369 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.894-2.095; P =0.149); however, previous HGPIN increased the risk of iPCa detection: OR 2.043 (95% CI 1.016-4.109; P =0.006).

CONCLUSION

The risk of csPCa in men with isolated HGPIN, in whom PCa suspicion disappears, is extremely low. Moreover, in those men in whom PCa suspicion persists, the risk of csPCa is not influenced by the previous finding of HGPIN. However, previous HGPIN increases the risk of iPCa detection. Therefore, repeat prostate biopsy should not be recommended solely because of a previous HGPIN.

Atypical small acinar proliferation and its significance in pathological reports in modern urological times

Atypical small acinar proliferation is a histopathological diagnosis of unspecified importance in prostate needle-biopsy reports, suggestive but not definitive for cancer. The terminology corresponds to some uncertainty in the biopsy report, as the finding might represent an underlying non-cancerous pathology mimicking cancer or an under-sampled prostate cancer site. Therefore, traditional practice favors an immediate repeat biopsy. However, in modern urological times, the need of urgent repeat biopsy is being challenged by some authors as in the majority of cases, the grade of cancer found in subsequent biopsy is reported to be low or the disease to be non-significant. On the other hand, high risk disease cannot be excluded, whereas no clinical or pathological factors can predict the final outcome. In this review, we discuss the significance of the diagnosis of atypical small acinar proliferation in the biopsy report, commenting on its importance in modern urological practice.

Rate of clinically significant prostate cancer on repeat saturation biopsy after a diagnosis of atypical small acinar proliferation

BACKGROUND

Atypical small acinar proliferation (ASAP) occurs in approximately 5% of prostate biopsies. Approximately 30%-40% of these patients may develop prostate cancer (PCa) within a 5-year period, often not clinically significant. Current guidelines recommend a repeat biopsy within 3-6 months after the initial diagnosis, but it seem not to be the best strategy.

METHODS

Objectives-evaluating the natural history of ASAP, stratifying the risk of csPCa after ASAP, identifying predictive factors of PCa after atypical diagnosis. Materials and methods-retrospective single-institutional study on patients undergoing prostate biopsy for suspicious PCa (2005-2016). We evaluated the incidence of overall PCa, intermediate-high risk of PCa and csPCa in case of ASAP, according to D'Amico classification and Epstein modified criteria.

RESULTS

Out of 4.567 patients undergoing prostate biopsy, ASAP was detected in 2.6% of cases. All patients with ASAP underwent repeat saturation biopsy within 6 months and PCa was diagnosed in 34.5%. According to D'Amico classification, 26%, 5.9%, and 2.5% had low, intermediate, and high-risk disease, respectively. According modified Epstein criteria, the incidence of csPCa was 12.6%. LRT showed that the overall probability to develop PCa doubled when PSA density (PSAD) moved from values lower than 0.13 ng/ml/cc to class 0.13-0.30 ng/ml/cc, and it tripled when PSAD was higher than 0.30 ng/ml/cc.

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of csPCa in patients with an initial diagnosis of ASAP who had repeat biopsy was 12.6%. The overall PCa rate was 34.5%. Among patient undergoing RP, an upgrading from ncsPCa to csPCa was reported in 35% of cases. PSAD is the only predictive factor directly associated to the risk of developing PCa on repeat biopsy. These findings suggest that immediate repeat biopsy remains the correct strategy in absence of novel predictor factors and non-invasive diagnostic evaluations.

Natural history of widespread high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and atypical small acinar proliferation: should we rebiopsy them all?

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the premalignant potential of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN) and atypical small acinar proliferation (ASAP).

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with monofocal HGPIN (mHGPIN), widespread HGPIN (≥4 cores, wHGPIN) and/or ASAP who underwent at least one rebiopsy during their follow-up, were enrolled. All enrollment biopsies underwent central pathologic revision. Risks for PCa were estimated using Fine and Gray method for competing risk.

RESULTS

Pathologic revision changed the original diagnosis in 32.3% of cases. Among 336 cases enrolled, PCa was diagnosed in 164 (48.8%), and more specifically in 20 (30.3%) mHGPIN, 10 (34.5%) wHGPIN, 101 (54.0%) ASAP, and 33 (61.1%) HGPIN + ASAP (mean follow-up 124 months). Most PCa were Gleason score 6(3 + 3) (51.0%) and 7(3 + 4) (34.3%). On multivariate analysis, HGPIN + ASAP (HR 2.76, p < 0.001) and ASAP alone (HR 2.41, p < 0.001) were the only lesions significantly associated with PCa development. Of all cancers detected, 64.3% were at first rebiopsy. A rebiopsy performed within 3 months after ASAP diagnosis had a 45% chance of finding PCa. At Kaplan-Meier survival curves, median PCa-free survival was 48.1 months for HGPIN + ASAP and 64.9 months for ASAP (p 0.0005 at Log-rank test). At 1 year, 70% of HGPIN + ASAP, 73% of ASAP, 89% of wHGPIN, and 84% of mHGPIN were PCa-free.

CONCLUSION

The diagnosis of ASAP and HGPIN strongly relies on the expertise of dedicated uro-pathologists. Finding of ASAP is a strong risk factor for a subsequent PCa diagnosis, advising a rebiopsy, possibly within 3 months. m/wHGPIN should not be routinely rebiopsied.

Prediction of clinically significant prostate cancer after negative prostate biopsy: The current value of microscopic findings

OBJECTIVE

To assess the current ability of atypical small acinar proliferation (ASAP), multifocal high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (mHGPIN), HGPIN with atypia (PINATYP) and other non-malignant lesions to predict clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in repeat prostate biopsies.

METHODS

This retrospective study analyzed 377 repeat prostate biopsies, carried out between 2.014 and 2.017, and excluding those with previous PCa or 5-alpha reductase inhibitors treatment. ASAP, mHGPIN, PINATYP, prostatic atrophy, prostatic hyperplastic atrophy, proliferative inflammatory atrophy (PIA), chronic prostatitis, acute prostatitis, or granulomatous prostatitis, were prospectively reported after 12-core transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) systematic negative previous biopsies. 3T-multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) was performed previous repeat biopsies. At least 2-core TRUS targeted biopsies of Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data Systemv2 lesions ≥3, and/or 12-core TRUS systematic biopsy were performed in repeat prostate biopsies. The main outcome measurements were csPCa detection, which was defined when the International Society of Uro-Pathology group grade >1 and avoided biopsies. After logistic regression analysis the most efficient model was selected, nomogram was designed with internal validation, and clinical utility was analyzed.

RESULTS

Normal benign tissue alone was present in less than 2% of previous negative biopsies. mHGPIN (39.7%), ASAP (4.3%) and PINATYP (3.7%) failed to predict csPCa risk in repeat biopsies. The finding of PIA (38.2%) associated with a decreased the risk of csPCa with an Odd ratio of 0.54 (95% confidence interval: 0.31-0.95), P= 0.031. The area under the curve, to predict csPCa, of mpMRI was 0.736, increasing up to 0.860 (95% confidence internal:0.82-0.90) when PSA density, age, digital rectal examination, and differential PSA between biopsies and PIA finding were integrated in a predictive model. At 6% threshold, more than 20% of repeat prostate biopsies were saved without missing csPCa.

CONCLUSION

Currently, mHGPIN in negative prostate biopsy seems not able to predict the risk of future csPCa. The low incidence of ASAP and PINATYP, in our series, did not allow us to draw conclusions. PIA finding associated with a reduced risk of csPCa, and it could be integrated in a useful based-mpMRI predictive nomogram.

Risk of invasive prostate cancer and prostate cancer death in relatives of patients with prostatic borderline or in situ neoplasia: A nationwide cohort study

BACKGROUND

The question of whether having a family history of prostatic borderline or in situ neoplasia (PBISN) is associated with an increased risk of invasive prostate cancer (PCa) or death from PCa remains unanswered. The objective of the current study was to provide an evidence-based risk estimation for the relatives of patients with PBISN.

METHODS

Nationwide Swedish family cancer data sets were used for the current study, including data regarding all residents of Sweden who were born after 1931 and their parents. Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs), standardized mortality ratios (SMRs), and lifetime cumulative risks of PCa were calculated for men with different constellations of family history. Family history was defined as a dynamic (time-dependent) variable considering changes during follow-up (1958-2015).

RESULTS

Of the 6,343,727 men in the current study, a total of 238,961 developed invasive PCa and 5756 were diagnosed with PBISN during the follow-up. Men with 1 first-degree relative who was diagnosed with PBISN had a 70% increased risk of invasive PCa (SIR, 1.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-1.9) and PCa death (SMR, 1.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-2.2) compared with men with no family history of PBISN or invasive PCa. These were rather close to estimates in men with 1 first-degree relative diagnosed with invasive PCa (SIR, 2.1 and SMR, 1.8). A higher risk of PCa in family members was found among patients with a family history of PBISN and/or PCa diagnosed before age 60 years. The results in terms of cumulative risk resembled this trend.

CONCLUSIONS

A family history of PBISN appears to be as important as a family history of invasive PCa with regard to an increased risk of invasive PCa or PCa mortality. Such a history should not be overlooked in PCa screening recommendations or in future research regarding familial PCa.