Tertiary Gleason pattern in radical prostatectomy specimens is associated with worse outcomes than the next higher Gleason score group in localized prostate cancer

Cribriform glands are associated with worse outcome than other pattern 4 subtypes: A study of prognostic and clinicopathological characteristics of prostate adenocarcinoma with an emphasis on Grade Groups

AIM

Although prostate adenocarcinoma is the most common cancer in men, survival is quite high and with the help of histopathological examination using the updated classification, patient management strategies are developing. We aimed to evaluate the correlation between the histopathological features and biochemical recurrence (BCR) in patients who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) using the new classification.

METHODS

A total of 285 prostate adenocarcinoma cases that underwent RP between January 2009 and December 2017 and followed up for at least 3 months were included in the study. The cases were re-evaluated according to WHO-ISUP 2016 classification and the findings were recorded.

RESULTS

The mean age was 63,4 years. Gleason scores of the cases were as follows: 3+3 144 cases (50.5%), 3+4 81 cases (28.4%), 4+3 28 cases (9.8%), 4+4 7 cases (2.5%) , 3+5 6 cases (2.1%), 5+3 2 cases (0.7%), 4+5 17 cases (6%). There were 198 (69,5%) pT2, 54 (18,9%) pT3a and 33 (11,6%) pT3b cases. The mean follow-up time was 44,1 months and BCR was detected in 97 cases (34%). The relationship between the Group Grades and BCR was statistically significant. BCR rate increased as the tumour volume and the percentage of pattern 4 increased (P < .001).There was a significant correlation between preoperative PSA value, extraprostatic extension, seminal vesicle invasion, surgical margin positivity, tumour volume, pattern 4 percentage, presence of cribriform glands and BCR and recurrence-free survival in both univariate and multivariate analysis and recurrence-free survival was also affected by these parameters. Among the morphological subtypes of Pattern 4, recurrence-free survival decreased as the incidence of cribriform glands increased (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Histopathological evaluation is important in predicting BCR in prostate adenocarcinoma, the Group Grade system seems to be helpful in this regard. More studies are needed to prove the relatively worse prognostic effect of cribriform glands.

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.

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.

Clinical outcome comparison of Grade Group 1 and Grade Group 2 prostate cancer with and without cribriform architecture at the time of radical prostatectomy

Aims

Invasive cribriform and intraductal carcinoma are associated with aggressive disease in Grade Group 2 (GG2) prostate cancer patients. However, the characteristics and clinical outcome of patients with GG2 prostate cancer without cribriform architecture (GG2−) as compared with those with Grade Group 1 (GG1) prostate cancer are unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical and pathological characteristics of GG1 and GG2− prostate cancer in radical prostatectomy specimens.

Methods and results

We reviewed 835 radical prostatectomy specimens for Grade Group, pT stage, surgical margin status, and the presence of cribriform architecture. Biochemical recurrence‐free survival and metastasis were used as clinical outcomes. GG1 prostate cancer was seen in 207 patients, and GG2 prostate cancer was seen in 420 patients, of whom 228 (54%) showed cribriform architecture (GG2+) and 192 (46%) did not. GG2− patients had higher prostate‐specific antigen levels (9.4 ng/ml versus 7.0 ng/ml; P < 0.001), more often had extraprostatic extension (36% versus 11%; P < 0.001) and had more positive surgical margins (27% versus 17%; P = 0.01) than GG1 patients. GG2− patients had shorter biochemical recurrence‐free survival (hazard ratio 2.7, 95% confidence interval 1.4–4.9; P = 0.002) than GG1 patients. Lymph node and distant metastasis were observed neither in GG2− nor in GG1 patients, but occurred in 22 of 228 (10%) GG2+ patients.

Conclusion

In conclusion, patients with GG2− prostate cancer at radical prostatectomy have more advanced disease and shorter biochemical recurrence‐free survival than those with GG1 prostate cancer, but both groups have a very low risk of developing metastasis.

Prognostic significance of tertiary Gleason pattern in the contemporary era of Gleason grade grouping: A narrative review

Since the Gleason score was developed in 1966 as a histological classification for prostate cancer, it has been widely used in clinical practice and has evolved over time. The concept of a "tertiary Gleason pattern" (also known as a minor Gleason pattern) was first proposed in 2000, and has been used in clinical practice since the 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology conference. The prognostic significance of a tertiary Gleason pattern has been widely validated in various settings of prostate cancer, whereas its definition has yet to be fully established. Currently, a provisional definition of tertiary Gleason pattern is "<5% Gleason pattern 4 or 5 in radical prostatectomy specimens." In contrast, "Gleason grade grouping" was proposed in 2013 and came into use in clinical practice in 2016 according to the 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology conference. Although the prognostic significance of Gleason grade grouping has already been widely confirmed, it does not incorporate the concept of tertiary Gleason pattern. Recently, the 2019 International Society of Urological Pathology conference discussed how to handle tertiary Gleason pattern in the current Gleason scoring system, but no consensus was reached on the issue. This review summarizes the evidence on the prognostic significance of tertiary Gleason pattern and discusses how to deal with it in the context of the contemporary Gleason grade grouping. It also refers to reporting of the percentage of Gleason patterns 4 and 5, as well as quantitative Gleason score models incorporating tertiary Gleason pattern.

Practice Patterns in Reporting Tertiary Grades at Radical Prostatectomy: Survey of a Large Group of Experienced Urologic Pathologists

CONTEXT.—

In prostate cancer, "tertiary" higher-grade patterns (TPs) have been associated with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy.

OBJECTIVE.—

To determine variation regarding definition and application of TPs.

DESIGN.—

Online survey regarding TPs in a range of grading scenarios circulated to 105 experienced urologic pathologists.

RESULTS.—

Among 95 respondents, 40 of 95 (42%) defined TPs as "third most common pattern" and 55 (58%) as "minor pattern/less than 5% of tumor." In a tumor with pattern 3 and less than 5% pattern 4, of the 95 respondents, 35 (37%) assigned 3 + 3 = 6 with TP4, while 56 (59%) assigned 3 + 4 = 7. In a tumor with pattern 4 and less than 5% pattern 5, of the 95 respondents, 51 (54%) assigned 4 + 4 = 8 with TP5, while 43 (45%) assigned 4 + 5 = 9. Six scenarios were presented in which the order of most common patterns was 3, 4, and 5 (Group 1) or 4, 3, and 5 (Group 2) with varying percentages. In both groups, when pattern 5 was less than 5%, we found that 98% and 93% of respondents would assign 3 + 4 = 7 or 4 + 3 = 7 with TP5. In scenarios with 15% or 25% pattern 5, most respondents (70% and 80%, respectively) would include pattern 5 as the secondary grade, that is, 3 + 5 = 8 (Group 1) or 4 + 5 = 9 (Group 2). For 85 of 95 (89%), a TP would not impact Grade Group assignment.

CONCLUSIONS.—

This survey highlights substantial variation in practice patterns regarding definition and application of "tertiary" grading in radical prostatectomy specimens. High consistency was observed in 3 + 4 = 7/4 + 3 = 7 scenarios with truly minor pattern 5. These findings should inform future studies assessing the standardization and predictive value of "tertiary" patterns.

Significance of tertiary Gleason pattern 5 in patients with Gleason score 7 after radical prostatectomy: a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the association between tertiary Gleason pattern 5 (TGP5) and biochemical recurrence (BCR) in patients with prostate cancer (PCa) with a Gleason score (GS) of 7 after radical prostatectomy (RP).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This retrospective study identified 350 patients who received RP and were graded as GS 7 (3+4 or 4+3) at the West China Hospital from January 2009 to December 2017. Initially, the patients were divided into two groups, TGP5 absence and TGP5 presence, independent of Gleason score. We further stratified the patients by adding the Gleason score into four groups: GS 3+4, GS 3+4/TGP5, GS 4+3, and GS 4+3/TGP5. Cox proportional-hazards models were used to evaluate the association between the status of TGP5 and BCR after adjusting for the confounding factors.

RESULTS

The risk of BCR was significantly higher in patients with TGP5 when compared to patients without TGP5 (P=0.04, HR=2.17 95%, Cl: 1.03-4.59). For patients with primary Gleason pattern 4, the risk of BCR for patients with Gleason 4+3/TGP5 was statistically significantly higher than Gleason 4+3 (P=0.04, HR=2.45, 95% Cl: 1.04-5.76).

CONCLUSION

The TGP5 in patients with GS 7 had strong association with the risk of BCR and was an independent predictor for BCR. Further research on larger data sets is needed to confirm these findings.

Ultrasensitive prostate-specific antigen level as a predictor of biochemical progression after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: Towards risk adapted follow-up

BACKGROUND

Ultrasensitive prostate-specific antigen (USPSA) is useful for stratifying patients according to their USPSA-based risk. Aim of our study was to determine the usefulness of USPSA as predictor of biochemical recurrence (BCR) after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP).

METHODS

This retrospective study included 213 prostate cancer patients who had a postoperative USPSA between 0.01 and 0.2 ng/mL and at least 2 years of follow-up. We developed predictive models for BCR with PSA ≥0.2 and ≥0.5 ng/mL.

RESULTS

A total of 103 patients (48.3%) had BCR at a median follow-up of 13.3 months. Higher postoperative USPSA (odds ratio [OR] = 4.73, P < 0.01), bilateral positive surgical margin in both sides (OR = 1.32, P = 0.044), higher average PSA rise (OR = 1.67, P = 0.031), ISUP grade group ≥3 (OR = 1.48, P = 0.003), and shorter interval since RARP (OR = 0.58, P < 0.001) were independent predictors of BCR with PSA ≥0.2 ng/mL. Higher postoperative USPSA (OR = 3.85, P < 0.01), bilateral positive surgical margin (OR = 1.34, P = 0.011), ISUP grade group ≥3 (OR = 1.5, P = 0.002), and shorter interval since RARP (OR = 0.61, P = 0.001) were independent predictors of BCR with PSA ≥0.5 ng/mL. The areas under the curve for the first and second model were 0.865 and 0.834, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Ultrasensitive PSA after RARP is a useful prognostic indicator of BCR which could guide postoperative risk stratification and layout follow-up scheduling.