PIN-like (Ductal) Adenocarcinoma of the Prostate

The rising incidence of ductal adenocarcinoma and intraductal carcinoma of the prostate: Diagnostic accuracy of biopsy, MRI-visibility, and outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Ductal adenocarcinoma (DA) and intraductal carcinoma (IDC) of the prostate are associated with higher stage disease at radical prostatectomy (RP). We evaluated diagnostic accuracy of biopsy, MRI-visibility, and outcomes for patients undergoing RP with DA/IDC histology compared to pure acinar adenocarcinoma (AA) of the prostate.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of men receiving RP between 2014 and 2021 revealing AA, DA, or IDC on final pathology was conducted. Multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards regression models were employed.

RESULTS

A total of 609 patients were included with 103 found to have DA/IDC. Patients with DA/IDC were older and had higher PSA, biopsy grade group (GG), RP GG, and other pathologic findings (extraprostatic extension, lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion, pN stage) compared to AA patients (all P < 0.05). On multivariable analysis, higher age, RP GG, and pT3a were associated with DA/IDC on RP (all P < 0.05). Sensitivity and specificity of biopsy compared to RP for diagnosis of DA/IDC was 29.1% (16.7% DA, 27.8% IDC) and 96.6% (99.3% DA, 96.6% IDC), respectively. In a subset of 281 men receiving MRI, PI-RADS distribution was similar for patients with DA/IDC vs. AA (90.7% vs. 80.7% with PI-RADS 4-5 lesions, P = 0.23) with slightly higher biopsy sensitivity (41.9%). DA/IDC was associated with worse BCR (HR = 1.77, P = 0.02) but not biopsy DA/IDC (P = 0.90).

CONCLUSIONS

Sensitivity of prostate biopsy was low for detection of DA/IDC histology at RP. Patients with DA/IDC histology had unfavorable pathologic features at RP and worse BCR. Of patients with DA/IDC at RP, 90.7% were categorized as PI-RADS 4 to 5 on preoperative MRI.

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.

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.

Histological patterns, subtypes and aspects of prostate cancer: different aspects, different outcomes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The most common prostatic cancers (PCa) are acinary adenocarcinomas. Histological subtypes have been variably defined. The purpose of this review is to discuss unusual histological patterns and subtypes of acinar adenocarcinoma, as well as other types of PCa and their prognostic and therapeutic relevance.

RECENT FINDINGS

The new term 'subtype' for morphologically defined tumor entities replaced the term 'variant' in the new 2022 classification of the WHO to allow for clear terminological distinction from genetic variants. The 2022 WHO classification mentions prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN)-like carcinoma, signet-cell-like adenocarcinoma, sarcomatoid carcinoma and pleomorphic-giant-cell adenocarcinoma of the prostate as true subtypes of acinary PCa. Other forms of acinary PCa are termed unusual histological patterns and include atrophic, foamy-cell, microcystic, pseudohyperplastic and mucinous patterns. Nonacinar forms of prostate cancer include other glandular PCa, the ductal adenocarcinoma and the treatment-associated neuroendocrine carcinoma, and nonglandular PCa, the adenosquamous carcinoma, the squamous cell carcinoma and the adenoid cystic (basal cell) carcinoma of the prostate.

SUMMARY

True subtypes of acinary PCa and other forms of glandular and nonglandular PCa show relevant differences in prognosis and treatment approach compared with classic acinary PCa. The relevance of unusual histological patterns mainly lies in their deceptive benign appearance and the need for pathologists to know about these entities for accurate and timely diagnosis.

The 2022 revision of World Health Organization classification of tumors of the urinary system and male genital organs: advances and challenges

The fifth edition of the World Health Organization (WHO) classification of urinary and male genital organ tumors has been recently published in 2022. The application of molecular profiling has made a substantial impact on classification of urologic tumors. The new WHO classification introduces a group of molecularly well-defined renal tumor subtypes. The significant changes include addition of a category of "other oncocytic tumors" with oncocytoma/chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (chRCC)-like features, elimination of the subcategorization of type1/2 papillary RCC and inclusion of eosinophilic solid and cystic RCC as an independent tumor entity. The WHO/ISUP grading now has been recommended for all RCCs. Major nomenclature changes include replacement of histologic 'variants' by 'subtypes', 'clear cell papillary renal cell carcinoma' to 'clear cell renal cell tumor','TCEB1-mutated RCC' to 'ELOC-mutated RCC', 'hereditary leiomyomatosis and renal cell carcinoma' to 'fumarate hydratase-deficient RCC', 'RCC-Unclassified' to 'RCC-NOS', 'primitive neuroectodermal tumor' to 'embryonic neuroectodermal tumor', 'testicular carcinoid' to 'testicular neuroendocrine tumor', and 'basal cell carcinoma of the prostate' to 'adenoid-cystic (basal-cell) carcinoma of the prostate'. Metastatic, hematolymphoid, mesenchymal, melanocytic, soft tissue and neuroendocrine tumors are collectively discussed in separate chapters. It has been suggested that the morphological classification of urothelial cancer be replaced with a new molecular taxonomic classification system.

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.

Prostatic adenocarcinoma with a peculiar morphology – a rare case of pseudohyperplastic variant with inverted polarity

Background

The inverted (hobnail) variant of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN) has been reported in two previous series and one case of inverted polarity in invasive adenocarcinoma has been reported. We reported an additional case of invasive carcinoma with this peculiar morphology.

Case presentation

We reported an additional case of invasive carcinoma with this peculiar morphology. A prostatectomy specimen of a 64-year-old patient showed a GG2 adenocarcinoma with extensive intraprostatic perineural infiltration and extraprostatic extension. Half of the entire tumor showed a distinctive inverted morphology.

Conclusion

Although pseudohyperplastic adenocarcinoma is believed to be a low-grade tumor to be graded as Gleason pattern 3, awareness of this morphology is important to collect more information on its biologic behavior and clinical implication.

PIN-like ductal carcinoma of the prostate has frequent activating RAS/RAF mutations

AIMS

Prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia-like (PIN-like) ductal carcinoma is a rare tumour characterised by often cystically dilated glands architecturally resembling high-grade PIN, but lacking basal cells. These tumours are frequently accompanied by grade group 1 acinar cancer and behave relatively indolently. In contrast, conventional ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate is an aggressive variant comparable to grade group 4 acinar cancer. Here, we used targeted next-generation sequencing to molecularly profile PIN-like ductal carcinoma cases at radical prostatectomy.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Five PIN-like ductal carcinoma samples at radical prostatectomy with sufficient tumour tissue available were analysed for genomic alterations by targeted next-generation sequencing using the Johns Hopkins University (JHU) solid tumour panel. DNA was captured using SureSelect for 640 genes and sequenced on the Illumina HiSeq platform. Three of five (60%) of the PIN-like ductal carcinomas showed activating mutations in the RAS/RAF pathways, which are extraordinarily rare in conventional primary prostate carcinoma (<3% of cases), including an activating hot-spot BRAF mutation (p.K601E), an activating hot-spot mutation in HRAS (p.Q61K) and an in-frame activating deletion in BRAF (p.T488_Q493delinsK). An additional two cases lacked BRAF or HRAS mutations, but harboured in-frame insertions of uncertain significance in MAP2K4 and MAP3K6. One case had sufficient acinar tumour for sequencing, and showed a similar molecular profile as the concurrent PIN-like ductal carcinoma, suggesting a clonal relationship between the two components.

CONCLUSIONS

PIN-like ductal carcinoma represents a molecularly unique tumour, enriched for potentially targetable oncogenic driver mutations in the RAS/RAF/MAPK pathway. This molecular profile contrasts with that of conventional ductal adenocarcinoma, which is typically enriched for pathogenic mutations in the mismatch repair (MMR) and homologous recombination (HR) DNA repair pathways.

The Role of Radiotherapy Among Patients With Prostate Ductal Adenocarcinoma

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to perform a Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) analysis on the effect of radiotherapy (RT) on survival among patients with prostate ductal adenocarcinoma (DA), a rare variant of prostate cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Cases of T1 to 4 N0 M0 prostate DA diagnosed between 2004 and 2013 were extracted from SEER. The association between categorical variables and radiation therapy was assessed for statistical significance using the χ² test or Fisher exact test. Difference in continuous variables across the RT groups was assessed for statistical significance using the 2-sample t test or non-parametric test. The distribution of overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) between the RT groups was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and the log rank test and after propensity matching. The association between hazards of death (HR) and covariates was examined using Cox proportional hazards model. A 2-sided P-value of .05 was used to determine statistical significance.

RESULTS

A total of 205 patients met inclusion criteria. On univariate analysis, RT was associated with significant improvement in OS and DSS. On multivariate Cox regression, RT significantly decreased risk of death for both OS and DSS (HR, 0.516; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.273-0.978 and HR, 0.232; 95% CI, 0.082-0.658, respectively). After propensity score matching, RT demonstrated a persistent improvement in both OS and DSS.

CONCLUSIONS

RT decreased risk of death for both OS and DSS in patients with node-negative, nonmetastatic prostate DA on multivariable analysis. RT was also associated with improved OS and DSS after propensity matching.

Prostatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Controlled for Cancer Grade and Tumor Volume Does Not Have an Independent Effect on Adverse Radical Prostatectomy Outcomes Compared to Usual Acinar Prostatic Adenocarcinoma

OBJECTIVE

To study if prostatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) controlled by Grade Group (GG), PSA, and tumor volume (TV) is an independent predictor of adverse radical prostatectomy (RP) outcomes.

MATERIALS

One-hundred and twenty-eight PDA and 1141 acinar continuous RPs were studied. Each tumor nodule (TN) was individually graded, staged, and its TV measured. Univariate analysis (UVA) identified features associated with lymph node metastasis (LN+), extraprostatic extension (EPE), positive surgical margins (SM+), and seminal vesicle invasion (SV+). We then assessed PDA effect on RP outcomes in a multivariate analysis (MVA).

RESULTS

In 127 cases PDA was present in 1 TN and no TN was pure PDA. One-hundred and twenty-three cases had PDA in TNs with highest grade, stage, and TV. Patients with PDA were older (65 vs 63 years, P < 0.001), had higher GG (P < 0.001), and LN+ (6.3% vs 2.7%, P = 0.049). Controlling these variables by GG eliminated statistical significance. Overall, there were 3249 separate TNs (129 PDA and 3120 acinar). In UVA, PDA predicted EPE (92/124 vs 517/3045), SV+ (28/1129 vs 116/3,120), and SM+ (51/129 vs 296/3120), all P < 0.001. In MVA, PDA lost its effect on EPE (OR = 0.88, P = 0.64), SM+ (OR = 0.86, P = 0.5), and SV+ (OR = 0.99, P = 0.98).

CONCLUSION

Controlled for grade and TV, PDA was not an independent predictor of adverse RP outcomes, but former 2 were. Hence, higher GG and TV associated with PDA TNs may be predictive of adverse RP outcomes rather than PDA by itself. These conclusions may be used in preoperative risk stratification and definitive therapy planning when PDA is identified on needle biopsy.

Cellular and Molecular Mechanisms Underlying Prostate Cancer Development: Therapeutic Implications

Prostate cancer is the most frequent nonskin cancer and second most common cause of cancer-related deaths in man. Prostate cancer is a clinically heterogeneous disease with many patients exhibiting an aggressive disease with progression, metastasis, and other patients showing an indolent disease with low tendency to progression. Three stages of development of human prostate tumors have been identified: intraepithelial neoplasia, adenocarcinoma androgen-dependent, and adenocarcinoma androgen-independent or castration-resistant. Advances in molecular technologies have provided a very rapid progress in our understanding of the genomic events responsible for the initial development and progression of prostate cancer. These studies have shown that prostate cancer genome displays a relatively low mutation rate compared with other cancers and few chromosomal loss or gains. The ensemble of these molecular studies has led to suggest the existence of two main molecular groups of prostate cancers: one characterized by the presence of ERG rearrangements (~50% of prostate cancers harbor recurrent gene fusions involving ETS transcription factors, fusing the 5' untranslated region of the androgen-regulated gene TMPRSS2 to nearly the coding sequence of the ETS family transcription factor ERG) and features of chemoplexy (complex gene rearrangements developing from a coordinated and simultaneous molecular event), and a second one characterized by the absence of ERG rearrangements and by the frequent mutations in the E3 ubiquitin ligase adapter SPOP and/or deletion of CDH1, a chromatin remodeling factor, and interchromosomal rearrangements and SPOP mutations are early events during prostate cancer development. During disease progression, genomic and epigenomic abnormalities accrued and converged on prostate cancer pathways, leading to a highly heterogeneous transcriptomic landscape, characterized by a hyperactive androgen receptor signaling axis.

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.