Prostate cancer detection in men with an initial diagnosis of atypical small acinar proliferation

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.

RNA-based markers in biopsy cores with atypical small acinar proliferation: Predictive effect of T2E fusion positivity and MMP-2 upregulation for a subsequent prostate cancer diagnosis

BACKGROUND

Atypical small acinar proliferation (ASAP) is a precursor lesion of prostate cancer (PC), and PC develops from this suspicious focus or an unsampled malignant gland nearby. However, PC-related molecular alterations that could guide the timing of repeat biopsies and help monitor PC risk in ASAP-diagnosed patients have not been investigated. The purpose of this study was to first investigate the expression of seven different PC-related RNAs that included serine 2 (TMPRSS2): erythroblastosis virus E26 oncogene homolog (ERG) gene (TMPRSS2-ERG, T2E) fusion, alpha-methylacyl-CoA racemase (AMACR), kallikrein related peptidase 3 (KLK3), androgen receptor (AR), prostate cancer specific antigen 3 (PCA3), and matrix metalloproteinases (MMP)-2 and 9.

METHODS

PC-related RNAs were evaluated using a real-time quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) system in pathologically ASAP-diagnosed prostate biopsy cores from 55 patients presenting with a normal digital rectal examination and a PSA level of 4-10 ng/mL.

RESULTS

We detected that positive T2E fusion status (P = 0.013) and the expression of AMACR (P = 0.016), AR (P = 0.016) and MMP-2 (P = 0.013) were independently and significantly associated with PC risk in ASAP patients. There were also several statistically significant correlations between expression levels. Additionally, we demonstrated that T2E fusion positive ASAP patients with higher MMP-2 expression were more likely to be diagnosed with PC at a subsequent biopsy during the follow-up period (P = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Although, more clinical validations are needed for the stratification of PC risk in ASAP-diagnosed biopsy cores, our current results indicate that the coexistence of T2E fusion positivity with MMP-2 upregulation may help clinicians adjust their biopsy timetable and/or assessment of PC risk in ASAP-diagnosed patients with a PSA level of 4-10 ng/mL.

Typing the atypical: Diagnostic issues and predictive markers in suspicious prostate lesions

As much as 5% of prostate biopsies yield findings equivocal for malignancy even for skilled uropathologist; such "grey zone" lesions have been addressed in many ways, although the acronym ASAP (atypical small acinar proliferation) is the most widely used when referring to an atypical focus suspicious, but not diagnostic, for malignancy. Since the introduction of this diagnostic category more than 20 years ago, debate has ensued over its histological characterization and clinical significance. Pathology reporting of ASAP, commonly based on strict morphological criteria and traditional immunohistochemical markers such as basal cell antibodies, has been improved by recent availability of novel immunohistochemical markers such as AMACR and ERG. Further pathological issues, such as the role of pre-analytical variables, number of tissue levels, interobserver variability, and association with prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia also play a role in the optimal assessment of ASAP. Apart from diagnostic issues, a major issue is ASAP predictive value for prostate cancer on repeat biopsy. Therefore, attempts have been made to identify clinical and biological parameters that could predict subsequent diagnosis of malignancy as well as define time and modality of repeat biopsy. Finally, pathological features of cancers detected after a previous ASAP diagnosis are compared with those diagnosed at first prostate biopsy.

Optimization of prostate biopsy: review of technique and complications

A 12-core systematic biopsy that incorporates apical and far-lateral cores in the template distribution allows maximal cancer detection and avoidance of a repeat biopsy while minimizing the detection of insignificant prostate cancers. Magnetic resonance imaging-guided prostate biopsy has an evolving role in both initial and repeat prostate biopsy strategies, potentially improving sampling efficiency, increasing the detection of clinically significant cancers, and reducing the detection of insignificant cancers. Hematuria, hematospermia, and rectal bleeding are common complications of prostate needle biopsy, but are generally self-limiting and well tolerated. All men should receive antimicrobial prophylaxis before biopsy.

Clinical validation of an epigenetic assay to predict negative histopathological results in repeat prostate biopsies

PURPOSE

The DOCUMENT multicenter trial in the United States validated the performance of an epigenetic test as an independent predictor of prostate cancer risk to guide decision making for repeat biopsy. Confirming an increased negative predictive value could help avoid unnecessary repeat biopsies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We evaluated the archived, cancer negative prostate biopsy core tissue samples of 350 subjects from a total of 5 urological centers in the United States. All subjects underwent repeat biopsy within 24 months with a negative (controls) or positive (cases) histopathological result. Centralized blinded pathology evaluation of the 2 biopsy series was performed in all available subjects from each site. Biopsies were epigenetically profiled for GSTP1, APC and RASSF1 relative to the ACTB reference gene using quantitative methylation specific polymerase chain reaction. Predetermined analytical marker cutoffs were used to determine assay performance. Multivariate logistic regression was used to evaluate all risk factors.

RESULTS

The epigenetic assay resulted in a negative predictive value of 88% (95% CI 85-91). In multivariate models correcting for age, prostate specific antigen, digital rectal examination, first biopsy histopathological characteristics and race the test proved to be the most significant independent predictor of patient outcome (OR 2.69, 95% CI 1.60-4.51).

CONCLUSIONS

The DOCUMENT study validated that the epigenetic assay was a significant, independent predictor of prostate cancer detection in a repeat biopsy collected an average of 13 months after an initial negative result. Due to its 88% negative predictive value adding this epigenetic assay to other known risk factors may help decrease unnecessary repeat prostate biopsies.

Prostate cancer: the need for biomarkers and new therapeutic targets

Prostate cancer (PCa) incidence and mortality have decreased in recent years. Nonetheless, it remains one of the most prevalent cancers in men, being a disquieting cause of men's death worldwide. Changes in many cell signaling pathways have a predominant role in the onset, development, and progression of the disease. These include prominent pathways involved in the growth, apoptosis, and angiogenesis of the normal prostate gland, such as androgen and estrogen signaling, and other growth factor signaling pathways. Understanding the foundations of PCa is leading to the discovery of key molecules that could be used to improve patient management. The ideal scenario would be to have a panel of molecules, preferably detectable in body fluids, that are specific and sensitive biomarkers for PCa. In the early stages, androgen deprivation is the gold standard therapy. However, as the cancer progresses, it eventually becomes independent of androgens, and hormonal therapy fails. For this reason, androgen-independent PCa is still a major therapeutic challenge. By disrupting specific protein interactions or manipulating the expression of some key molecules, it might be possible to regulate tumor growth and metastasis formation, avoiding the systemic side effects of current therapies. Clinical trials are already underway to assess the efficacy of molecules specially designed to target key proteins or protein interactions. In this review, we address that recent progress made towards understanding PCa development and the molecular pathways underlying this pathology. We also discuss relevant molecular markers for the management of PCa and new therapeutic challenges.

[Diagnostic histopathology of prostate cancer]

Even though the principal criteria for the diagnosis of adenocarcinoma of the prostate have remained unchanged for more than 60 years, the diagnostic pathology of prostate cancer, its mimicking and precursor lesions, grading and processing have undergone an immense development in diagnostic precision and differentiation. This article presents the major aspects of prostate diagnostics, Gleason grading and processing of prostatectomy specimens according to the TNM system.

Prostate cancer detection after a negative prostate biopsy: lessons learnt in the Cleveland Clinic experience

Urologists are often faced with the dilemma of managing patients with a negative initial prostate biopsy in whom clinical or pathological risk for prostate cancer still exists. Such real-life challenging scenarios might raise questions such as: Who should undergo further biopsies? What are the optimal predictors for prostate cancer on subsequent biopsies? What is the optimal biopsy protocol that should be used? When to stop the biopsy cascade? The last decade has witnessed numerous studies that have analyzed factors conferring a significant risk for cancer discovered on repeat biopsies. We and others have developed predictive models to aid decision-making regarding pursuing further biopsies. For decades, high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia has been considered a strong risk indicator for subsequent cancer. However, it has been recently shown that only through segmentation of this heterogeneous population does the real risk profile emerge. Biopsy templates underwent modification regarding the number and location of cores with emergence of the transrectal or brachytherapy grid transperineal saturation biopsy. However, the best biopsy protocol remains controversial. We have refined the initial biopsy template to a 14 core initial biopsy template that optimizes cancer detection, and have shown that transrectal saturation biopsy significantly improves cancer detection for repeat biopsy. Another concern is the overdiagnosis of clinically insignificant cancer on repeat biopsies, so we explored ways to limit this, and to deal with its ramifications. Through carrying out a Medline literature search, we critically evaluated pertinent articles together with emphasis of our own journey in this arena to assist in the decision-making process for repeat biopsy population.

Pathologic results of radical prostatectomies in patients with simultaneous atypical small acinar proliferation and prostate cancer

PURPOSE

The incidence of adenocarcinoma on a subsequent biopsy following a diagnosis of atypical small acinar proliferation (ASAP) ranges from 34% to 60%. We reexamined radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens of patients diagnosed as having synchronous ASAP with prostate cancer (PCa) to evaluate pathological entities and the clinical significance of ASAP.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From January 2007 to December 2008, a total of 118 patients who had been diagnosed with adenocarcinoma on prostate needle biopsy underwent RP. Forty-six of the 118 patients (39%) were diagnosed as having synchronous ASAP with PCa on the prostate needle biopsy. Using whole-mount sections and prostate mapping, we evaluated the RP specimens that were close sections to the ASAP on prostate needle biopsy. All tissues were examined by immunohistochemistry with high molecular weight cytokeratin (34betaE12), p63, and AMACR/P504S added to initial H&E stains by one pathologist.

RESULTS

Thirty-six of the 46 patients (78%) were diagnosed as having adenocarcinoma at sites of ASAP on the initial prostate needle biopsies. The Gleason score was 5 to 6 in 22 patients (61%), 7 in 3 (8%), and unknown due to multifocal and microfocal lesions in 11 (31%). The tumor volume of 14 of the 36 patients (39%) was 0.5 cc or less and was unknown due to multifocal and microfocal lesions in 8 (22%).

CONCLUSIONS

Most ASAP on initial prostate needle biopsy was a true pathological entity, in other words, prostatic adenocarcinoma. Aggressive approaches including more extended repeat biopsy with additional biopsy of the site of the ASAP are needed to diagnose PCa in patients with ASAP.