Interobserver Variability in the Diagnosis of High-Grade Prostatic Intraepithelial Neoplasia in a Tertiary Hospital in Northern Jordan

Comparative Pathobiology of Canine and Human Prostate Cancer: State of the Art and Future Directions

First described in 1817, prostate cancer is considered a complex neoplastic entity, and one of the main causes of death in men in the western world. In dogs, prostatic carcinoma (PC) exhibits undifferentiated morphology with different phenotypes, is hormonally independent of aggressive character, and has high rates of metastasis to different organs. Although in humans, the risk factors for tumor development are known, in dogs, this scenario is still unclear, especially regarding castration. Therefore, with the advent of molecular biology, studies were and are carried out with the aim of identifying the main molecular mechanisms and signaling pathways involved in the carcinogenesis and progression of canine PC, aiming to identify potential biomarkers for diagnosis, prognosis, and targeted treatment. However, there are extensive gaps to be filled, especially when considering the dog as experimental model for the study of this neoplasm in humans. Thus, due to the complexity of the subject, the objective of this review is to present the main pathobiological aspects of canine PC from a comparative point of view to the same neoplasm in the human species, addressing the historical context and current understanding in the scientific field.

CDK19 as a diagnostic marker for high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia

High-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN) is a facultative precursor lesion of prostate cancer (PCa). Multifocal HGPIN in needle biopsies in the absence of PCa indicates a higher risk of cancer detection in subsequent biopsies. Therefore, a reliable diagnosis of HGPIN is of high clinical relevance guiding the management of patients with cancer-negative biopsies. Detection of HGPIN is merely based on morphological features while biomarkers aiding in the diagnosis of HGPIN and its differentiation from benign glands and other glandular lesions are lacking yet. Here, we investigated the expression of CDK19 by immunohistochemistry on prostate needle biopsies of 140 patients who were all diagnosed with PCa using whole tissue sections, and compared CDK19 levels between HGPIN, PCa and adjacent benign glands. In addition, CDK19 was compared to AMACR expression in a subset of intraductal carcinomas (IDC) on radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens. HGPIN was present in 65.7% of biopsies and in 88% associated to adjacent PCa. CDK19 overexpression defined as moderate to high CDK19 expression visible at low magnification was found in 82.6% of HGPIN. In contrast, 89.3% of benign glands were CDK19-negative or demonstrated only low CDK19 expression highlighting a high sensitivity and specificity to accurately detect HGPIN based on CDK19 expression levels. CDK19 was overexpressed in 59% of PCa but did not correlate significantly with the expression of intermingled HGPIN. On RP, CDK19 and AMACR showed no significant difference in the detection rate of IDC. In summary, assessment of CDK19 facilitates accurate and simplified diagnosis of HGPIN with high sensitivity and specificity and aides the differentiation to non-neoplastic glandular alterations. Considering the high clinical significance of diagnosis HGPIN that still has a limited reproducibility among pathologists we suggest CDK19 as diagnostic biomarker for HGPIN.