Metastatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma of the Prostate

Ductal, intraductal, and cribriform carcinoma of the prostate: Molecular characteristics and clinical management

Prostatic acinar adenocarcinoma accounts for approximately 95% of prostate cancer (CaP) cases. The remaining 5% of histologic subtypes of CaP are known to be more aggressive and have recently garnered substantial attention. These histologic subtypes - namely, prostatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA), intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P), and cribriform carcinoma of the prostate (CC-P) - typically exhibit distinct growth characteristics, genomic features, and unique oncologic outcomes. For example, PTEN mutations, which cause uncontrolled cell growth, are frequently present in IDC-P and CC-P. Germline mutations in homologous DNA recombination repair (HRR) genes (e.g., BRCA1, BRCA2, ATM, PALB2, and CHEK2) are discovered in 40% of patients with IDC-P, while only 9% of patients without ductal involvement had a germline mutation. CC-P is associated with deletions in common tumor suppressor genes, including PTEN, TP53, NKX3-1, MAP3K7, RB1, and CHD1. Evidence suggests abiraterone may be superior to docetaxel as a first-line treatment for patients with IDC-P. To address these and other critical pathological attributes, this review examines the molecular pathology, genetics, treatments, and oncologic outcomes associated with CC-P, PDA, and IDC-P with the objective of creating a comprehensive resource with a centralized repository of information on PDA, IDC-P, and CC-P.

Radiotherapy for ductal carcinoma of the prostate: an analysis based on the Japanese radiation oncology study group survey

BACKGROUND

The clinical characteristics of prostate ductal carcinoma is still unclear, and treatment strategy has not yet been established due to its rarity. Therefore, we conducted a multicenter survey of radiation therapy for prostate ductal carcinoma in Japan.

METHOD

Data of patients with ductal carcinoma of the prostate treated with radiation therapy between 1996 and 2018 were extracted from the database of each facility.

RESULTS

Fifty-two treatment records of 41 patients were collected from nine institutions. The treatment purpose and situations were varied curative intent to palliation. Twenty-eight patients received curative treatments. The median follow-up period of these patients was 68 months. Androgen deprivation therapy was combined with radiation therapy in 26 cases (93%). X-ray and particle irradiation was used. Radiation dose range was 63-78 Gy; 5-year overall survival, progression-free survival and biochemical relapse-free survival were 87.0, 79.3 and 79.3%, respectively. One patient experienced Grade 3 radiation proctitis and one experienced Grade 3 radiation cystitis. There were no Grade 4 or worse adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Most patient received similar treatment with adenocarcinoma of prostate, and the clinical results were compatible. For more reliable evidence, further studies are required.

Ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate or seminal vesicle adenocarcinoma: An multi-disciplinary team (MDT) case report and literature review

We introduced a 61-year-old male with ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate who underwent a tortuous diagnosis and treatment. Multi-disciplinary team meetings organized by our hospital have shown great value in the whole process. The patient presented with gross hematuria accompanied by frequent urination initially, and was diagnosed with ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate involving right seminal vesicle gland and urethra by urethroscopy biopsy. The clinical stage of tumor was T3bN0M0. After 4 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, the tumor shrank significantly and the patient underwent a laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. But the patient declined to continue chemotherapy postoperatively. After 10 months, the serum prostatic specific antigen increased to 0.05 ng/mL, and multiple metastases were found in the patient's bilateral lungs. However, an unexpected diagnosis of seminal vesicle adenocarcinoma was put forward from another hospital after supplementary pathologic immunohistochemical examination. Then, after careful discussion and demonstration by our multi-disciplinary team experts, we insisted on the diagnosis of ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate and suggested that the original regimen of chemotherapy should be continued. Up-to-date, 14 months after the operation, the patient continues to survive while undergoing ongoing active treatment as recommended.

Optimizing the diagnosis and management of ductal prostate cancer

Ductal adenocarcinoma (DAC) is the most common variant histological subtype of prostate carcinoma and has an aggressive clinical course. DAC is usually characterized and treated as high-risk prostatic acinar adenocarcinoma (PAC). However, DAC has a different biology to that of acinar disease, which often poses a challenge for both diagnosis and management. DAC can be difficult to identify using conventional diagnostic modalities such as serum PSA levels and multiparametric MRI, and the optimal management for localized DAC is unknown owing to the rarity of the disease. Following definitive therapy for localized disease with radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy, the majority of DACs recur with visceral metastases at low PSA levels. Various systemic therapies that have been shown to be effective in high-risk PAC have limited use in treating DAC. Although current understanding of the biology of DAC is limited, genomic analyses have provided insights into the pathology behind its aggressive behaviour and potential future therapeutic targets.

Patterns of metastases of prostatic ductal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

The current study was conducted to investigate the patterns of metastases in men with metastatic prostatic ductal adenocarcinoma (DAC) and recurrence patterns after therapy.

METHODS

All patients with a new diagnosis of DAC with de novo metastases and those with localized disease who developed metastases after treatment and were treated at the study institution from January 2005 to November 2018 were included. All patient and tumor characteristics and outcome data were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 164 patients (37.7%) had metastatic DAC, including 112 with de novo metastases and 52 who developed metastases after treatment. Men with de novo metastases were found to have a significantly higher median prostate-specific antigen level and International Society of Urological Pathology grade but a lower cT3 and/or T4 classification compared with those with metastases that developed after treatment (all P < .05). Approximately 87% of men with de novo metastases progressed despite multiple systemic therapies, 37.6% required intervention for the palliation of symptoms, and 10.1% responded to systemic therapy and underwent treatment of the primary tumor. Men with de novo metastatic DAC and those who developed metastases after treatment had multiple metastatic sites (including bone and viscera), with higher rates of lung metastases noted in the posttreatment group (23.2% vs 44.2%; P = .01). A total of 45 patients who were treated with curative intent developed metastases at a median of 22 months (range, 0.9-74.8 months) after treatment, at low prostate-specific antigen levels (median, 4.4 ng/mL [interquartile range, 1.7-11.1 ng/mL]).

CONCLUSIONS

The current study described the metastatic patterns of DAC in both patients with de novo metastatic disease and those who later progress to metastases. Men receiving treatment for DAC with curative intent require stringent long-term follow-up with imaging modalities, including chest imaging given the predilection toward lung metastases noted among these patients.

Utility of NKX3.1 Immunostaining in the Detection of Metastatic Prostatic Carcinoma on Fine-Needle Aspiration Smears

OBJECTIVES

NK3 homeobox 1 (NKX3.1) has been increasingly used to diagnose metastatic prostatic carcinoma in histologic samples. However, its utility and reliability in cytologic direct smears have not been studied.

METHODS

A total of 59 fine-needle aspiration (FNA) cases with a definitive diagnosis of metastatic carcinoma from the prostate were included. The cases were grouped based on different Gleason score in their corresponding primary tumors and morphologic variants. For each case, tumor cells were immunostained with NKX3.1, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and prostatic acid phosphatase (PAP) on cell-transferred smears.

RESULTS

NKX3.1 was strongly and diffusely positive in all 40 metastatic prostatic adenocarcinomas, including those with ductal features, but negative for the 19 small cell carcinoma (SmCC) cases. NKX3.1 had a better detection rate than PSA (13/50, 26%) and PAP (0/47, 0%).

CONCLUSIONS

NKX3.1 immunostaining on FNA smears is highly reliable for detecting metastatic prostatic carcinomas of conventional and ductal types but not for SmCC.

Diverse Immunoprofile of Ductal Adenocarcinoma of the Prostate with an Emphasis on the Prognostic Factors

BACKGROUND

Ductal adenocarcinoma (DAC) of the prostate is an uncommon histologic subtype whose prognostic factors and immunoprofile have not been fully defined.

METHODS

To define its prognostic factors and immunoprofile, the clinicopathological features, including biochemical recurrence (BCR), of 61 cases of DAC were analyzed. Immunohistochemistry was performed on tissue microarray constructs to assess the expression of prostate cancer-related and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) signaling-related proteins.

RESULTS

During the median follow-up period of 19.3 months, BCR occurred in 26 cases (42.6%). DAC demonstrated a wide expression range of prostate cancer-related proteins, including nine cases (14.8%) that were totally negative for pan-cytokeratin (PanCK) immunostaining. The mTOR signaling-related proteins also showed diverse expression. On univariate analysis, BCR was associated with high preoperative serum levels of prostate-specific antigen (PSA), large tumor volume, predominant ductal component, high Gleason score (GS), comedo-necrosis, high tumor stage (pT), lymphovascular invasion, and positive surgical margin. High expressions of phospho-mTOR (p-mTOR) as well as low expressions of PSA, phospho-S6 ribosomal protein (pS6) and PanCK were associated with BCR. On multivariable analysis, GS, pT, and immunohistochemical expressions of PanCK and p-mTOR remained independent prognostic factors for BCR.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest GS, pT, and immunohistochemical expressions of PanCK and p-mTOR as independent prognostic factors for BCR in DAC. Since DAC showed diverse expression of prostate cancer-related proteins, this should be recognized in interpreting the immunoprofile of DAC. The diverse expression of mTOR-related proteins implicates their potential utility as predictive markers for mTOR targeted therapy.

Immunohistochemical profile of ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate

Ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate (DAC) is considered to be an aggressive subtype of prostate cancer with greater risk of progression than acinar adenocarcinoma (AC). It has been debated whether DAC is a distinct subtype or a morphological variant of AC. Our aim was to examine the protein expression of DAC and to compare the results with AC. A tissue microarray was constructed from 60 DAC and 46 AC matched by Gleason score. The slides were stained for 28 immunomarkers (estrogen, progesterone and androgen receptor, prolactin, PSA, prostein, PSMA, PSAP, CDX2, lysozyme, villin, monoclonal CEA, CK7, CK20, HMWCK, p63, p504s, c-myc, EGFR, Ki-67, p16, p21, p27, p53, PTEN, ERG, PAX-2, and PAX-8). HMWCK was positive in 8.5 % of DAC, but negative in all cases of AC (p = 0.045). p16 was positive in 53.3 % of DAC and in 26.1 % of AC (p = 0.005). p53 was positive in 42.4 % of DAC and 26.7 % of AC (p = 0.031). A distinct patchy positivity of CK20 was seen in 23.7 % of DAC, and this pattern was also seen in 9.1 % of AC (p = 0.047). Villin was positive in 3.4 % of DAC while expression was negative in AC. Ki-67 labeling index was significantly higher in DAC than in AC (mean 9.2 % [95 % CI 6.4-12.0] and 2.6 % [1.9-3.4], p < 0.001). While there is some overlap in the immunohistochemical expression of DAC and AC, the differences between these two morphotypes of prostatic carcinoma are consistent with DAC having a more aggressive phenotype than AC.

Histopathological features of ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate in 1,051 radical prostatectomy specimens

Ductal adenocarcinoma (DAC) of the prostate is thought to have worse prognosis than prostatic acinar carcinoma (PAC). We aimed to evaluate the prognostic significance of histopathological patterns of DAC. A series of 1,051 radical prostatectomy specimens from Karolinska University Hospital 1998-2005 was reviewed. A ductal component was classified as classical DAC (DACC) if it had columnar, pseudostratified epithelium, elongated nuclei, and papillary, glandular, or cribriform architecture; borderline DAC (DACB) if it lacked elongated nuclei or classical architecture; and prostatic adenocarcinoma with ductal features (PCDF) if stratified high-grade nuclei were found. DACC, DACB, and PCDF were seen in 2.6, 4.0, and 1.6 % of the cases. DAC was usually mixed with PAC and constituted 10-100 % (mean 40 %) of the main tumor. Location was periurethral, peripheral, or both in 69.8, 3.5, and 26.7 %. Necrosis was seen in 31.3 %, stromal invasion of DAC in 52.3 %, and intraductal spread in 91.9 %. In DACC/DACB and PAC, extraprostatic extension was seen in 66.7 and 42.4 % (p < 0.001) and seminal vesicle invasion in 13.0 and 5.0 % (p = 0.0045). DACC, DACB, and PCDF had a hazard ratio for biochemical recurrence of 1.5 (0.7-2.8), 1.4 (0.8-2.6) and 1.2 (0.5-2.7). When PCDF was excluded from DAC, hazard ratio was 1.4 (95 % CI 0.9-2.3, p = 0.12). Location, % DAC, necrosis, stromal invasion, or Gleason score were not predictive of recurrence. This suggests that DACC and DACB are more aggressive than average PAC, while cancers with acinar architecture and pseudostratified high-grade nuclei should not be included in DAC.

Variants and unusual patterns of prostate cancer: clinicopathologic and differential diagnostic considerations

Beyond the typical acinar morphology observed in the majority of prostatic adenocarcinomas, a spectrum of morphologic variants and prostate cancer subtypes exists. These unusual entities may be classified as: (1) cancer morphologies arising by divergent differentiation of prostatic ductal, acinar, or basal cells and associated with unique clinical features and/or therapeutic approaches, and (2) histologies occurring in the context of usual prostatic adenocarcinoma that may result in diagnostic misinterpretation or difficulties in Gleason grade assignment, especially in limited samples. This article details a number of variants, with emphasis on diagnostic criteria, differential diagnoses, and clinical significance.

Improved differentiation between ductal and acinar prostate cancer using three-dimensional histology and biomarkers

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to refine the methodology for discriminating the ductal (DAP) and acinar adenocarcinomas (AAP) of the prostate and confirm that prostate carcinoma of ductal origin is a more aggressive subtype.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 110 consecutive radical prostatectomy cases operated on between 2000 and 2006 and worked up using large-format "two-dimensional" (2D; 4 μm thick) and "three-dimensional" (3D; 1500 μm thick) histology sections was carried out, with an average follow-up of 5.1 years. The same material was also analysed for selected biomarkers in tissue microarray blocks. The most discriminatory biomarkers were then tested on preoperative core biopsy specimens from 24 of these patients.

RESULTS

3D histology classified 97/110 (88%) cases of AAP and 13/110 (12%) DAP, which was then confirmed in 2D specimens. The DAP cases had a significantly greater frequency of pT3a and more advanced cancers, > 20 mm tumour focus, high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia, Gleason score ≥ 7, positive margin, extracapsular extension, vascular invasion, seminal vesicle infiltration, biochemical/local recurrence, regional lymph-node metastases and distant metastases. Three biomarkers in combination (chromogranin A, epidermal growth factor receptor and p53] distinguished DAP from AAP with an accuracy of 94% (area under the curve 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.88-0.99). The same high accuracy was achieved using these three biomarkers on the preoperative specimens.

CONCLUSIONS

Both 3D histology and the three selected biomarkers can help in accurately distinguishing DAP from AAP. The clear-cut distinction of two forms of prostate cancers by the approach advocated in this paper would allow AAP patients to undergo less radical treatment and would segregate DAP patients into a subset requiring more effective treatment regimens.

Ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate: increased mortality risk and decreased serum prostate specific antigen

PURPOSE

The clinical significance of ductal prostatic carcinoma is not well-defined. In a population based cancer registry we identified a large group of patients with ductal carcinoma to characterize the impact of the ductal subtype on presentation and survival in men with prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used a national cancer registry to identify incident cases of ductal and acinar adenocarcinoma from 1996 to 2006. We analyzed clinicopathological variables and performed Cox multivariate survival analysis. Prostate specific antigen values were available for 2004 to 2006 and used to assess differences in Gleason grade and serum prostate specific antigen between ductal and acinar cancer cases at diagnosis.

RESULTS

We identified 442,881 acinar and 371 ductal cases. Ductal cases were more likely to present with distant disease (12% vs 4%, p <0.001) and be poorly differentiated (50% vs 32%, p <0.001). Ductal histology was associated with a 30% decrease in geometric mean prostate specific antigen (adjusted coefficient 0.7, 95% CI 0.6-0.8) and more than 2-fold increased odds of prostate specific antigen less than 4.0 ng/ml (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.4-4.0) independent of other clinicopathological variables. In men with nondistant disease at diagnosis ductal histology was associated with 2.2-fold (CI 1.4-3.5) increased disease specific mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

In what is to our knowledge the largest series of this histological subtype ductal cancer cases were more likely to present with advanced stage cancer and lower prostate specific antigen, suggesting that timely disease detection is a significant challenge. Also, men with locoregional disease were more likely to die of the disease.

Gene expression profiles of ductal versus acinar adenocarcinoma of the prostate

Ductal adenocarcinoma is an uncommon variant of prostatic adenocarcinoma with a generally more aggressive clinical course than usual acinar adenocarcinoma. However, the molecular distinction between ductal and acinar adenocarcinomas is not well characterized. The aim of this investigation was to evaluate the relatedness of ductal versus acinar prostatic adenocarcinoma by comparative gene expression profiling. Archived, de-identified, snap frozen tumor tissue from 5 ductal adenocarcinomas, 3 mixed ductal-acinar adenocarcinomas, and 11 acinar adenocarcinomas cases were analyzed. All cases of acinar and ductal adenocarcinomas were matched by Gleason grade. RNA from whole tissue sections of the 5 ductal and 11 acinar adenocarcinomas cases were subjected to gene expression profiling on Affymetrix U133Plus2 microarrays. Independently, laser-capture microdissection was also performed on the three mixed ductal-acinar cases and five pure acinar cases to isolate homogeneous populations of ductal and acinar carcinoma cells from the same tumor. Seven of these laser-capture microdissected samples (three ductal and four acinar cell populations) were similarly analyzed on U133Plus2 arrays. Analysis of data from whole sections of ductal and acinar carcinomas identified only 25 gene transcripts whose expression was significantly and at least two-fold different between ductal and acinar adenocarcinomas. A similar analysis of microdissected cell populations identified 10 transcripts, including the prolactin receptor, with more significant differences in expression of 5- to 27-fold between ductal and acinar adenocarcinomas cells. Overexpression of prolactin receptor protein in ductal versus acinar adenocarcinoma was confirmed by immunohistochemistry in an independent set of tumors. We conclude that ductal and acinar adenocarcinomas of the prostate are strikingly similar at the level of gene expression. However, several of the genes identified in this study, including the prolactin receptor, represent targets for further investigations on the molecular basis for histomorphological and clinical behavioral differences between acinar and ductal adenocarcinomas.

[Ductal Adenocarcinoma of the prostate with infiltration of the bladder. Can radical cystectomy and antiandrogen therapy cure the disease?]

Ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate is a rare entity. The lack of correlation between the prostate-specific antigen value and the tumor stage, as well as early dissemination, are major differences from acinar cancer. Due to a lack of early symptoms, the tumor is often found in an advanced stage. Urinary obstruction and hematuria lead to clinical assessment. The characteristic tumor growth near the seminal colliculus can yield a negative digital rectal examination. Despite a lack of treatment guidelines, authors recommend an aggressive surgical concept. First approaches include radical prostatectomy, transurethral resection, and high-dose radiotherapy. Subsequent androgen deprivation is recommended. We report the case of a 64-year-old man with ductal prostate cancer who underwent radical cystectomy followed by androgen deprivation therapy. This is the first such case reported in both the German and the English literature.

Variants and Unusual Patterns of Prostate Cancer

Beyond the typical acinar morphology observed in most prostatic adenocarcinoma, a spectrum of morphologic variants and prostate cancer subtypes exists. These unusual entities may be further classified into (1) cancer morphologies arising by divergent differentiation of prostatic ductal, acinar, or basal cells and associated with unique clinical features or therapeutic approaches, and (2) histologies occurring in the context of usual prostatic adenocarcinoma that may result in diagnostic misinterpretation or difficulties in Gleason grade assignment, especially in limited samples. This article details several variants, with emphasis on diagnostic criteria, differential diagnoses, and clinical significance.

A case of prostatic adenocarcinoma recurrence presenting as ductal carcinoma of the prostate

BACKGROUND

A 61-year-old man with a history of recurrent prostate cancer presented with obstructive urinary symptoms. He had been diagnosed with locally invasive adenocarcinoma of the prostate 10 years previously and treated with neoadjuvant hormonal and external beam radiation therapies. Because of the patient's rising PSA level, he had been started on goserelin 6 years after this diagnosis and bicalutamide 6 months before the current presentation. The patient presented to the urology clinic with worsening lower urinary tract symptoms consisting of nocturia, urgency, and weak stream.

INVESTIGATIONS

Physical examination revealed a largely normal digital rectal examination, although there was slight asymmetry. The post-void residual urine volume was approximately 200 ml. Laboratory tests showed no evidence of urinary tract infection, but confirmed a rising PSA level despite low serum testosterone levels. Cystoscopic examination revealed hypervascular, large lateral prostatic lobes obstructing the bladder neck. The bladder was normal.

DIAGNOSIS

The patient underwent transurethral resection of the prostate. Soon after the resection started, bilateral papillary tumors arising from the stroma of both prostatic lobes were uncovered. Owing to the diffuse nature of the papillary tumors, complete resection was not possible. Pathologic analysis confirmed the presence of ductal carcinoma of the prostate.

MANAGEMENT

The patient had an uneventful postoperative course and reported improvement of voiding symptoms. Staging with bone scan and CT of the abdomen and pelvis demonstrated multi-focal bony metastasis. The patient was started on docetaxel-based chemotherapy for hormone refractory recurrence of prostate cancer as ductal carcinoma of the prostate. He remains under close surveillance for clinical response and progression of disease.

Role of radiotherapy in ductal (endometrioid) carcinoma of the prostate

BACKGROUND

Ductal carcinoma of the prostate is a rare variant of prostate cancer that presents most commonly with obstructive urinary symptoms or hematuria. This case series of 6 patients is the first to report the outcome of ductal carcinoma treated with external beam radiotherapy.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of patients treated between 1980 and 2006 at Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Penn. Six patients were identified with ductal carcinoma.

RESULTS

Five of the 6 patients were treated definitively and the sixth patient was treated at recurrence 3 years after a radical prostatectomy. Patient ages ranged from 66-80 years and the initial prostate-specific antigen (iPSA) ranged from 1.69-100.3 ng/mL. Three patients had a mixed acinar and ductal carcinoma, 2 with a Gleason score (GS) of 8 and 1 with a GS of 7. Of the patients treated definitively, 4 had clinical stage T2A-T2C and 1 had clinical stage T1B. Definitive radiotherapy was delivered to the prostate with doses between 72 Gy and 78 Gy. Pelvic lymph nodes were treated in all patients. One patient was treated postradical prostatectomy to the prostate bed to a dose of 60 Gy. Adjuvant androgen deprivation was given in 5 of the patients. Two of the patients died from metastatic disease at 1.4 and 7.1 years after treatment. The remaining 4 patients remain alive between 3.2 and 4.8 years from treatment, with 3 patients biochemically without evidence of disease. No patients have developed a local recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Ductal carcinoma of the prostate may be treated effectively with external beam radiotherapy. Aggressive management is indicated, even with low-volume metastatic disease.