Literature DB >> 9384444

The focus of "atypical glands, suspicious for malignancy" in prostatic needle biopsy specimens: incidence, histologic features, and clinical follow-up of cases diagnosed in a community practice.

J C Cheville1, M J Reznicek, D G Bostwick.   

Abstract

This study was undertaken to determine retrospectively the prevalence and histologic features of the atypical foci that are suspicious for but are not diagnostic of a malignancy in contemporary prostate needle biopsy specimens reported in a community practice. Histologic features were examined in detail to identify features that prevented an unequivocal diagnosis of carcinoma. Of 1,009 prostate needle biopsy specimens obtained between January 1, 1993, and August 1, 1995, the diagnosis of an atypical focus suspicious for malignancy was made in 48 (4.8%). In review of the biopsy specimens diagnosed as benign, an additional 7 cases (0.7%) were identified. The following histologic features were identified in 54 cases: enlarged nucleoli, 54 (100%); enlarged nuclei, 45 (83%); intraluminal eosinophilic secretions, 40 (74%); infiltrative growth, 37 (68%); small acinar proliferation, 37 (68%); intraluminal basophilic mucin, 23 (42%); amphophilic cytoplasm, 18 (33%); high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia, 17 (31%); and crystalloids, 12 (22%). Corpora amylacea were not identified. The foci contained from 1 to 67 acini (mean, 20.7). Although each atypical focus showed most of the features of adenocarcinoma, an unequivocal diagnosis of malignancy was not given owing to four features: the small size of the focus, the small number of cells with enlarged nucleoli, the clustered growth pattern, and the presence of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia within many of the foci. At initial examination, 36 of 41 patients (83%) had an elevated serum concentration of prostate-specific antigen (mean, 10 ng/mL), and 20 (49%) had abnormal findings on a digital rectal examination. Twenty-five patients (46%) underwent additional sampling of the prostate, and 15 of these (60%) were found to have adenocarcinoma; the remaining 30 patients did not undergo a subsequent biopsy. Patients with subsequent cancer had higher mean serum concentrations of prostate-specific antigen and change in concentrations of prostate-specific antigen than those whose repeat biopsy results were negative; no other clinical or histologic differences were observed between these two groups. To the community pathologists in this study, the lack of prominent nucleoli, the small size of the focus, clustered acini, and/or adjacent high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia prevented an unequivocal diagnosis of malignancy. If a prostate needle biopsy specimen is reported as containing an atypical focus suspicious for malignancy, a subsequent biopsy is warranted given the high predictive value for adenocarcinoma.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9384444     DOI: 10.1093/ajcp/108.6.633

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol        ISSN: 0002-9173            Impact factor:   2.493


  14 in total

1.  High-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia.

Authors:  David G Bostwick; Lina Liu; Michael K Brawer; Junqi Qian
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2004

2.  Is repeat biopsy for isolated high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia necessary?

Authors:  Arnold I Chin; Dhiren S Dave; Jacob Rajfer
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2007

3.  Inverted (hobnail) high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and invasive inverted pattern.

Authors:  Meltem Öznur; Sevim Baykal Koca; Pelin Yildiz; Burak Bahadir; Kemal Behzatoğlu
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2015-08-10       Impact factor: 2.967

4.  Prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia: an overview.

Authors:  Michael K Brawer
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2005

5.  Incidence, grade and distribution of prostate cancer following transperineal template-guided mapping biopsy in patients with atypical small acinar proliferation.

Authors:  Gregory S Merrick; Robert W Galbreath; Abbey Bennett; Wayne M Butler; Edward Amamovich
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-11-29       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 6.  Atypical small acinar proliferation (ASAP): Is a repeat biopsy necessary ASAP? A multi-institutional review.

Authors:  A Leone; B Gershman; K Rotker; C Butler; J Fantasia; A Miller; A Afiadata; A Amin; A Zhou; Z Jiang; T Sebo; A Mega; S Schiff; G Pareek; D Golijanin; J Yates; R J Karnes; J Renzulli
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2015-11-17       Impact factor: 5.554

7.  [Small suggestive lesions of the prostate. Histological and immunohistochemical analyses -- report of the uropathology consultation service].

Authors:  B Helpap
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 1.011

8.  Subsequent prostate cancer detection in patients with prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia or atypical small acinar proliferation.

Authors:  Moamen M Amin; Suganthiny Jeyaganth; Nader Fahmy; Louis Bégin; Samuel Aronson; Stephen Jacobson; Simon Tanguay; Armen G Aprikian
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 1.862

9.  Screening for Prostate Cancer by Digital Rectal Examination and PSA Determination in Senegal.

Authors:  Lamine Niang; Charles N Kouka; Mohamed Jalloh; Sérigne M Gueye
Journal:  ISRN Oncol       Date:  2011-07-10

10.  Atypical small acinar proliferation: utility of additional sections and immunohistochemical analysis of prostatic needle biopsies.

Authors:  Julián Arista-Nasr; Omar Martínez-Mijangos; Braulio Martínez-Benítez; Leticia Bornstein-Quevedo; Saul Lino-Silva; Shaddaí Urbina-Ramírez
Journal:  Nephrourol Mon       Date:  2012-03-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.