Prostatic adenocarcinoma remains the most common cancer affecting men. A substantial majority of patients have the diagnosis made on thin needle biopsies, most often in the absence of a palpable ...abnormality. Treatment choices ranging from surveillance to radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy are largely driven by the pathologic findings in the biopsy specimen. The first part of this review focuses on important morphologic parameters in needle biopsy specimens that are not covered in the accompanying articles. This includes tumor quantification as well as other parameters such a extraprostatic extension, seminal vesicle invasion, perineural invasion, and lymphovascular invasion. For those men who undergo radical prostatectomy, pathologic stage and other parameters are critical in prognostication and in determining the appropriateness of adjuvant therapy. Staging parameters, including extraprostatic extension, seminal vesicle invasion, and lymph node status are discussed here. Surgical margin status is also an important parameter and definitions and reporting of this feature are detailed. Throughout the article the current reporting guidelines published by the College of American Pathologists and the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting are highlighted.
Five years after the last prostatic carcinoma grading consensus conference of the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP), accrual of new data and modification of clinical practice ...require an update of current pathologic grading guidelines. This manuscript summarizes the proceedings of the ISUP consensus meeting for grading of prostatic carcinoma held in September 2019, in Nice, France. Topics brought to consensus included the following(1) approaches to reporting of Gleason patterns 4 and 5 quantities, and minor/tertiary patterns, (2) an agreement to report the presence of invasive cribriform carcinoma, (3) an agreement to incorporate intraductal carcinoma into grading, and (4) individual versus aggregate grading of systematic and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging–targeted biopsies. Finally, developments in the field of artificial intelligence in the grading of prostatic carcinoma and future research perspectives were discussed.
Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) subtypes are increasingly being discerned via their molecular underpinnings. Frequently this can be correlated to histologic and immunohistochemical surrogates, such that ...only simple targeted molecular assays, or none at all, are needed for diagnostic confirmation. In clear cell RCC, VHL mutation and 3p loss are well known; however, other genes with emerging important roles include SETD2, BAP1, and PBRM1, among others. Papillary RCC type 2 is now known to include likely several different molecular entities, such as fumarate hydratase (FH) deficient RCC. In MIT family translocation RCC, an increasing number of gene fusions are now described. Some TFE3 fusion partners, such as NONO, GRIPAP1, RBMX, and RBM10 may show a deceptive fluorescence in situ hybridization result due to the proximity of the genes on the same chromosome. FH and succinate dehydrogenase deficient RCC have implications for patient counseling due to heritable syndromes and the aggressiveness of FH-deficient RCC. Immunohistochemistry is increasingly available and helpful for recognizing both. Emerging tumor types with strong evidence for distinct diagnostic entities include eosinophilic solid and cystic RCC and TFEB/VEGFA/6p21 amplified RCC. Other emerging entities that are less clearly understood include TCEB1 mutated RCC, RCC with ALK rearrangement, renal neoplasms with mutations of TSC2 or MTOR, and RCC with fibromuscular stroma. In metastatic RCC, the role of molecular studies is not entirely defined at present, although there may be an increasing role for genomic analysis related to specific therapy pathways, such as for tyrosine kinase or MTOR inhibitors.
This guideline provides recommendations for available tissue-based prostate cancer biomarkers geared toward patient selection for active surveillance, identification of clinically significant ...disease, choice of postprostatectomy adjuvant versus salvage radiotherapy, and to address emerging questions such as the relative value of tissue biomarkers compared with magnetic resonance imaging.
An ASCO multidisciplinary Expert Panel, with representatives from the European Association of Urology, American Urological Association, and the College of American Pathologists, conducted a systematic literature review of localized prostate cancer biomarker studies between January 2013 and January 2019. Numerous tissue-based molecular biomarkers were evaluated for their prognostic capabilities and potential for improving management decisions. Here, the Panel makes recommendations regarding the clinical use and indications of these biomarkers.
Of 555 studies identified, 77 were selected for inclusion plus 32 additional references selected by the Expert Panel. Few biomarkers had rigorous testing involving multiple cohorts and only 5 of these tests are commercially available currently: Onco
Dx Prostate, Prolaris, Decipher, Decipher PORTOS, and ProMark. With various degrees of value and validation, multiple biomarkers have been shown to refine risk stratification and can be considered for select men to improve management decisions. There is a paucity of prospective studies assessing short- and long-term outcomes of patients when these markers are integrated into clinical decision making.
Tissue-based molecular biomarkers (evaluating the sample with the highest volume of the highest Gleason pattern) may improve risk stratification when added to standard clinical parameters, but the Expert Panel endorses their use only in situations in which the assay results, when considered as a whole with routine clinical factors, are likely to affect a clinical decision. These assays are not recommended for routine use as they have not been prospectively tested or shown to improve long-term outcomes-for example, quality of life, need for treatment, or survival. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/genitourinary-cancer-guidelines.
Summary Renal oncocytoma and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (RCC) have been long recognized as distinct tumors; however, it remains unknown if uniform diagnostic criteria are used to distinguish ...these tumor types in practice. A survey was distributed to urologic pathologists regarding oncocytic tumors. Responses were received from 17/26 invitees. Histologically, >1 mitotic figure was regarded as most worrisome (n = 10) or incompatible (n = 6) with oncocytoma diagnosis. Interpretation of focal nuclear wrinkling, focal perinuclear clearing, and multinucleation depended on extent and did not necessarily exclude oncocytoma if minor. Staining techniques most commonly used included: CK7 (94%), KIT (71%), vimentin (65%), colloidal iron (59%), CD10 (53%), and AMACR (41%). Rare CK7-positive cells (≤5%) was regarded as most supportive of oncocytoma, although an extent excluding oncocytoma was not universal. Multiple chromosomal losses were most strongly supportive for chromophobe RCC diagnosis (65%). Less certainty was reported for chromosomal gain or a single loss. For tumors with mixed or inconclusive features, many participants use an intermediate diagnostic category (82%) that does not label the tumor as unequivocally benign or malignant, typically “oncocytic neoplasm” or “tumor” with comment. The term “hybrid tumor” was used variably in several scenarios. A slight majority (65%) report outright diagnosis of oncocytoma in needle biopsies. The morphologic, immunohistochemical, and genetic characteristics that define oncocytic renal tumors remain incompletely understood. Further studies correlating genetics, behavior, and histology are needed to define which tumors truly warrant classification as carcinomas for patient counseling and follow-up strategies.
Trial RTOG 9202 was a phase 3 randomized trial designed to determine the optimal duration of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) when combined with definitive radiation therapy (RT) in the treatment ...of locally advanced nonmetastatic adenocarcinoma of the prostate. Long-term follow-up results of this study now available are relevant to the management of this disease.
Men (N=1554) with adenocarcinoma of the prostate (cT2c-T4, N0-Nx) with a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) <150 ng/mL and no evidence of distant metastasis were randomized (June 1992 to April 1995) to short-term ADT (STAD: 4 months of flutamide 250 mg 3 times per day and goserelin 3.6 mg per month) and definitive RT versus long-term ADT (LTAD: STAD with definitive RT plus an additional 24 months of monthly goserelin).
Among 1520 protocol-eligible and evaluable patients, the median follow-up time for this analysis was 19.6 years. In analysis adjusted for prognostic covariates, LTAD improved disease-free survival (29% relative reduction in failure rate, P<.0001), local progression (46% relative reduction, P=.02), distant metastases (36% relative reduction, P<.0001), disease-specific survival (30% relative reduction, P=.003), and overall survival (12% relative reduction, P=.03). Other-cause mortality (non-prostate cancer) did not differ (5% relative reduction, P=.48).
LTAD and RT is superior to STAD and RT for the treatment of locally advanced nonmetastatic adenocarcinoma of the prostate and should be considered the standard of care.
The classification of urothelial neoplasms has been a subject of significant controversy and debate over the last decade. Only recently has a general level of agreement developed on the utility of ...the classification first proposed by the World Health Organization and the International Society of Urologic Pathology in 1998. Recent adoption of this scheme in therapeutic guidelines indicates the clinical utility of the system. In this review a brief historical perspective is presented, followed by a review of the classification system, the histological criteria for the specific categories and the clinical significance of these diagnoses.
During the 2019 International Society of Urological Pathology Consultation Conference on Molecular Pathology of Urogenital Cancer, the Working Group on Bladder Cancer presented the current status and ...made recommendations on the diagnostic use of molecular pathology, incorporating a premeeting survey. Bladder cancers are biologically diverse and can be separated into “molecular subtypes,” based on expression profiling. These subtypes associate with clinical behavior, histology, and molecular alterations, though their clinical utility has not been demonstrated at present and use in bladder cancer is not recommended. Mutations in the TERT promoter are present in the majority of bladder cancers, including the noninvasive stage of tumor evolution, but not in reactive conditions. Mutational analysis of the TERT promoter thus distinguishes histologically deceptive cancers from their benign mimics in some cases. A minority of pathologists employ this test. FGFR3 mutations are common in bladder cancer, and metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC) with such mutations frequently responds to erdafitinib, an FGFR inhibitor. Testing for FGFR3 alterations is required before using this drug. Metastatic UC responds to immune-oncology (IO) agents in 20% of cases. These are approved as first and second-line treatments in metastatic UC. Several biological parameters associate with response to IO agents, including tumor mutational burden, molecular subtype, and infiltration by programmed death-ligand 1–positive lymphocytes, detected by immunohistochemistry. Programmed death-ligand 1 immunohistochemistry is mandatory before administering IO agents in the first-line setting. In conclusion, much has been learned about the biology of bladder cancer, and this understanding has improved the care of patients with the disease.
Clear cell papillary renal cell carcinoma is a recently recognized renal neoplasm, composed of cells with clear cytoplasm lining cystic, tubular, and papillary structures. These tumors have ...immunohistochemical and genetic profiles distinct from clear cell renal cell carcinoma and papillary renal cell carcinoma. We studied morphologic and immunohistochemical features (cytokeratin 7 (CK7), carbonic anhydrase IX (CAIX), CD10, alpha-methylacyl-CoA racemase, smooth muscle actin, desmin, estrogen and progesterone receptors) in 55 tumors from 34 patients, 8 of whom had end-stage renal disease. These tumors comprised 3% of all adult renal cell carcinoma resections over a period of 3 years. The patients' ages ranged from 33 to 87 years (mean 61). Multiple tumors (2–8) were present in 9 patients. Other renal tumors were present concurrently in four patients and subsequently in two patients, including: oncocytoma, clear cell renal cell carcinoma, and multilocular cystic renal cell carcinoma. Sizes ranged from 0.2 to 7.5 (mean 2.0) cm; 87% were Fuhrman grade 2, and 96% were stage pT1a. Papillary architecture was usually limited to focal branching papillae (51% of 55 tumors) or small, blunt papillae (35%). Large areas of extensively branched papillae were present in only 14% of tumors. Almost all tumors (98%) included cysts, and 18 tumors were extensively (≥90%) cystic. Immunoprofile showed CK7+, AMACR−, CD10−, CAIX+ in the tubular and papillary components of all tumors; however, CD10 labeled the apical cell membrane of cyst epithelium in 59%. The stroma was focally actin positive (94%), with infrequent desmin expression (13%). Estrogen receptor and progesterone receptor were negative. During a median follow-up period of 56 months, no patient developed local recurrence, distant or lymph-node metastasis, or cancer death. Branched tubules, small papillae, and the immunohistochemical and molecular profiles aid in distinguishing these tumors from clear cell renal cell carcinoma and multilocular cystic renal cell carcinoma.
To determine whether adding 2 years of androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) improved outcome for patients electively treated with ADT before and during radiation therapy (RT).
Prostate cancer patients ...with T2c-T4 prostate cancer with no extra pelvic lymph node involvement and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) less than 150 ng/mL were included. All patients received 4 months of goserelin and flutamide before and during RT. They were randomized to no further ADT (short-term ADT STAD + RT) or 24 months of goserelin (long-term ADT LTAD + RT). A total of 1,554 patients were entered. RT was 45 Gy to the pelvic nodes and 65 to 70 Gy to the prostate. Median follow-up of all survival patients is 11.31 and 11.27 years for the two arms.
At 10 years, the LTAD + RT group showed significant improvement over the STAD + RT group for all end points except overall survival: disease-free survival (13.2% v 22.5%; P < .0001), disease-specific survival (83.9% v 88.7%; P = .0042), local progression (22.2% v 12.3%; P < .0001), distant metastasis (22.8% v 14.8%; P < .0001), biochemical failure (68.1% v 51.9%; P <or= .0001), and overall survival (51.6% v 53.9%, P = .36). One subgroup analyzed consisted of all cancers with a Gleason score of 8 to 10 cancers. An overall survival difference was observed (31.9% v 45.1%; P = .0061), as well as in all other end points herein.
LTAD as delivered in this study for the treatment of locally advanced prostate cancer is superior to STAD for all end points except survival. A survival advantage for LTAD + RT in the treatment of locally advanced tumors with a Gleason score of 8 to 10 suggests that this should be the standard of treatment for these high-risk patients.
PDF
