Is cribriform pattern in prostate biopsy a risk factor for metastatic disease on
Cribriform growth pattern
PSMA PET/CT
Prostate cancer
Journal
World journal of urology
ISSN: 1433-8726
Titre abrégé: World J Urol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8307716
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2023
Aug 2023
Historique:
received:
21
12
2022
accepted:
29
05
2023
medline:
11
8
2023
pubmed:
18
6
2023
entrez:
17
6
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Cribriform growth pattern (CP) in prostate cancer (PCa) has been associated with different unfavourable oncological outcomes. This study addresses if CP in prostate biopsies is an independent risk factor for metastatic disease on PSMA PET/CT. Treatment-naive patients with ISUP GG ≥ 2 staged with A total of 401 patients were included. CP was reported in 252 (63%) patients. CP in biopsies was not an independent risk factor for metastatic disease on the This retrospective study found that CP in biopsies was not an independent risk factor for metastatic disease on 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37330440
doi: 10.1007/s00345-023-04467-z
pii: 10.1007/s00345-023-04467-z
doi:
Substances chimiques
gallium 68 PSMA-11
0
Edetic Acid
9G34HU7RV0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2165-2171Commentaires et corrections
Type : ErratumIn
Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
Références
Kweldam CF, Wildhagen MF, Steyerberg EW et al (2015) Cribriform growth is highly predictive for postoperative metastasis and disease-specific death in Gleason score 7 prostate cancer. Mod Pathol 28:457–464. https://doi.org/10.1038/modpathol.2014.116
doi: 10.1038/modpathol.2014.116
pubmed: 25189638
Dong F, Yang P, Wang C et al (2013) Architectural heterogeneity and cribriform pattern predict adverse clinical outcome for Gleason grade 4 prostatic adenocarcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 37:1855–1861. https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0b013e3182a02169
doi: 10.1097/PAS.0b013e3182a02169
pubmed: 24145642
Hollemans E, Verhoef EI, Bangma CH et al (2020) Clinical outcome comparison of Grade Group 1 and Grade Group 2 prostate cancer with and without cribriform architecture at the time of radical prostatectomy. Histopathology 76:755–762. https://doi.org/10.1111/his.14064
doi: 10.1111/his.14064
pubmed: 31944367
pmcid: 7216977
Hollemans E, Verhoef EI, Bangma CH et al (2021) Cribriform architecture in radical prostatectomies predicts oncological outcome in Gleason score 8 prostate cancer patients. Mod Pathol 34:184–193. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41379-020-0625-x
doi: 10.1038/s41379-020-0625-x
pubmed: 32686748
Remmers S, Hollemans E, Nieboer D et al (2022) Improving the prediction of biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy with the addition of detailed pathology of the positive surgical margin and cribriform growth. Ann Diagn Pathol 56:151842. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anndiagpath.2021.151842
doi: 10.1016/j.anndiagpath.2021.151842
pubmed: 34717190
Downes MR, Xu B, van der Kwast TH (2021) Cribriform architecture prostatic adenocarcinoma in needle biopsies is a strong independent predictor for lymph node metastases in radical prostatectomy. Eur J Cancer 148:432–439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2020.09.016
doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2020.09.016
pubmed: 33077335
van Leenders GJLH, van der Kwast TH, Grignon DJ et al (2020) The 2019 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on grading of prostatic carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 44:e87–e99. https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0000000000001497
doi: 10.1097/PAS.0000000000001497
pubmed: 32459716
pmcid: 7382533
van der Kwast TH, van Leenders GJ, Berney DM et al (2021) ISUP consensus definition of cribriform pattern prostate cancer. Am J Surg Pathol 45:1118–1126. https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0000000000001728
doi: 10.1097/PAS.0000000000001728
pubmed: 33999555
Mottet N, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E et al (2021) EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer-2020 update. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol 79:243–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2020.09.042
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.09.042
pubmed: 33172724
Hofman MS, Lawrentschuk N, Francis RJ et al (2020) Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET-CT in patients with high-risk prostate cancer before curative-intent surgery or radiotherapy (proPSMA): a prospective, randomised, multicentre study. Lancet 395:1208–1216. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30314-7
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30314-7
pubmed: 32209449
Wegelin O, Exterkate L, van der Leest M et al (2019) The FUTURE trial: a multicenter randomised controlled trial on target biopsy techniques based on magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer in patients with prior negative biopsies. Eur Urol 75:582–590. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2018.11.040
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.11.040
pubmed: 30522912
Ceci F, Oprea-Lager DE, Emmett L et al (2021) E-PSMA: the EANM standardized reporting guidelines v1.0 for PSMA-PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 48:1626–1638. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-021-05245-y
doi: 10.1007/s00259-021-05245-y
pubmed: 33604691
pmcid: 8113168
Soret M, Bacharach SL, Buvat I (2007) Partial-volume effect in PET tumor imaging. J Nucl Med 48:932–945. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.106.035774
doi: 10.2967/jnumed.106.035774
pubmed: 17504879
Cai Q, Costa DN, Metter CK et al (2022) Sensitivity of multiparametric MRI and targeted biopsy for detection of adverse pathologies (Cribriform gleason pattern 4 and intraductal carcinoma): Correlation of detected and missed prostate cancer foci with whole mount histopathology. Urol Oncol 40:452.e1-452.e8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2022.07.012
doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2022.07.012
pubmed: 36008255
Truong M, Hollenberg G, Weinberg E et al (2017) Impact of gleason subtype on prostate cancer detection using multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging: correlation with final histopathology. J Urol 198:316–321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.01.077
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2017.01.077
pubmed: 28163032
Bernardino RM, Carvalho R, Severo L et al (2020) Prostate cancer with cribriform pattern: Exclusion criterion for active surveillance? Arch Ital Urol Androl. https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2020.3.235
doi: 10.4081/aiua.2020.3.235
pubmed: 33016063
Gao J, Zhang Q, Fu Y et al (2020) Combined clinical characteristics and multiparametric MRI parameters for prediction of cribriform morphology in intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients. Urol Oncol 38:216–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2019.09.002
doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2019.09.002
pubmed: 31601518
Gao J, Zhang C, Zhang Q et al (2019) Diagnostic performance of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT for identification of aggressive cribriform morphology in prostate cancer with whole-mount sections. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 46:1531–1541. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-019-04320-9
doi: 10.1007/s00259-019-04320-9
pubmed: 31025048
Kweldam CF, Nieboer D, Algaba F et al (2016) Gleason grade 4 prostate adenocarcinoma patterns: an interobserver agreement study among genitourinary pathologists. Histopathology 69:441–449. https://doi.org/10.1111/his.12976
doi: 10.1111/his.12976
pubmed: 27028587
Ambrosini P, Hollemans E, Kweldam CF et al (2020) Automated detection of cribriform growth patterns in prostate histology images. Sci Rep 10:14904. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-71942-7
doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-71942-7
pubmed: 32913202
pmcid: 7483768
Prostate Cancer Nomograms: Dynamic Prostate Cancer Nomogram: Coefficients | Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. https://www.mskcc.org/nomograms/prostate/pre_op/coefficients . Accessed 22 Jul 2022
Briganti A, Larcher A, Abdollah F et al (2012) Updated nomogram predicting lymph node invasion in patients with prostate cancer undergoing extended pelvic lymph node dissection: the essential importance of percentage of positive cores. Eur Urol 61:480–487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2011.10.044
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.10.044
pubmed: 22078338
de Barros HA, Remmers S, Luiting HB et al (2022) Predictive value of cribriform and intraductal carcinoma for the nomogram-based selection of prostate cancer patients for pelvic lymph node dissection. Urology S0090–4295(22):00537–00544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2022.04.043
doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2022.04.043
Ericson KJ, Wu SS, Lundy SD et al (2020) Diagnostic accuracy of prostate biopsy for detecting cribriform gleason pattern 4 carcinoma and intraductal carcinoma in paired radical prostatectomy specimens: implications for active surveillance. J Urol 203:311–319. https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000000526
doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000000526
pubmed: 31483693
van der Slot MA, Seyrek N, Kweldam CF et al (2022) Percentage gleason pattern 4 and PI-RADS score predict upgrading in biopsy grade group 2 prostate cancer patients without cribriform pattern. World J Urol 40:2723–2729. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-022-04161-6
doi: 10.1007/s00345-022-04161-6
pubmed: 36190529
pmcid: 9617947
Pantazopoulos H, Diop MK, Grosset AA et al (2022) Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate as a cause of prostate cancer metastasis: a molecular portrait. Cancers (Basel) 14:820. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14030820
doi: 10.3390/cancers14030820
pubmed: 35159086