Characterization of prostate cancer incidentally detected in radical cystoprostatectomy specimens from Japanese men with bladder cancer

Incidental Prostate Cancer in Radical Cystoprostatectomy Specimens is Associated with Worse Overall Survival

BACKGROUND

The impact of incidental prostate cancer (IPC) on oncological outcomes after radical cystoprostatectomy (RCP) specimens from patients with bladder cancer (BC) remains controversial. This relationship has not been well elucidated in Asian countries, where the incidence of prostate cancer has recently shown dramatic increases.

OBJECTIVES

This study retrospectively compared pathological features and oncological outcomes between BC patients with and without IPC in the RCP specimens.

METHODS

This study included 142 men who underwent RCP for BC. Men who were previously diagnosed with prostate cancer were excluded. Each prostate gland and seminal vesicle was processed as whole mounts and 4-mm close-step sectioning was performed. A single genitourinary pathologist diagnosed IPC. The pathological features and oncological outcomes such as overall survival (OS), bladder cancer-specific survival (BCSS), and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared between patients with IPC (IPC+group, n = 45) and without IPC (IPC- group, n = 97). P values less than 0.05 considered to indicate statistical significance for patients' characteristics. Because of multi-primary endpoint, P values less than 0.0167 was considered statistical significance for oncological outcomes.

RESULTS

We detected IPC in 45 RCP specimens (31.6%). Patients in the IPC- group were significantly younger at surgery than those in the IPC+group (P < 0.001). The pathological features of the RCP specimens did not differ significantly. In multivariable analyses, presence of IPC was significantly associated with worse OS (P = 0.005), but not with either BCSS or PFS (P = 0.038 and 0.326, respectively). In Kaplan-Meier analyses, OS tended to be longer in the IPC- group than that in the IPC+group (NR vs 65 months, P = 0.0017).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggested significantly better OS in patients without IPC than that in those with IPC.

Epidemiology of prostate cancer in Asian countries

The incidence of prostate cancer has been increasing worldwide in recent years. The GLOBOCAN project showed that prostate cancer was the second most frequently diagnosed cancer and the fifth leading cause of cancer mortality among men worldwide in 2012. This trend has been growing even in Asian countries, where the incidence had previously been low. However, the accuracy of data about incidence and mortality as a result of prostate cancer in some Asian countries is limited. The cause of this increasing trend is multifactorial. One possible explanation is changes in lifestyles due to more Westernized diets. The incidence is also statistically biased by the wide implementation of early detection systems and the accuracy of national cancer registration systems, which are still immature in most Asian countries. Mortality rate decreases in Australia, New Zealand and Japan since the 1990s are possibly due to the improvements in treatment and/or early detection efforts employed. However, this rate is increasing in the majority of other Asian countries. Studies of latent and incidental prostate cancer provide less biased information. The prevalence of latent and incidental prostate cancer in contemporary Japan and Korea is similar to those in Western countries, suggesting the influence of lifestyle changes on carcinogenesis. Many studies reported evidence of both congenital and acquired risk factors for carcinogenesis of prostate cancer. Recent changes in the acquired risk factors might be associated with the increasing occurrence of prostate cancer in Asian countries. This trend could continue, especially in developing Asian countries.

Prevalence and management of prostate cancer among East Asian men: Current trends and future perspectives

OBJECTIVES

Previously East Asian men had been considered less likely to develop or die of prostate cancer. Emerging research and the onset of prostate-specific antigen screening in East Asian countries suggests that this may not be the case. We sought to analyze epidemiology and molecular genetic data and recent trends in the management of prostate cancer among East Asian men.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We performed literature searches using PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar to examine current literature on prostate cancer in East Asian men. Additionally, articles were searched for further references related to the topic.

RESULTS

Recent studies have reported increasing incidence of prostate cancer identified in East Asian men. Prostate cancer mortality has increased and is currently the fourth leading cause of death among men in Shanghai, China. Although prostate cancer was considered less aggressive among East Asian men, studies suggest that it is similarly aggressive to prostate cancer in Western populations. Molecular markers such as the TEMPRESS:ERG fusion gene and PTEN loss may provide novel methods of screening East Asian men for prostate cancer. National-level guidelines for prostate cancer screening and management are only available in Japan.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of prostate cancer in East Asian men is likely similar to that in Western male populations. East Asian men present at higher stages of prostate cancer, likely because of a lack of standardized screening protocols. Urologists in Western countries should screen East Asian men for prostate cancer using the same standards as used for Western men.

Incidental prostate cancer in Asian men: high prevalence of incidental prostatic adenocarcinoma in Chinese patients undergoing radical cystoprostatectomy for treatment of bladder cancer and selection of candidates for prostate-sparing cystectomy

BACKGROUND

Previous studies report a low prevalence of incidental prostate cancer in Chinese patients (3-7%). We evaluated incidental prostatic adenocarcinoma (PCa) and urothelial carcinoma (UCa) involvement of the prostate in cystoprostatectomy specimens.

METHODS

We analyzed 340 cystoprostatectomy specimens from patients who underwent radical cystoprostatectomy for the treatment of bladder cancer in China from 2004 to 2014. None of the patients had known prostate cancer prior to cystoprostatectomy.

RESULTS

Overall, 180 (53%) patients had either PCa or UCa in the prostate. We found that 95 (28%) had PCa and 115 (34%) had UCa involvement of prostate. The rate of incidental prostate cancer was 21% and 31%, respectively, from two study periods (2004-2008 and 2009-2014). Among the 95 patients with PCa, 19 (20%) had Gleason score of ≥7, nine (10%) had PCa tumor volume >0.5 cc, and eight (8.4%) had extracapsular extension. Of the 115 with prostatic UCa, 61 had prostatic urethra and/or periurethral prostatic duct involvement only, while 54 had prostatic stromal invasion. Age (odds ratio [OR] = 1.04, P = 0.001), increasing stage of bladder tumor (OR = 1.28, P = 0.005), multifocal tumors of bladder (OR = 3.22, P < 0.001), carcinoma in situ (CIS) in the bladder (OR = 5.52, P < 0.001), and bladder neck involvement (OR = 6.12, P < 0.001) were strongly associated with prostatic UCa.

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of incidental PCa in cystoprostatectomy specimens in China has increased over the last decade. Patients with advanced age, elevated serum PSA level, advanced bladder tumor stage, multifocal bladder tumors, CIS in the bladder, and tumor location at the bladder neck should be excluded as candidates for prostate-sparing cystectomy.

Incidental prostate cancer at the time of cystectomy: the incidence and clinicopathological features in Chinese patients

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the incidence and the clinicopathological features of incidental prostate cancer detected in radical cystoprostatectomy (RCP) specimens in Chinese men and to estimate the oncological risk of prostate apex-sparing surgery for such patients.

METHODS

The clinical data and pathological feature of 504 patients who underwent RCP for bladder cancer from January 1999 to March 2013 were retrospectively reviewed. Whole mount serial section of the RCP specimens were cut transversely at 3-4 mm intervals and examined in same pathological institution.

RESULTS

Thirty-four out of 504 patients (6.8%) had incidental prostate cancer with a mean age of 70.3 years. 12 cases (35.2%) were diagnosed as significant disease. 4 cases were found to have apex involvement of adenocarcinoma of the prostate while in 5 cases the prostate stroma invasion by urothelial carcinoma were identified (one involved prostate apex). The mean follow-up time was 46.4±33.8 months. Biochemical recurrence occurred in 3 patients but no prostate cancer-related death during the follow-up. There was no statistical significance in cancer specific survival between the clinically significant and insignificant cancer group.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of incidental prostate cancer in RCP specimens in Chinese patients was remarkably lower than in western people. Most of the incidental prostate cancer was clinically insignificant and patient's prognosis was mainly related to the bladder cancer. Sparing the prostate apex was potentially associated with a 1.0% risk of leaving significant cancer of the prostate or urothelial carcinoma.

Incidentally found prostate cancer and influence on overall survival after radical cystoprostatectomy

Objectives. To determine incidentally found prostate cancer frequency and impact on overall survival after RCP. Patients and Methods. The records of 81 men who underwent cystoprostatectomy from January 2000 to December 2009 were reviewed. The vital status of the study group was assessed as on September 1, 2009, by passive followup, using data from the population registry. Results. The 81 men underwent RCP. The incidental prostate cancer was found in the specimens of 27 (33.3%) patients. 13 (48.1%) of 27 prostate cancer cases were clinically significant. For 3 patients (11.1%) an extraprostatic extension was found. For 2 patients (7.4%)—positive margins, for 1 patient (3.7%)—Gleason sum 8, and for the rest 7 patients bigger than 0.5 cm³ volume tumor, and Gleason sum 7 was found. The mean follow-up time was 39.2 ± 33.8 months (varies from 0.8 to 131.2 months). The patients with bladder cancer and incidentally found prostate cancer lived shorter (28.1 ± 27.5 and 45.5 ± 35.40 months). Higher overall survival (P = 0.03) was found in the patient group with bladder cancer without incidentally diagnosed prostate cancer. Conclusion. There are indications that in this small study prostate cancer has influenced on patients' survival with bladder cancer after radical cystoprostatectomy.