High ductal proportion predicts biochemical recurrence in prostatic ductal adenocarcinoma

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.

Construction and validation of a prognostic nomogram for ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate: A population-based study

This study aimed to establish and validate a nomogram for ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate (DAC) to accurately predict the prognosis of DAC patients. The data of 834 patients with confirmed DAC were obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. The cases were randomly assigned to the training and internal validation cohorts. Data from patients attending our institution as an external validation cohort (n = 35). Nomogram and web-based dynamic nomogram were constructed based on Cox regression analysis, and their prediction accuracy was evaluated by concordance index (C-index), calibration curve, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, and decision curve analysis. Multivariate analyses identified age, T-stage, N-stage, M-stage, surgery, lymph node dissection, Gleason score, and PSA as independent prognostic factors for overall survival. The C-index and calibration curves demonstrate the good discriminative performance of the prediction model. The area under the curve further confirmed the accuracy of the nomogram in predicting survival. In addition, the area under the curve and decision curve analysis were better than the 7th tumor-node-metastasis staging system. The Kaplan-Meier curves of the nomogram-based risk groups showed significant differences (P < .001). We constructed and validated the first nomogram to predict patients with DAC.

High GLUT1 membrane expression and low PSMA membrane expression in Ductal Adenocarcinoma and Intraductal Carcinoma of the prostate

BACKGROUND

Both Ductal Adenocarcinoma (DAC) and Intraductal Carcinoma (IDC) of the prostate are generally associated with aggressive clinical behavior and poor prognosis, which were linked with discordant FDG positivity and low Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen (PSMA) expression. A recent study only cited a DAC patient with low 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT uptake but high 18F-FDG PET/CT uptake, however, there is lack of directly compared articles nor large data sets. Hence, the objective of this study was to investigate the expression of PSMA and GLUT1 in DAC and IDC-P patients.

METHODS

The study was conducted on 87 DAC or/and IDC-P patients without any treatment and 97 PAC patients with a Gleason score ≥8 of prostate biopsies and prostatectomy samples between August 2017 and August 2022. We performed immunohistochemical staining and scoring of various cancer component samples from the patients to reflect the protein expression levels of PSMA and GLUT1.

RESULTS

PSMA expression in PAC was significantly higher than in DAC/IDC-P (141.2 vs 78.6, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in PSMA expression between DAC/IDC-P and adjacent PAC (78.6 vs 93.4, p = 0.166). GLUT1 expression was higher in DAC/IDC-P than in adjacent PAC (68.6 vs 51.3, p = 0.007), but was still lower than that in pure PAC (68.6 vs 93.1, p = 0.0014). It is worth noting that GLUT1 membrane expression in DAC/IDC-P was significantly increased than in pure PAC (13.0 vs 6.6, p = 0.025), and in PAC adjacent to DAC/IDC-P (13.0 vs 2.0, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In DAC/IDC-P tissues, PSMA expression is low, while GLUT1 expression, especially GLUT1 membrane expression is high. These findings imply that DAC/IDC-P may have higher glucose metabolic and raise interest in targeting membrane GLUT1 as a novel anticancer strategy for DAC/IDC-P and other prostate cancer with high glucose metabolism.

Impact of Epithelial Histological Types, Subtypes, and Growth Patterns on Oncological Outcomes for Patients with Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer Treated with Curative Intent: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

The optimal management for men with prostate cancer (PCa) with unconventional histology (UH) is unknown. The outcome for these cancers might be worse than for conventional PCa and so different approaches may be needed.

OBJECTIVE

To compare oncological outcomes for conventional and UH PCa in men with localized disease treated with curative intent.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic review adhering to the Referred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022296013) was performed in July 2021.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

We screened 3651 manuscripts and identified 46 eligible studies (reporting on 1 871 814 men with conventional PCa and 6929 men with 10 different PCa UHs). Extraprostatic extension and lymph node metastases, but not positive margin rates, were more common with UH PCa than with conventional tumors. PCa cases with cribriform pattern, intraductal carcinoma, or ductal adenocarcinoma had higher rates of biochemical recurrence and metastases after radical prostatectomy than for conventional PCa cases. Lower cancer-specific survival rates were observed for mixed cribriform/intraductal and cribriform PCa. By contrast, pathological findings and oncological outcomes for mucinous and prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN)-like PCa were similar to those for conventional PCa. Limitations of this review include low-quality studies, a risk of reporting bias, and a scarcity of studies that included radiotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraductal, cribriform, and ductal UHs may have worse oncological outcomes than for conventional and mucinous or PIN-like PCa. Alternative treatment approaches need to be evaluated in men with these cancers.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We reviewed the literature to explore whether prostate cancers with unconventional growth patterns behave differently to conventional prostate cancers. We found that some unconventional growth patterns have worse outcomes, so we need to investigate if they need different treatments. Urologists should be aware of these growth patterns and their clinical impact.

The rising incidence of ductal adenocarcinoma and intraductal carcinoma of the prostate: Diagnostic accuracy of biopsy, MRI-visibility, and outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Ductal adenocarcinoma (DA) and intraductal carcinoma (IDC) of the prostate are associated with higher stage disease at radical prostatectomy (RP). We evaluated diagnostic accuracy of biopsy, MRI-visibility, and outcomes for patients undergoing RP with DA/IDC histology compared to pure acinar adenocarcinoma (AA) of the prostate.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of men receiving RP between 2014 and 2021 revealing AA, DA, or IDC on final pathology was conducted. Multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards regression models were employed.

RESULTS

A total of 609 patients were included with 103 found to have DA/IDC. Patients with DA/IDC were older and had higher PSA, biopsy grade group (GG), RP GG, and other pathologic findings (extraprostatic extension, lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion, pN stage) compared to AA patients (all P < 0.05). On multivariable analysis, higher age, RP GG, and pT3a were associated with DA/IDC on RP (all P < 0.05). Sensitivity and specificity of biopsy compared to RP for diagnosis of DA/IDC was 29.1% (16.7% DA, 27.8% IDC) and 96.6% (99.3% DA, 96.6% IDC), respectively. In a subset of 281 men receiving MRI, PI-RADS distribution was similar for patients with DA/IDC vs. AA (90.7% vs. 80.7% with PI-RADS 4-5 lesions, P = 0.23) with slightly higher biopsy sensitivity (41.9%). DA/IDC was associated with worse BCR (HR = 1.77, P = 0.02) but not biopsy DA/IDC (P = 0.90).

CONCLUSIONS

Sensitivity of prostate biopsy was low for detection of DA/IDC histology at RP. Patients with DA/IDC histology had unfavorable pathologic features at RP and worse BCR. Of patients with DA/IDC at RP, 90.7% were categorized as PI-RADS 4 to 5 on preoperative MRI.

Defining Diagnostic Criteria for Prostatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma at Multiparametric MRI

Background Prostatic ductal adenocarcinoma (DAC) is an aggressive histologic variant of prostate cancer that often warrants multimodal therapy and poses a significant diagnostic challenge clinically and at imaging. Purpose To develop multiparametric MRI criteria to define DAC and to assess their diagnostic performance in differentiating DAC from prostatic acinar adenocarcinoma (PAC). Materials and Methods Men with histologically proven DAC who had multiparametric MRI before radical prostatectomy were retrospectively identified from January 2011 through November 2018. MRI features were predefined using a subset of nine DACs and then compared for men with peripheral-zone DACs 1 cm or greater in size and men with matched biopsy-confirmed International Society of Urological Pathology grade group 4-5 PAC, by four independent radiologists blinded to the pathologic diagnosis. Diagnostic performance was determined by consensus read. Patient and tumor characteristics were compared by using the Fisher test, t-tests, and Mann-Whitney U test. Agreement (Cohen κ) and sensitivity analyses were also performed. Results There were 59 men with DAC (median age, 63 years [interquartile range, 56, 67 years]) and 59 men with PAC (median age, 64 years [interquartile range, 59, 69 years]). Predefined MRI features, including intermediate T2 signal, well-defined margin, lobulation, and hypointense rim, were detected in a higher proportion of DACs than PACs (76% [45 of 59] vs 5% [three of 59]; P < .001). On consensus reading, the presence of three or more features demonstrated 76% sensitivity, 94% specificity, 94% positive predictive value [PPV], and 80% negative predictive value [NPV] for all DACs and 100% sensitivity, 95% specificity, 81% PPV, and 100% NPV for pure DACs. The DACs and PACs showed no difference in contrast enhancement (100% vs 100%; P >.99, median T2 signal intensity (254 vs 230; P = .99), or apparent diffusion coefficient (median, 677 10^-6 mm²/sec vs 685 10^-6 mm²/sec; P = .73). Conclusion The presence of intermediate T2 signal, well-defined margin, lobulation, and/or hypointense rim, together with restricted diffusion and contrast enhancement at multiparametric MRI of the prostate, suggests prostatic ductal adenocarcinoma rather than prostatic acinar adenocarcinoma. © RSNA, 2022 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

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.

Ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate: A systematic review and meta-analysis of incidence, presentation, prognosis, and management

Context

Ductal adenocarcinoma (DAC) is relatively rare, but is nonetheless the second most common subtype of prostate cancer. First described in 1967, opinion is still divided regarding its biology, prognosis, and outcome.

Objectives

To systematically interrogate the literature to clarify the epidemiology, diagnosis, management, progression, and survival statistics of DAC.

Materials and methods

We conducted a literature search of five medical databases from inception to May 04 2020 according to PRISMA criteria using search terms "prostate ductal adenocarcinoma" OR "endometriod adenocarcinoma of prostate" and variations of each.

Results

Some 114 studies were eligible for inclusion, presenting 2 907 170 prostate cancer cases, of which 5911 were DAC. [Correction added on 16 January 2021 after the first online publication: the preceding statement has been corrected in this current version.] DAC accounts for 0.17% of prostate cancer on meta-analysis (range 0.0837%-13.4%). The majority of DAC cases were admixed with predominant acinar adenocarcinoma (AAC). Median Prostate Specific Antigen at diagnosis ranged from 4.2 to 9.6 ng/mL in the case series.DAC was more likely to present as T3 (RR1.71; 95%CI 1.53-1.91) and T4 (RR7.56; 95%CI 5.19-11.01) stages, with far higher likelihood of metastatic disease (RR4.62; 95%CI 3.84-5.56; all P-values < .0001), compared to AAC. Common first treatments included surgery (radical prostatectomy (RP) or cystoprostatectomy for select cases) or radiotherapy (RT) for localized disease, and hormonal or chemo-therapy for metastatic disease. Few studies compared RP and RT modalities, and those that did present mixed findings, although cancer-specific survival rates seem worse after RP.Biochemical recurrence rates were increased with DAC compared to AAC. Additionally, DAC metastasized to unusual sites, including penile and peritoneal metastases. Where compared, all studies reported worse survival for DAC compared to AAC.

Conclusion

When drawing conclusions about DAC it is important to note the heterogenous nature of the data. DAC is often diagnosed incidentally post-treatment, perhaps due to lack of a single, universally applied histopathological definition. As such, DAC is likely underreported in clinical practice and the literature. Poorer prognosis and outcomes for DAC compared to AAC merit further research into genetic composition, evolution, diagnosis, and treatment of this surprisingly common prostate cancer sub-type.

Patient summary

Ductal prostate cancer is a rare but important form of prostate cancer. This review demonstrates that it tends to be more serious at detection and more likely to spread to unusual parts of the body. Overall survival is worse with this type of prostate cancer and urologists need to be aware of the presence of ductal prostate cancer to alter management decisions and follow-up.

Impact of treatment modality on overall survival in localized ductal prostate adenocarcinoma: A national cancer database analysis

PURPOSE

Ductal adenocarcinoma is considered a rare histological variant of prostate adenocarcinoma (PCa). Given the rarity of this subtype, optimal treatment strategies for men with nonmetastatic ductal PCa is largely unknown. We aimed to describe the impact of surgery, radiotherapy, systemic therapy, and observation on overall survival (OS) in men with nonmetastatic ductal PCa.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We selected 1,656 cases of nonmetastatic ductal PCa, diagnosed between 2004 and 2015, within the National Cancer Database. Covariates included age, race, Charlson comorbidity score, clinical T stage, clinical lymph node stage, serum prostate specific antigen (PSA), income, hospital type, insurance status, year of diagnosis, and location of residence. Cox regression analysis tested the impact of treatment (surgery, radiotherapy, systemic therapy, and observation) on OS.

RESULTS

In men with nonmetastatic ductal PCa, median (interquartile range [IQR]) age and PSA were 67 (60-73) years and 6.2 (4.2-10.7) ng/ml, respectively. Advanced local stage (≥cT3a) was most frequently observed in patients initially treated with systemic therapy (34.8%), followed by those treated with radiotherapy (18.1%), surgery (7.1%) and observation (6.4%, P< 0.001). Serum PSA at presentation was highest in the systemic therapy cohort (median 16.0 ng/ml, IQR: 4.9-37.7), followed by the radiotherapy cohort (median 7.2 ng/ml, IQR: 4.1-12.2), observation cohort (median 7.0 ng/ml, IQR: 4.3-13.3) and surgery cohort (median 5.9 ng/ml, IQR: 4.3-9.2, P< 0.001). Multivariable analysis showed that in comparison to men treated surgically, OS was significantly lower for patients receiving radiotherapy (HR 2.2; 95% CI: 1.5-3.2), under observation (HR 4.6; 95% CI: 2.8-7.6) and receiving systemic therapy (HR 5.2; 95% CI: 3.0-9.1) as an initial course of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

While limited by its retrospective nature, our study shows that starting treatment with surgery is associated with more favorable long-term OS outcomes than radiotherapy, systemic therapy or observation.