Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Standardization of reporting discontinuous tumor involvement in prostatic needle biopsy: a systematic review

  • Review and Perspectives
  • Published:
Virchows Archiv Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Discontinuous tumor involvement (DTI) is a not uncommon finding in the tumor in prostate needle core biopsies undertaken for diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa). The objective of this review is to establish a clear definition of DTI in order to provide a standardized method of measurement which reliably reflects pathologic features and disease progression following radical prostatectomy (RP). A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed up to March 2020 to identify studies of PCa patients which included needle biopsies containing DTI and matched subsequent RP treatment with or without follow-up information. The methodology and quality of reporting of DTI are reviewed, compared, and summarized. DTI is a frequent finding in diagnostic biopsy for PCa (up to 30%). Six studies were compared by methods of measurement used for predicting pathologic features and outcomes which are observed in subsequent RP. In most cases with DTI (> 90%), intervening benign tissue in the tumor core was less than 5 mm. DTI found in the biopsy was likely to be associated with a single, irregular tumor nodule going in and out of the plane of the section, but DTI was not associated with multiple small foci of the tumor. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) also demonstrated that about 75% of cases of DTI shared an IHC profile which supports the concept that DTI most likely comes from a homogeneous tumor nodule. Furthermore, DTI was associated with positive surgical margin (PSM) and bilateral tumor in RP specimens. Compared to additive measurement (with the subtraction of intervening benign tissue), linear measurement (including intervening benign tissue) of DTI was more accurately predictive of aggressive disease in the RP including higher pT stage, PSM, and greater actual extent of the tumor. However, the advantage of linear measurement was lost in cases where there was an upgrade from the biopsy to the RP which may result from undersampling. For cases with either very small tumor foci or very extensive cancer volume, no difference was observed in these two methods of measurement. DTI in core biopsies may represent undersampling of a larger irregular nodule but likely does not result from multifocality and is similarly unlikely to represent multiclonality. Linear measurement of DTI was more accurately predictive of post-RP pathologic findings and oncologic prognosis. This method should be applied for patient selection for AS.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

AS:

active surveillance

BCR:

biochemical recurrence

Bx:

biopsy

DTI:

discontinuous tumor involvement

EPE:

extraprostatic extension

GPC:

greatest percentage of cancer involvement

GS:

Gleason score

IHC:

immunohistochemistry

PCa:

prostate cancer

PSA:

prostate-specific antigen

PSM:

positive surgical margin

RP:

radical prostatectomy

References

  1. Andreoiu M, Cheng L (2010) Multifocal prostate cancer: biologic, prognostic, and therapeutic implications. Hum Pathol 41:781–793. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humpath.2010.02.011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Arias-Stella JA 3rd, Varma KR, Montoya-Cerrillo D, Gupta NS, Williamson SR (2015) Does discontinuous involvement of a prostatic needle biopsy core by adenocarcinoma correlate with a large tumor focus at radical prostatectomy? Am J Surg Pathol 39:281–286. https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0000000000000344

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ayala G, Tuxhorn JA, Wheeler TM, Frolov A, Scardino PT, Ohori M, Wheeler M, Spitler J, Rowley DR (2003) Reactive stroma as a predictor of biochemical-free recurrence in prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res 9:4792–4801

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Brimo F, Vollmer RT, Corcos J, Kotar K, Begin LR, Humphrey PA, Bismar TA (2008) Prognostic value of various morphometric measurements of tumour extent in prostate needle core tissue. Histopathology 53:177–183. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2559.2008.03087.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bsirini C, Danakas AM, Miyamoto H (2018) Continuous versus discontinuous tumor involvement: a dilemma in prostate biopsy quantitation. Prostate 78:1166–1171. https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.23691

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Cooperberg MR, Carroll PR (2015) Trends in management for patients with localized prostate cancer, 1990-2013. JAMA 314:80–82. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2015.6036

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Dall’Era MA, Albertsen PC, Bangma C, Carroll PR, Carter HB, Cooperberg MR, Freedland SJ, Klotz LH, Parker C, Soloway MS (2012) Active surveillance for prostate cancer: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol 62:976–983. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2012.05.072

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Egevad L, Allsbrook WC Jr, Epstein JI (2006) Current practice of diagnosis and reporting of prostate cancer on needle biopsy among genitourinary pathologists. Hum Pathol 37:292–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humpath.2005.10.011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Egevad L, Judge M, Delahunt B, Humphrey PA, Kristiansen G, Oxley J, Rasiah K, Takahashi H, Trpkov K, Varma M, Wheeler TM, Zhou M, Srigley JR, Kench JG (2019) Dataset for the reporting of prostate carcinoma in core needle biopsy and transurethral resection and enucleation specimens: recommendations from the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR). Pathology 51:11–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pathol.2018.10.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Epstein JI (2011) Prognostic significance of tumor volume in radical prostatectomy and needle biopsy specimens. J Urol 186:790–797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2011.02.2695

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Epstein JI, Amin M, Boccon-Gibod L, Egevad L, Humphrey PA, Mikuz G, Newling D, Nilsson S, Sakr W, Srigley JR, Wheeler TM, Montironi R (2005) Prognostic factors and reporting of prostate carcinoma in radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy specimens. Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl:34–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/03008880510030932

  12. Fontugne J, Davis K, Palanisamy N, Udager A, Mehra R, McDaniel AS, Siddiqui J, Rubin MA, Mosquera JM, Tomlins SA (2016) Clonal evaluation of prostate cancer foci in biopsies with discontinuous tumor involvement by dual ERG/SPINK1 immunohistochemistry. Mod Pathol 29:157–165. https://doi.org/10.1038/modpathol.2015.148

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Hsing AW, Tsao L, Devesa SS (2000) International trends and patterns of prostate cancer incidence and mortality. Int J Cancer 85:60–67

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Kammerer-Jacquet SF, Comperat E, Egevad L, Hes O, Oxley J, Varma M, Kristiansen G, Berney DM (2018) Handling and reporting of transperineal template prostate biopsy in Europe: a web-based survey by the European Network of Uropathology (ENUP). Virchows Arch 472:599–604. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-017-2265-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Karram S, Trock BJ, Netto GJ, Epstein JI (2011) Should intervening benign tissue be included in the measurement of discontinuous foci of cancer on prostate needle biopsy? Correlation with radical prostatectomy findings. Am J Surg Pathol 35:1351–1355. https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0b013e3182217b79

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lowenthal BM, Liao X, Wen F, Bagherzadeh N, Mahooti S (2016) Discontinuous unilateral involvement of 12 part core biopsies by adenocarcinoma predicts bilateral involvement of subsequent radical prostatectomy. Pathol Int 66:438–443. https://doi.org/10.1111/pin.12437

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Meliti A, Sadimin E, Diolombi M, Khani F, Epstein JI (2017) Accuracy of grading Gleason score 7 prostatic adenocarcinoma on needle biopsy: influence of percent pattern 4 and other histological factors. Prostate 77:681–685. https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.23314

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Mertz KD, Horcic M, Hailemariam S, D’Antonio A, Dirnhofer S, Hartmann A, Agaimy A, Eppenberger-Castori S, Obermann E, Cathomas G, Bubendorf L (2013) Heterogeneity of ERG expression in core needle biopsies of patients with early prostate cancer. Hum Pathol 44:2727–2735. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humpath.2013.07.019

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Montironi R, Scarpelli M, Mazzucchelli R, Cheng L, Lopez-Beltran A, Montorsi F (2012) Extent of cancer of less than 50% in any prostate needle biopsy core: how many millimeters are there? Eur Urol 61:751–756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2011.12.050

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sadimin ET, Khani F, Diolombi M, Meliti A, Epstein JI (2016) Interobserver reproducibility of percent Gleason pattern 4 in prostatic adenocarcinoma on prostate biopsies. Am J Surg Pathol 40:1686–1692. https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0000000000000714

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Schultz L, Maluf CE, da Silva RC, Falashi Rde H, da Costa MV, Schultz MI (2013) Discontinuous foci of cancer in a single core of prostatic biopsy: when it occurs and performance of quantification methods in a private-practice setting. Am J Surg Pathol 37:1831–1836. https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0000000000000112

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A (2019) Cancer statistics, 2019. CA Cancer J Clin 69:7–34. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21551

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Verhoef EI, Kweldam CF, Kummerlin IP, Nieboer D, Bangma CH, Incrocci L, van der Kwast TH, Roobol MJ, van Leenders G (2020) Comparison of tumor volume parameters on prostate cancer biopsies. Arch Pathol Lab Med. https://doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2019-0361-OA

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pathology, Peking University Third Hospital, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China

    Min Lu

  2. Department of Urology and Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA

    Shulin Wu & Chin-Lee Wu

Authors
  1. Min Lu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shulin Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chin-Lee Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Wu C.L. and Lu M. were involved in project development; Lu M. and Wu S. were involved in data collection; Lu M., Wu S., and Wu C.L. were involved in data analysis and interpretation; Lu M., Wu S., and Wu C.L. were involved in writing or revising the work critically for important intellectual content.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chin-Lee Wu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplement Figure 1

: Flow chart for study selection. (DOCX 25 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lu, M., Wu, S. & Wu, CL. Standardization of reporting discontinuous tumor involvement in prostatic needle biopsy: a systematic review. Virchows Arch 478, 383–391 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-020-03009-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-020-03009-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation