Adenocarcinoma Found among Prostatic Intraepithelial Neoplasia Patients

Chii-Cheng Hsieh,An Chen,Min-Zen Lin,Shan-Sen Lee,Guang‐Huan Sun,Chen‐Li Cheng,Chau‐Jye Fong,Hsiao‐Hsien Wang,Tai-Hou Yang,Cheng‐Ping Ma,Dah-Shyong
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7024/juaroc.199606.0055
1996-01-01
Abstract:A retrospective review was done of the results in 204 patients who had received prostatic flee- die biopsy for prostate specific antigen (PSA) elevation or abnormal digital rectal examination (DRE) in the past five years, and the clinical significance of prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN) on prostate biopsy was investigated. Thirteen patients had atypical hyperplasia or dysplasia, and one was PIN in original pathological results. All were reclassified according to the histological criteria of PIN; there were seven low-grade, and seven high-grade, PINs. The average PSA level in the groups was 17.8 ng/ml and 21.8 ng/ml, respectively. Seven patients had adenocarcinoma identified on the surgical specimens of the same biopsy or following transurethral resection of prostate (TURP) and retropubic prostatectomy; one had benign nodular hyperpiasia (BPH) and the remaining six cases had no final pathoigocial diagnosis. Of the seven patients with adenocarcinoma, five cases had been high-grade PIN, and two cases were low-grade PIN in the original prostate biopsy. In conclusion, there is a strong association between PIN and adenocarcinoma of prostate. Immediate repeat biopsies and close follow-up are recommended for patients with PIN identified on prostatic biopsy to detect any possible missed prostatic carcinoma; there should be close follow-up even if the second biopsy is negative.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?