Histopathological features of ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate in 1,051 radical prostatectomy specimens

Amanda H. Seipel,Fredrik Wiklund,N Peter Wiklund,Lars Egevad
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-013-1385-5
2013-02-27
Virchows Archiv
Abstract:Ductal adenocarcinoma (DAC) of the prostate is thought to have worse prognosis than prostatic acinar carcinoma (PAC). We aimed to evaluate the prognostic significance of histopathological patterns of DAC. A series of 1,051 radical prostatectomy specimens from Karolinska University Hospital 1998–2005 was reviewed. A ductal component was classified as classical DAC (DACC) if it had columnar, pseudostratified epithelium, elongated nuclei, and papillary, glandular, or cribriform architecture; borderline DAC (DACB) if it lacked elongated nuclei or classical architecture; and prostatic adenocarcinoma with ductal features (PCDF) if stratified high-grade nuclei were found. DACC, DACB, and PCDF were seen in 2.6, 4.0, and 1.6 % of the cases. DAC was usually mixed with PAC and constituted 10–100 % (mean 40 %) of the main tumor. Location was periurethral, peripheral, or both in 69.8, 3.5, and 26.7 %. Necrosis was seen in 31.3 %, stromal invasion of DAC in 52.3 %, and intraductal spread in 91.9 %. In DACC/DACB and PAC, extraprostatic extension was seen in 66.7 and 42.4 % (p < 0.001) and seminal vesicle invasion in 13.0 and 5.0 % (p = 0.0045). DACC, DACB, and PCDF had a hazard ratio for biochemical recurrence of 1.5 (0.7–2.8), 1.4 (0.8–2.6) and 1.2 (0.5–2.7). When PCDF was excluded from DAC, hazard ratio was 1.4 (95 % CI 0.9–2.3, p = 0.12). Location, % DAC, necrosis, stromal invasion, or Gleason score were not predictive of recurrence. This suggests that DACC and DACB are more aggressive than average PAC, while cancers with acinar architecture and pseudostratified high-grade nuclei should not be included in DAC.
pathology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?