Current practice of diagnosis and reporting of prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and glandular atypia among genitourinary pathologists

Modern Pathology

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 180-185

  Egevad, Lars ^a   Allsbrook Jr , William C ^b   Epstein, Jonathan I ^c  

^a KAROLINSKA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^b MEDICAL COLLEGE OF GEORGIA   (United States)

^c JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Human; Male; Pathology; Prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia; Prostatic neoplasms

Indexed keywords

ADULT; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER INVASION; CELL NUCLEUS; CELL PROLIFERATION; CELL TYPE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CYTOARCHITECTURE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; HUMAN; MEDICAL PRACTICE; MEDICAL SOCIETY; MITOSIS; PATHOLOGIST; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE DISEASE; PROSTATE GLANDULAR ATYPIA; PROSTATIC INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; REVIEW;

ADULT; AGED; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY, CLINICAL; PRACTICE GUIDELINES; PROSTATE; PROSTATIC HYPERPLASIA; PROSTATIC INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; QUESTIONNAIRES; UROGENITAL SYSTEM;

EID: 30944437449     PISSN: 08933952     EISSN: 15300285     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/modpathol.3800522     Document Type: Review

References (26)

1. Egevad L, Allsbrook Jr WC, Epstein JI. Current practice of Gleason grading among genitourinary pathologists. Hum Pathol 2005;36:5-9.
2. Bostwick DG, Brawer MK. Prostatic intra-epithelial neoplasia and early invasion in prostate cancer. Cancer 1987;59:788-794.
3. Bostwick DG, Srigley J, Grignon D, et al. Atypical adenomatous hyperplasia of the prostate: morphologic criteria for its distinction from well-differentiated carcinoma. Hum Pathol 1993;24:819-832.
4. Iczkowski KA, MacLennan GT, Bostwick DG. Atypical small acinar proliferation suspicious for malignancy in prostate needle biopsies: clinical significance in 33 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 1997;21:1489-1495.
5. Epstein JI, Grignon DJ, Humphrey PA, et al. Interobserver reproducibility in the diagnosis of prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia. Am J Surg Pathol 1995;19:873-886.
6. Kastendieck H, Helpap B. Prostatic 'dysplasia/atypical hyperplasia'. Terminology, histopathology, pathobiology, and significance. Urology 1989;34:28-42.
7. McNeal JE. Significance of duct-acinar dysplasia in prostatic carcinogenesis. Prostate 1988;13:91-102.
8. McNeal JE. Morphogenesis of prostatic carcinoma. Cancer 1965;18:1659-1666.
9. McNeal JE, Yemoto CE. Spread of adenocarcinoma within prostatic ducts and acini. Morphologic and clinical correlations. Am J Surg Pathol 1996;20:802-814.
10. Cohen RJ, McNeal JE, Baillie T. Patterns of differentiation and proliferation in intraductal carcinoma of the prostate: significance for cancer progression. Prostate 2000;43:11-19.
11. Rubin MA, de La Taille A, Bagiella E, et al. Cribriform carcinoma of the prostate and cribriform prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia: incidence and clinical implications. Am J Surg Pathol 1998;22:840-848.
12. McNeal JE, Bostwick DG. Intraductal dysplasia: a premalignant lesion of the prostate. Hum Pathol 1986;17:64-71.
13. Troncoso P, Babaian RJ, Ro JY, et al. Prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and invasive prostatic adenocarcinoma in cystoprostatectomy specimens. Urology 1989;34:52-56.
14. Srigley JR, Amin MB, Bostwick DG, et al. Updated protocol for the examination of specimens from patients with carcinomas of the prostate gland: a basis for checklists. Cancer Committee. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2000;124:1034-1039.
15. Bostwick DG, Amin MB, Dundore P, et al. Architectural patterns of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia. Hum Pathol 1993;24:298-310.
16. Bishara T, Ramnani DM, Epstein JI. High-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia on needle biopsy: risk of cancer on repeat biopsy related to number of involved cores and morphologic pattern. Am J Surg Pathol 2004;28:629-633.
17. Kronz JD, Allan CH, Shaikh AA, et al. Predicting cancer following a diagnosis of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia on needle biopsy: data on men with more than one follow-up biopsy. Am J Surg Pathol 2001;25:1079-1085.
18. Gokden N, Roehl KA, Catalona WJ, et al. High-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia in needle biopsy as risk factor for detection of adenocarcinoma: current level of risk in screening population. Urology 2005;65:538-542.
19. Davidson D, Bostwick DG, Qian J, et al. Prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia is a risk factor for adenocarcinoma: predictive accuracy in needle biopsies. J Urol 1995;154:1295-1299.
20. Lefkowitz GK, Taneja SS, Brown J, et al. Followup interval prostate biopsy 3 years after diagnosis of high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia is associated with high likelihood of prostate cancer, independent of change in prostate specific antigen levels. J Urol 2002;168:1415-1418.
21. Kronz JD, Shaikh AA, Epstein JI. High-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia with adjacent small atypical glands on prostate biopsy. Hum Pathol 2001;32:389-395.
22. Naya Y, Ayala AG, Tamboli P, et al. Can the number of cores with high-grade prostate intraepithelial neoplasia predict cancer in men who undergo repeat biopsy? Urology 2004;63:503-508.
23. Epstein JI. How should atypical prostate needle biopsies be reported? Controversies regarding the term 'ASAP'. Hum Pathol 1999;30:1401-1402.
24. Rubin MA, Bismar TA, Curtis S, et al. Prostate needle biopsy reporting: how are the surgical members of the Society of Urologic Oncology using pathology reports to guide treatment of prostate cancer patients? Am J Surg Pathol 2004;28:946-952.
25. Humphrey PA. Prostate Pathology. ASCP Press: Chicago, 2003.
26. Amin M, Boccon-Gibod L, Egevad L, et al. Prognostic and predictive factors and reporting of prostate carcinoma in prostate needle biopsy specimens. Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl 2005;216:20-33.