Guidelines for Processing and Reporting of Prostatic Needle Biopsies

Overview

Journal J Clin Pathol

Specialty Pathology

Date 2003 Apr 30

PMID 12719451

Citations 19

Authors

Th H Van der Kwast

C Lopes

C Santonja

C-G Pihl

I Neetens

P Martikainen

S Di Lollo

L Bubendorf

R F Hoedemaeker

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The reported detection rate of prostate cancer, lesions suspicious for cancer, and prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN) in needle biopsies is highly variable. In part, technical factors, including the quality of the biopsies, the tissue processing, and histopathological reporting, may account for these differences. It has been thought that standardisation of tissue processing might reduce the observed variations in detection rate. Consensus among the members of the pathology committee of the European Randomised study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) concerning the optimal methodology of tissue embedding resulting in guidelines for prostatic needle biopsy processing was reached. The adoption of an unequivocal and uniform way of reporting lesions encountered in prostatic needle biopsies is considered helpful for decision taking by the clinician. The definition of parameters for quality control of prostatic needle biopsy diagnostics will further facilitate clinical epidemiological multicentre studies of prostate cancer.

Citing Articles

Deciphering the Role of BRAFV600E Immunohistochemistry in Breast Lesions: A Comprehensive Review.

Khan S, Bhake A, Sagar S Cureus. 2024; 16(7):e64872.

PMID: 39156294 PMC: 11330685. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.64872.

The feasibility of distance to the tumor of biopsy cores to estimate the extracapsular extension.

Hyun C, Park K Prostate Int. 2024; 11(4):233-238.

PMID: 38196557 PMC: 10772149. DOI: 10.1016/j.prnil.2023.10.001.

Visual Assessment of 2-Dimensional Levels Within 3-Dimensional Pathology Data Sets of Prostate Needle Biopsies Reveals Substantial Spatial Heterogeneity.

Koyuncu C, Janowczyk A, Farre X, Pathak T, Mirtti T, Fernandez P Lab Invest. 2023; 103(12):100265.

PMID: 37858679 PMC: 10926776. DOI: 10.1016/j.labinv.2023.100265.

Independent real-world application of a clinical-grade automated prostate cancer detection system.

da Silva L, Pereira E, Salles P, Godrich R, Ceballos R, Kunz J J Pathol. 2021; 254(2):147-158.

PMID: 33904171 PMC: 8252036. DOI: 10.1002/path.5662.

Histopathology, pharmacotherapy, and predictors of prostatic malignancy in elderly male patients with raised prostate-specific antigen levels - A prospective study.

Mathaiyan D, Tripathi S, Raj J, Sivaramakrishna B Urol Ann. 2020; 12(2):132-137.

PMID: 32565650 PMC: 7292440. DOI: 10.4103/UA.UA_68_19.

References

Rogatsch H, Mairinger T, Horninger W, Gschwendtner A, Bartsch G, Mikuz G . Optimized preembedding method improves the histologic yield of prostatic core needle biopsies. Prostate. 2000; 42(2):124-9. DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0045(20000201)42:2<124::aid-pros6>3.0.co;2-5. View

Bostwick D, Srigley J, Grignon D, Maksem J, Humphrey P, van der Kwast T . Atypical adenomatous hyperplasia of the prostate: morphologic criteria for its distinction from well-differentiated carcinoma. Hum Pathol. 1993; 24(8):819-32. DOI: 10.1016/0046-8177(93)90131-y. View

Epstein J . How should atypical prostate needle biopsies be reported? Controversies regarding the term "ASAP". Hum Pathol. 2000; 30(12):1401-2. DOI: 10.1016/s0046-8177(99)90155-7. View

Iczkowski K, Cheng L, Qian J, Shanks J, Gadaleanu V, Bostwick D . ASAP is a valid diagnosis. Atypical small acinar proliferation. Hum Pathol. 2000; 30(12):1403-4. DOI: 10.1016/s0046-8177(99)90158-2. View

Rubin M, Bassily N, Sanda M, Montie J, Strawderman M, Wojno K . Relationship and significance of greatest percentage of tumor and perineural invasion on needle biopsy in prostatic adenocarcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2000; 24(2):183-9. DOI: 10.1097/00000478-200002000-00003. View

Oppenheimer J, Kahane H, Epstein J . Granulomatous prostatitis on needle biopsy. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1997; 121(7):724-9. View

Reyes A, Humphrey P . Diagnostic effect of complete histologic sampling of prostate needle biopsy specimens. Am J Clin Pathol. 1998; 109(4):416-22. DOI: 10.1093/ajcp/109.4.416. View

Iczkowski K, Bassler T, Schwob V, Bassler I, Kunnel B, Orozco R . Diagnosis of "suspicious for malignancy" in prostate biopsies: predictive value for cancer. Urology. 1998; 51(5):749-57; discussion 757-8. DOI: 10.1016/s0090-4295(98)00109-5. View

Mettlin C, Murphy G, Babaian R, Chesley A, Kane R, Littrup P . The results of a five-year early prostate cancer detection intervention. Investigators of the American Cancer Society National Prostate Cancer Detection Project. Cancer. 1996; 77(1):150-9. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19960101)77:1<150::AID-CNCR25>3.0.CO;2-3. View

10.

Bostwick D . Prospective origins of prostate carcinoma. Prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and atypical adenomatous hyperplasia. Cancer. 1996; 78(2):330-6. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19960715)78:2<330::AID-CNCR22>3.0.CO;2-W. View

11.

Epstein J . The diagnosis and reporting of adenocarcinoma of the prostate in core needle biopsy specimens. Cancer. 1996; 78(2):350-6. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19960715)78:2<350::AID-CNCR26>3.0.CO;2-U. View

12.

Lane Jr R, LANE C, Mangold K, Johnson M, Allsbrook Jr W . Needle biopsies of the prostate: what constitutes adequate histologic sampling?. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1998; 122(9):833-5. View

13.

de la Taille A, Rubin M, Bagiella E, Olsson C, Buttyan R, Burchardt T . Can perineural invasion on prostate needle biopsy predict prostate specific antigen recurrence after radical prostatectomy?. J Urol. 1999; 162(1):103-6. DOI: 10.1097/00005392-199907000-00025. View

14.

Goldstein N, Underhill J, Roszka J, Neill J . Cytokeratin 34 beta E-12 immunoreactivity in benign prostatic acini. Quantitation, pattern assessment, and electron microscopic study. Am J Clin Pathol. 1999; 112(1):69-74. DOI: 10.1093/ajcp/112.1.69. View

15.

Schroder F, Kranse R, Rietbergen J, Hoedemaeke R, Kirkels W . The European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC): an update. Members of the ERSPC, Section Rotterdam. Eur Urol. 1999; 35(5-6):539-43. DOI: 10.1159/000019894. View

16.

Cohen R, McNeal J, Baillie T . Patterns of differentiation and proliferation in intraductal carcinoma of the prostate: significance for cancer progression. Prostate. 2000; 43(1):11-9. DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0045(20000401)43:1<11::aid-pros3>3.0.co;2-b. View

17.

Epstein J . Gleason score 2-4 adenocarcinoma of the prostate on needle biopsy: a diagnosis that should not be made. Am J Surg Pathol. 2000; 24(4):477-8. DOI: 10.1097/00000478-200004000-00001. View

18.

Srigley J, Amin M, Bostwick D, Grignon D, Hammond M . 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(7):1034-9. DOI: 10.5858/2000-124-1034-UPFTEO. View

19.

Hoedemaeker R, Rietbergen J, Kranse R, Schroder F, van der Kwast T . Histopathological prostate cancer characteristics at radical prostatectomy after population based screening. J Urol. 2000; 164(2):411-5. View

20.

Noguchi M, Stamey T, McNeal J, Yemoto C . Relationship between systematic biopsies and histological features of 222 radical prostatectomy specimens: lack of prediction of tumor significance for men with nonpalpable prostate cancer. J Urol. 2001; 166(1):104-9; discussion 109-10. View