Implementation of Repeat Biopsy and Detection of Cancer After a Diagnosis of Atypical Small Acinar Proliferation of the Prostate

Overview

Journal Mol Clin Oncol

Specialty Oncology

Date 2020 Oct 5

PMID 33014366

Citations 2

Authors

Takahiro Imanaka

Takahiro Yoshida

Ayumu Taniguchi

Kazuaki Yamanaka

Hidefumi Kishikawa

Kenji Nishimura

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Current guidelines recommend a repeat biopsy within 3-6 months after an initial diagnosis of atypical small acinar proliferation (ASAP) due to the high incidence of cancer detection on repeat biopsy. The current study sought to investigate practice patterns after a diagnosis of ASAP in a real-world setting and examine the clinicopathological outcomes of repeat biopsy. The departmental database of the Hyogo Prefectural Nishinomiya Hospital identified 97 of 1,218 patients with a diagnosis of ASAP on initial biopsy from 2011 to 2016. Clinical and pathological data were retrospectively analyzed. Of the 97 patients, 34 (35.1%) underwent a repeat biopsy. Patients with a repeat biopsy had a significantly higher prostate-specific antigen (PSA) velocity and shorter PSA doubling time than patients without a repeat biopsy (P=0.0002), and of these 34 patients with a repeat biopsy, 16 (47.1%) were diagnosed as having cancer. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that a small prostate (P=0.0250) and advanced age (P=0.0297) were associated with cancer detection on repeat biopsy. Of the 16 cancers identified, 13 (81.6%) were diagnosed with a Gleason score >6. The results indicated that the implementation of a repeat biopsy for patients with ASAP could be affected by clinical characteristics in real-world settings, despite the current recommendation of guidelines endorsing immediate repeat biopsy. Prostate volume and age would aid in the decision-making process to perform repeat biopsy in patients with high PSA velocity and short PSA doubling time after a diagnosis of ASAP.

Citing Articles

Expression of nectin-4 in prostate cancer.

Ordu M, Karaaslan M, Sirin M, Yilmaz M North Clin Istanb. 2023; 10(5):583-588.

PMID: 37829757 PMC: 10565758. DOI: 10.14744/nci.2023.36034.

Clinical strategy of repeat biopsy in patients with atypical small acinar proliferation (ASAP).

Kim H, Kim J, Choe G, Hong S Sci Rep. 2021; 11(1):23143.

PMID: 34848744 PMC: 8633016. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-02172-8.

References

Cool D, Romagnoli C, Izawa J, Chin J, Gardi L, Tessier D . Comparison of prostate MRI-3D transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy for first-time and repeat biopsy patients with previous atypical small acinar proliferation. Can Urol Assoc J. 2016; 10(9-10):342-348. PMC: 5085915. DOI: 10.5489/cuaj.3831. View

Scattoni V, Roscigno M, Freschi M, Deho F, Raber M, Briganti A . Atypical small acinar proliferation (ASAP) on extended prostatic biopsies: predictive factors of cancer detection on repeat biopsies. Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2005; 77(1):31-6. View

Borboroglu P, Sur R, Roberts J, Amling C . Repeat biopsy strategy in patients with atypical small acinar proliferation or high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia on initial prostate needle biopsy. J Urol. 2001; 166(3):866-70. View

Montironi R, Scattoni V, Mazzucchelli R, Lopez-Beltran A, Bostwick D, Montorsi F . Atypical foci suspicious but not diagnostic of malignancy in prostate needle biopsies (also referred to as "atypical small acinar proliferation suspicious for but not diagnostic of malignancy"). Eur Urol. 2006; 50(4):666-74. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.07.048. View

Merrick G, Galbreath R, Bennett A, Butler W, Amamovich E . Incidence, grade and distribution of prostate cancer following transperineal template-guided mapping biopsy in patients with atypical small acinar proliferation. World J Urol. 2016; 35(7):1009-1013. DOI: 10.1007/s00345-016-1976-2. View

Romero-Otero J, Garcia-Gomez B, Duarte-Ojeda J, Rodriguez-Antolin A, Vilaseca A, Carlsson S . Active surveillance for prostate cancer. Int J Urol. 2015; 23(3):211-8. PMC: 4966658. DOI: 10.1111/iju.13016. View

Koca O, Caliskan S, Ozturk M, Gunes M, Karaman M . Significance of atypical small acinar proliferation and high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia in prostate biopsy. Korean J Urol. 2011; 52(11):736-40. PMC: 3242985. DOI: 10.4111/kju.2011.52.11.736. View

Nakai Y, Tanaka N, Shimada K, Konishi N, Miyake M, Anai S . Review by urological pathologists improves the accuracy of Gleason grading by general pathologists. BMC Urol. 2015; 15:70. PMC: 4511985. DOI: 10.1186/s12894-015-0066-x. View

Kimura T, Egawa S . Epidemiology of prostate cancer in Asian countries. Int J Urol. 2018; 25(6):524-531. DOI: 10.1111/iju.13593. View

10.

Carroll P, Parsons J, Andriole G, Bahnson R, Barocas D, Catalona W . Prostate cancer early detection, version 1.2014. Featured updates to the NCCN Guidelines. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2014; 12(9):1211-9. DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2014.0120. View

11.

Ficarra V, Novella G, Novara G, Galfano A, Pea M, Martignoni G . The potential impact of prostate volume in the planning of optimal number of cores in the systematic transperineal prostate biopsy. Eur Urol. 2005; 48(6):932-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2005.08.008. View

12.

Paller C, Olatoye D, Xie S, Zhou X, Denmeade S, Eisenberger M . The effect of the frequency and duration of PSA measurement on PSA doubling time calculations in men with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2013; 17(1):28-33. PMC: 3945997. DOI: 10.1038/pcan.2013.40. View

13.

Leone A, Gershman B, Rotker K, Butler C, Fantasia J, Miller A . Atypical small acinar proliferation (ASAP): Is a repeat biopsy necessary ASAP? A multi-institutional review. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2016; 19(1):68-71. DOI: 10.1038/pcan.2015.52. View

14.

Srirangam V, Rai B, Abroaf A, Agarwal S, Tadtayev S, Foley C . Atypical Small Acinar Proliferation and High Grade Prostatic Intraepithelial Neoplasia: Should We Be Concerned? An Observational Cohort Study with a Minimum Follow-Up of 3 Years. Curr Urol. 2017; 10(4):199-205. PMC: 5704718. DOI: 10.1159/000447181. View

15.

Leone A, Rotker K, Butler C, Mega A, Li J, Amin A . Atypical Small Acinar Proliferation: Repeat Biopsy and Detection of High Grade Prostate Cancer. Prostate Cancer. 2015; 2015:810159. PMC: 4584238. DOI: 10.1155/2015/810159. View

16.

Heidenreich A, Bastian P, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, van der Kwast T . EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent-update 2013. Eur Urol. 2013; 65(1):124-37. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.09.046. View

17.

Warlick C, Feia K, Tomasini J, Iwamoto C, Lindgren B, Risk M . Rate of Gleason 7 or higher prostate cancer on repeat biopsy after a diagnosis of atypical small acinar proliferation. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2015; 18(3):255-9. PMC: 4788962. DOI: 10.1038/pcan.2015.14. View

18.

Epstein J, Herawi M . Prostate needle biopsies containing prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia or atypical foci suspicious for carcinoma: implications for patient care. J Urol. 2006; 175(3 Pt 1):820-34. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)00337-X. View

19.

Aglamis E, Kocaarslan R, Yucetas U, Toktas G, Ceylan C, Doluoglu O . How many cores should be taken in a repeat biopsy on patients in whom atypical small acinar proliferation has been identified in an initial transrectal prostate biopsy?. Int Braz J Urol. 2014; 40(5):605-12. DOI: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2014.05.04. View

20.

Litwin M, Tan H . The Diagnosis and Treatment of Prostate Cancer: A Review. JAMA. 2017; 317(24):2532-2542. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2017.7248. View