Prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia in prostate specimens: Frequency, significance and relationship to the sampling of the specimen (A retrospective study of 121 cases)

被引:17
作者
Aydin Ö. [1 ]
Coşar E.F. [2 ]
Varinli S. [2 ]
Buǧdayci R. [3 ]
Tansuǧ Z. [4 ]
机构
[1] Department of Pathology, Mersin University, Faculty of Medicine, Mersin
[2] Department of Pathology, Çukurova University, Faculty of Medicine, Adana
[3] Department of Public Health, Mersin University, Faculty of Medicine, Mersin
[4] Department of Urology, Çukurova University, Faculty of Medicine, Adana
关键词
Public Health; Carcinoma; Retrospective Study; Paraffin; Bladder Cancer;
D O I
10.1023/A:1007120907921
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Objectives: To determine the frequency of PIN (prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia) in prostate specimens and the relationship of PIN with PCA (prostatic carcinoma) and amount of sampling of the specimen. Materials and methods: All the haematoxylin-eosin stained slides of 121 cases diagnosed between 1990 and 1995 were re-examined retrospectively. The amount of sampling of prostate specimens was also re-examined. Results: PIN was observed in 47.9% of all prostate specimens. The frequency of incidental PIN was 71.4% in cystoprostatectomy specimens. PIN was present in 58.3% of the cases with PCA. We observed foci of high-grade PIN adjacent to sites of invasive carcinoma in 100.0% of prostatectomy specimens with PCA. PIN was high-grade in 100.0% of the carcinomatous prostates with PIN. It was multifocal in 53.4% of 58 cases with PIN. Incidental PCA was identified in 14.3% of cytoprostatectomies for bladder cancer. The average number of paraffin blocks of prostatic tissue was 4.1 (±2.6) in cases with PIN and 3.2 (±1.4) in cases without PIN. Conclusion: In prostate specimens, the determination of PIN is very important since it is the most likely precursor of PCA. The probability of detecting PIN and PCA in a prostate specimen is directly related to the amount of sampling.
引用
收藏
页码:687 / 697
页数:10
相关论文
共 19 条
[1]  
Pienta K.J., Etiology, epidemiology, and prevention of carcinoma of the prostate, Campbell's Urology, 7th Edn, 3, pp. 2489-2496, (1998)
[2]  
Brawer M.K., Quantitative microvessel density. A staging and prognostic marker for human prostatic carcinoma, Cancer, 78, (1996)
[3]  
Eschenbach A.C., The biologic dilemma of early carcinoma of the prostate, Cancer, 78, (1996)
[4]  
De La Torre M., Haggman M., Brandstedt S., Busch C., Prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and invasive carcinoma in total prostatectomy specimens: Distribution, volumes and DNA ploidy, Br. J. Urol., 72, (1993)
[5]  
Epstein J.I., The prostate and seminal vesicles, Diagnostic Surgical Pathology, 2nd Edn, 2, pp. 1807-1854, (1994)
[6]  
Bostwick D.G., Amin M.B., Prostate and seminal vesicles, Anderson's Pathology, 10th Edn, 2, pp. 2166-2230, (1996)
[7]  
Bostwick D.G., Prospective origins of prostate carcinoma. Prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and atypical adenomatous hyperplasia, Cancer, 78, (1996)
[8]  
Sakr W.A., Haas G.P., Cassin B.F., Pontes J.E., Crissman J.D., The frequency of carcinoma and intraepithelial neoplasia of the prostate in young male patients, Br. J. Urol., 150, (1993)
[9]  
Jones E.C., Young R.H., The differential diagnosis of prostatic carcinoma. Its distinction from premalignant and pseudocarcinomatous lesions of the prostate gland, Am. J. Clin. Pathol., 101, (1994)
[10]  
Epstein J.I., Adenosis (atypical adenomatous hyperplasia): Histopathology and relationship to carcinoma, Path Res Pract., 191, (1995)