Biyopsi Değerlendirilmesinde Gleason (3+3) Tanılı Hastaların Prostatlarında Kribriform Alan Şüphesi. Kısıtlı Morfolojik Görünüm Hastaları Takip Grubuna Almak için Yeterli Olmayabilir
Abstract
Objectives: Histologic grade is the most useful predictor of prognosis of prostate cancer. The Gleason scoring is the only grading method for
prostatic carcinoma, which is recommended by World Health Organization. The Gleason grading (3+3) 6 is the lowest score currently assigned. In
radical materials, we can see all prostate areas and decide certain grading easily. However, in the biopsy, we can see only a part of the tumor and we
cannot be sure of the histologic grade of the total tumor. If the tumor has a potential for cribriform formation, we cannot detect it with current
methods. Our aim in this study was to detect molecular heterogeneity in well-differentiated prostate cancers.
Materials and Methods: Twenty-six prostate needle biopsies from patients with prostate carcinoma Gleason (3+3) were stained and analyzed with
immunohistochemical markers of Betacatenin, Cyclin D1, Pax2 and Pax8.
Results: While intense staining was observed with Betacatenin in tumor, no significant findings were detected with Cyclin D1, Pax2 and Pax8.
Conclusion: Betacatenin, Cyclin D1, Pax2 and Pax8 are the markers that we use frequently in daily pathology practice and have also been the
subject of studies in the literature on urogenital system carcinogenesis. However, while intense staining was observed with Betacatenin in welldifferentiated
tumoral acinar structures, no significant findings were detected with Cyclin D1, Pax2 and Pax8.
Keywords
Prostate Carcinoma, Immunohistochemical Heterogeneity, Betacatenin
Ethical Statement
Etik
Etik Kurul Onayı: Çalışma için TOBB Üniversitesi Tıp
Fakültesi, Klinik Araştırmalar Etik Kurulu’ndan onay alınmıştır.
Hasta Onayı: Retrospektif çalışma.
Hakem Değerlendirmesi: Editörler kurulunun dışında olan
kişiler tarafından değerlendirilmiştir.
Finansal Destek: Bu çalışma herhangi bir kurum, kuruluş ya
da kişi tarafından finanse edilmemiştir.
References
- 1. Kryvenko ON, Epstein JI. Prostate Cancer Grading: A Decade After the 2005 Modified Gleason Grading System. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2016;140:1140-1152.
- 2. Braunhut BL, Punnen S, Kryvenko ON. Updates on Grading and Staging of Prostate Cancer. Surg Pathol Clin. 2018;11:759-774.
- 3. Epstein JI, Egevad L, Amin MB, et al. The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma: Definition of Grading Patterns and Proposal for a New Grading System. Am J Surg Pathol. 2016;40:244-252.
- 4. Goodman M, Ward KC, Osunkoya AO, et al. Frequency and determinants of disagreement and error in Gleason scores: a population-based study of prostate cancer. Prostate. 2012;72:1389-1398.
- 5. Al-Maghrabi JA, Bakshi NA, Farsi HM. Gleason grading of prostate cancer in needle core biopsies: a comparison of general and urologic pathologists. Ann Saudi Med. 2013;33:40-44.
- 6. Hofer DR, Sherwood ER, Bromberg WD, et al. Autonomous growth of androgen-independent human prostatic carcinoma cells: role of transforming growth factor alpha. Cancer Res. 1991;51:2780-2785.
- 7. Demark-Wahnefried W, Moyad MA. Dietary intervention in the management of prostate cancer. Curr Opin Urol. 2007;17:168-174.
- 8. Gülhan Ö, Mahi B. The Role of AMACR, CD10, TMPRSS2-ERG, and p27 Protein Expression Among Different Gleason Grades of Prostatic Adenocarcinoma on Needle Biopsy. Clin Med Insights Oncol. 2020;14:1179554920947322.
- 9. Gu M, Roy S, Raina K, et al. Inositol hexaphosphate suppresses growth and induces apoptosis in prostate carcinoma cells in culture and nude mouse xenograft: PI3K-Akt pathway as potential target. Cancer Res. 2009;69:9465-9472.
- 10. Wise HM, Hermida MA, Leslie NR. Prostate cancer, PI3K, PTEN and prognosis. Clin Sci (Lond). 2017;131:197-210.