Clinical outcomes of intraductal carcinoma or cribriform in radical prostatectomy specimens of men opting for active surveillance: data from the PRIAS-JAPAN study.

Among early stage prostate cancer patients, intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) and invasive cribriform are key prognostic factors; however, their presence and clinical significance following active surveillance (AS) are unknown.

In men who opted for AS, we aimed to examine the presence and impact of IDC-P or cribriform, utilizing radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens.

We re-reviewed 137 RP specimens available in the PRIAS-JAPAN prospective cohort between January 2010 and September 2020. We assessed the presence of IDC-P or cribriform, and compared the patients' characteristics and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) recurrence-free survival after RP between groups with and without IDC-P or cribriform. In addition, we examined the predictive factors associated with IDC-P or cribriform.

The percentage of patients with IDC-P or cribriform presence was 34.3% (47 patients). IDC-P or cribriform pattern was more abundant in the higher Gleason grade group in RP specimens (P < 0.001). The rates of PSA recurrence-free survival were significantly lower in the IDC-P or cribriform groups than in those without them (log rank P = 0.0211). There was no association between IDC-P or cribriform on RP with the Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) 4,5 score on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) before RP even with adjustments for other covariates (OR, 1.43; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.511-3.980, P = 0.497).

IDC-P or cribriform comprised approximately one-third of all RP specimens in men who underwent RP following AS, confirming their prognostic significance.

International journal of clinical oncology. 2022 Dec 06 [Epub ahead of print]

Yoichiro Tohi, Ryou Ishikawa, Takuma Kato, Jimpei Miyakawa, Ryuji Matsumoto, Keiichiro Mori, Koji Mitsuzuka, Junichi Inokuchi, Masafumi Matsumura, Kenichiro Shiga, Hirohito Naito, Yasuo Kohjimoto, Norihiko Kawamura, Masaharu Inoue, Hidefumi Kinoshita, Kohei Hashimoto, Keisuke Goto, Reiji Haba, Yoshiyuki Kakehi, Mikio Sugimoto

Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Kagawa University, 1750-1, Ikenobe, Miki-cho, Kita-gun, Kagawa, 761-0793, Japan. ., Department of Diagnostic Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Kagawa University, Kagawa, Japan., Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Kagawa University, 1750-1, Ikenobe, Miki-cho, Kita-gun, Kagawa, 761-0793, Japan., Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan., Department of Renal and Genito-Urinary Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Hokkaido, Japan., Department of Urology, Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan., Department of Urology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Miyagi, Japan., Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan., Department of Urology, National Hospital Organization Shikoku Cancer Center, Ehime, Japan., Division of Urology, Harasanshin Hospital, Fukuoka, Japan., Department of Urology, Kurashiki Central Hospital, Okayama, Japan., Department of Urology, Wakayama Medical University, Wakayama, Japan., Department of Urology, Osaka International Cancer Institute, Osaka, Japan., Department of Urology, Saitama Cancer Center, Saitama, Japan., Department of Urology and Andrology, General Medical Center, Kansai Medical University, Osaka, Japan., Department of Urology, Sapporo Medical University School of Medicine, Hokkaido, Japan., Department of Urology, Hiroshima University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Hiroshima, Japan.

Go Beyond the Abstract and Read a Commentary by the Authors