Minimal (Limited) Pseudohyperplastic Prostatic Adenocarcinoma in Needle Prostatic Biopsy

Arista-Nasr, Julián; Martínez‐Benitez, Braulio; Mijangos-Trejo, Alejandra; Bornstein-Quevedo, Leticia; Albores‐Saavedra, Jorge

doi:10.1177/1066896917715910

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 24 publications

(57 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Three of these cases of minimal pseudohyperplastic adenocarcinoma had been mistaken for hyperplasia, adenosis, and prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia. 39 The standard diagnostic approach for all deceptively benign-appearing prostatic adenocarcinomas should be used for pseudohyperplastic adenocarcinoma: a search for adjacent usual small acinar adenocarcinoma should be made and immunohistochemistry for basal cells and AMACR should be performed (Figure 3, H). Note that 77% of cases (13 of 17) are AMACR positive.…”

Section: Pseudohyperplastic Adenocarcinomamentioning

confidence: 99%

False-Negative Histopathologic Diagnosis of Prostatic Adenocarcinoma

Yang

Humphrey

2019

Archives of Pathology &Amp; Laboratory Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context.— Histopathologic diagnosis of adenocarcinoma of the prostate is based on light-microscopic examination of hematoxylin-eosin–stained tissue sections. Multiple factors, including preanalytic and analytic elements, affect the ability of the pathologist to accurately diagnose prostatic adenocarcinoma. False-negative diagnosis, that is, failure to diagnose prostatic adenocarcinoma, may have serious clinical consequences. It is important to delineate and understand those factors that may affect and cause histopathologic false-negative diagnoses of prostatic adenocarcinoma. Objectives.— To review common factors involved in histopathologic underdiagnosis of prostatic adenocarcinoma, including the following: (1) tissue processing and sectioning artifacts, (2) minimal adenocarcinoma, (3) deceptively benign appearing variants of acinar adenocarcinoma, (4) single cell adenocarcinoma, and (5) treatment effects. Data Sources.— Data sources included published, peer-reviewed literature and personal experiences of the senior author. Conclusions.— Knowledge of the reasons for histopathologic false-negative diagnosis of adenocarcinoma of the prostate is an important component in the diagnostic assessment of prostate tissue sections. Diagnostic awareness of the histomorphologic presentations of small (minimal) adenocarcinoma; deceptively benign appearing variants including atrophic, foamy gland, microcystic, and pseudohyperplastic variants; single cell carcinoma; and treatment effects is critical for establishment of a definitive diagnosis of adenocarcinoma and the prevention of false-negative diagnoses of prostate cancer.

show abstract

Section: Pseudohyperplastic Adenocarcinomamentioning

confidence: 99%

False-Negative Histopathologic Diagnosis of Prostatic Adenocarcinoma

Yang

Humphrey

2019

Archives of Pathology &Amp; Laboratory Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previously, we have studied foamy carcinoma and pseudohyperplastic carcinoma when they are found in isolated histological fields (limited, minimal, or microcarcinoma). [1][2][3] In both neoplasms, the histological criteria of conventional acinar carcinoma [4][5][6][7][8] were only partially useful since they correspond to microcarcinomas that show architectural and cytological criteria that are specific to them. [8][9][10][11][12][13] Atrophic carcinoma may be similar to sclerosing atrophy, post-atrophic hyperplasia, partial atrophy, or cystic atrophy, and can therefore be difficult to recognize, as noted in the literature.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Atrophic and Microcystic Limited Prostatic Adenocarcinomas

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Atrophic carcinoma and microcystic carcinoma have previously been classified as variants of conventional acinar adenocarcinoma. In this article, we studied 4 cases of atrophic carcinoma and 4 cases of limited microcystic carcinoma. We found an incidence of 0.8% in 250 needle prostatic biopsies and 1.3% of atrophic carcinoma in 150 radical prostatectomies. Microcystic carcinomas were found in 3 prostatectomies (1.2%) and in 1 needle biopsy (0.67%). The useful histological criteria for atrophic carcinoma included the irregular disposition of the glands, infiltrative pattern, “rigid” luminal borders, and intraluminal secretions. Cytological changes included scant cytoplasm, nucleomegaly, hyperchromatic nuclei, and visible nucleoli. The glands of the microcystic carcinoma differ from the benign glands because the malignant ones show a markedly greater dilatation and exhibit rigidity of glandular lumens. In some cases of microcystic carcinoma, the nuclei were flattened, small, and hyperchromatic; therefore, they can be difficult to recognize as malignant.

show abstract

Minimal (Limited) Pseudohyperplastic Prostatic Adenocarcinoma in Needle Prostatic Biopsy

Abstract: The architectural and cytological criteria for limited acinar adenocarcinoma are only partially useful in interpreting minimum pseudohyperplastic adenocarcinomas. Knowledge of the criteria for malignancy in both neoplasms is important in order to avoid underdiagnosis of malignancy.

Cited by 2 publications

References 24 publications

False-Negative Histopathologic Diagnosis of Prostatic Adenocarcinoma

False-Negative Histopathologic Diagnosis of Prostatic Adenocarcinoma

Atrophic and Microcystic Limited Prostatic Adenocarcinomas

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About