Prostate cancer staging and datasets: The Nitty-Gritty. What determines our pathological reports? 06/07/2018. Dan Berney Maastricht 2018

Similar documents
I have no financial relationships to disclose. I WILL NOT include discussion of investigational or off-label use of a product in my presentation.

3/23/2017. Significant Changes in Prostate Cancer Classification, Grading, Staging and Reporting. Disclosure of Relevant Financial Relationships

S1.04 Principal clinician. G1.01 Comments. G2.01 *Specimen dimensions (prostate) S2.02 *Seminal vesicles

S1.04 PRINCIPAL CLINICIAN G1.01 COMMENTS S2.01 SPECIMEN LABELLED AS G2.01 *SPECIMEN DIMENSIONS (PROSTATE) S2.03 *SEMINAL VESICLES

Prostate cancer ~ diagnosis and impact of pathology on prognosis ESMO 2017

A schematic of the rectal probe in contact with the prostate is show in this diagram.

Procedures Needle Biopsy Transurethral Prostatic Resection Suprapubic or Retropubic Enucleation (Subtotal Prostatectomy) Radical Prostatectomy

GUIDELINES ON PROSTATE CANCER

AJCC Cancer Staging 8 th Edition. Prostate Chapter 58. Executive Committee, AJCC. Professor and Director, Duke Prostate Center

Prostate Cancer Grading, Staging and Reporting: An Update Cristina Magi-Galluzzi, MD, PhD

Protocol for the Examination of Specimens From Patients With Carcinoma of the Prostate Gland

TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION

GUIDELINEs ON PROSTATE CANCER

A215- Urinary bladder cancer tissues

Diagnosis, pathology and prognosis including variant pathology

Collaborative Staging

Q&A. Overview. Collecting Cancer Data: Prostate. Collecting Cancer Data: Prostate 5/5/2011. NAACCR Webinar Series 1

Prostate Case Scenario 1

Prostate MRI. Overview. Introduction 2/20/2015. Prostate cancer is most frequently diagnosed noncutaneous cancer in males (25%)

Case Scenario 1. 4/19/13 Bone Scan: No scintigraphic findings to suggest skeletal metastases.

Supplemental Information

Collecting Cancer Data: Prostate Q&A. Overview. NAACCR Webinar Series June 11, 2009

Chapter 2. Understanding My Diagnosis

Recommendations for the Reporting of Prostate Carcinoma

6/5/2010. Renal vein invasion & Capsule Penetration (T3a) Adrenal Gland involvement (T4 vs. M1) Beyond Gerota s Fascia? (?T4).

Large blocks in prostate and bladder pathology

Comparative Analysis Research of Robotic Assisted Laparoscopic Prostatectomy

Neoplasms of the Prostate and Bladder

The Depth of Tumor Invasion is Superior to 8 th AJCC/UICC Staging System to Predict Patients Outcome in Radical Cystectomy.

INTRADUCTAL LESIONS OF THE PROSTATE. Jonathan I. Epstein

Update on Reporting Prostate Cancer Pathology

New research in prostate brachytherapy

ADENOCARCINOMA OF THE PROSTATE

Diagnosis of prostate cancer

20 Prostate Cancer Dan Ash

SEER Summary Stage Still Here!

Prostate Cancer Case Study 1. Medical Student Case-Based Learning

Standards and Datasets for Reporting Cancers. Dataset for histopathology reports for prostatic carcinoma (2 nd edition) October 2009

11/10/2015. Prostate cancer in the U.S. Multi-parametric MRI of Prostate Diagnosis and Treatment Planning. NIH estimates for 2015.

When to worry, when to test?

Boot Camp Case Scenarios

Prostate MRI for local staging and surgical planning in prostate cancer

Are Prostate Carcinoma Clinical Stages T1c and T2 Similar?

PSA. HMCK, p63, Racemase. HMCK, p63, Racemase

Outline (1) Outline (2) Concepts in Prostate Pathology. Peculiarities of Prostate Cancer. Peculiarities of Prostate Cancer

Case #1: 75 y/o Male (treated and followed by prostate cancer oncology specialist ).

Genitourinary Neoplasms Updated for 2012 Requirements and CSv02.04

Genitourinary Neoplasms Updated for 2012 Requirements and CSv02.04

Case Discussions: Prostate Cancer

25 TH ICRO DEHRADUN STAGING OF GENITOURINARY MALIGNANCIES

Prostate Pathology: Prostate Carcinoma, variants and Gleason Grading (Part 1)

A re-audit of Prostate biopsies from January to December 2010 and 2013.

Magnetic resonance imaging predictors of extracapsular extension of prostate cancer: Do they accurately reflect pt3 staging?

da Vinci Prostatectomy

Clinical Case Conference

RECTAL CARCINOMA: A DISTANCE APPROACH. Stephanie Nougaret

Case Scenario 1 Worksheet. Primary Site C44.4 Morphology 8743/3 Laterality 0 Stage/ Prognostic Factors

Update on staging colorectal carcinoma, the 8 th edition AJCC. General overview of staging. When is staging required? 11/1/2017

Localized at a focus, central point or locus. Localized finding distinct from neighboring tissues, not a threedimensional

ACOS Inquiry and Response Selected Inquires CS Tumor Size/Extension Evaluation, CS Lymph Nodes Evaluation, CS Metastasis at Diagnosis Evaluation *

Carcinoma of the Urinary Bladder Histopathology

Prostate MRI: Who needs it?

ACCME/Disclosures. Cribriform Lesions of the Prostate. Case

The importance of maximal restoration of peri-prostatic support

Uropathology January Jon Oxley

Quality ID #250 (NQF 1853): Radical Prostatectomy Pathology Reporting National Quality Strategy Domain: Effective Clinical Care

Evaluation of the 7th American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM Staging System for Prostate Cancer in Point of Classification of Bladder Neck Invasion

Some prostatic diseases

Aram Kim 4, Myong Kim 1, Se Un Jeong 2, Cheryn Song 1, Yong Mee Cho 2, Jae Yoon Ro 3 and Hanjong Ahn 1*

Pathologic Assessment of Invasion in TUR Specimens. A. Lopez-Beltran. T1 (ct1)

UICC TNM 8 th Edition Errata

The Role of the Pathologist Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer

Prostatectomy as salvage therapy. Cases. Paul Cathcart - Guy s & St Thomas NHS Trust, London

CONTEMPORARY UPDATE OF PROSTATE CANCER STAGING NOMOGRAMS (PARTIN TABLES) FOR THE NEW MILLENNIUM

Prostate Cancer: Screening, Treatment, and Survivorship

Protocol for the Examination of Specimens from Patients with Carcinoma of the Prostate Gland

S Crouzet, O Rouvière, JY Chapelon, F Mege, X martin, A Gelet

UICC TNM 8 th Edition Errata

Radical prostatectomy as radical cure of prostate cancer in a high risk group: A single-institution experience

B REAST STAGING FORM. PATHOLOGIC Extent of disease through completion of definitive surgery. CLINICAL Extent of disease before any treatment

Anatomic distribution and pathologic characterization of small-volume prostate cancer (o0.5 ml) in whole-mount prostatectomy specimens

B REAST STAGING FORM. PATHOLOGIC Extent of disease through completion of definitive surgery. CLINICAL Extent of disease before any treatment

PLACE LABEL HERE. ACRIN 6659 Registration/Eligibility Institution

Definition of Synoptic Reporting

Prognostic value of the Gleason score in prostate cancer

Prognostic Value of Surgical Margin Status for Biochemical Recurrence Following Radical Prostatectomy

Catholic University of Louvain, St - Luc University Hospital Head and Neck Oncology Programme. Anatomopathology. Pathology 1 Sept.

1/25/13 Right partial nephrectomy followed by completion right radical nephrectomy.

Gross appearance of nodular hyperplasia in material obtained from suprapubic prostatectomy. Note the multinodular appearance and the admixture of

Prognostic factors of genitourinary tumors: Do we have to care?

Adenocarcinoma of the Prostate Part II: Tissue Prognosticators

MUSCLE - INVASIVE AND METASTATIC BLADDER CANCER

OMPRN Pathology Matters Meeting 2017

David Gillatt Bristol Urological Institute. David Gillatt Bristol UK

Prostate Cancer MRI. Accurate Diagnosis and Treatment. PSA to Prostate MRI. for patients and curious doctors

What Is Prostate Cancer? Prostate cancer is the development of cancer cells in the prostate gland (a gland that produces fluid for semen).

Disease-specific death and metastasis do not occur in patients with Gleason score 6 at radical prostatectomy

Procedures Needle Biopsy Transurethral Prostatic Resection Suprapubic or Retropubic Enucleation (Subtotal Prostatectomy) Radical Prostatectomy

Multiparametric MR Imaging of the Prostate after Treatment of Prostate Cancer

Transcription:

Prostate cancer staging and datasets: The Nitty-Gritty What determines our pathological reports? Dan Berney Maastricht 2018 Biopsy reporting. How not to do it. The TNM 8 th edition. Changes good and bad Some philosophy. 1

Left base: Five disrupted prostate cores, three of which contain a moderately to poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma of the prostate gland, Gleason grade 3+4 (=score 7). The approximate ratio of Gleason pattern 3 to 4 is 95:5. The tumour occupies discontinuous lengths of 3 (2.5+0.5)mm (spanning 4mm) 2.5 (2+0.5) mm (spanning 3mm) and 2 (1+0.5+0.5) mm corresponding to to approximately 75%, 50%, and 25% of the areas studied in each core respectively. There is perineural invasion in one core, but no evidence of acute inflammation, high grade PIN, or extraprostatic extension. Conclusion Gleason grade 3+4 Grade Group 2 No of involved cores 18 Total tumour length 85mm Total length of all cores studied: 191mm % of tumour length in all cores 5% Maximum tumour length: 13mm Tumour Laterality: Bilateral Left base: Five disrupted prostate cores, three of which contain a moderately to poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma of the prostate gland, Gleason grade 3+4 (=score 7). The approximate ratio of Gleason pattern 3 to 4 is 95:5. The tumour occupies discontinuous lengths of 3 (2.5+0.5)mm (spanning 4mm) 2.5 (2+0.5) mm (spanning 3mm) and 2 (1+0.5+0.5) mm corresponding to to approximately 75%, 50%, and 25% of the areas studied in each core respectively. There is perineural invasion in one core, but no evidence of acute inflammation, high grade PIN, or extraprostatic extension. Conclusion Gleason grade 3+4 Grade Group 2 No of involved cores 18 Total tumour length 85mm Total length of all cores studied: 191mm % of tumour length in all cores 5% Maximum tumour length: 13mm Tumour Laterality: Bilateral 2

Biopsy site (Modified Barzell Zone) 1 Left anterior apex 2 3 Left anterior Right base anterior apex 4 Right anterior base 5 Midline apex 6 Midline base Block number A B C D E F NSNumber of cores 6 6 8 6 1 1 Longest core (mm) 11 10 13 14 12 11 Adenocarcinoma Yes Yes Yes Yes No No present? Number of cores 1 2 7 5 0 0 involved Largest cancer focus 1 3 7 7 0 0 (mm) Total core length 55 48 68 50 12 11 (mm) Total cancer length 1 4 32 28 0 0 (mm) % cancer in sample 1 8 47 56 0 0 Gleason 3+3=6 3+4=7 3+4=7 3+4=7 - - Perineural invasion No No No Yes No No High grade PIN in 1 core? No No No No No No Left Base: 3/5 prostate cores show adenocarcinoma, Gleason score 3+4=7 without cribriform areas, (5% grade 4) (3mm 75%, 3mm 50%, 2mm 25% discontinuously) Perineural invasion seen. Conclusion: prostatic adenocarcinoma, Gleason score 3+4=7, Grade Group 2 in 18/25 cores, Perineural invasion seen. IS THERE CANCER? TYPE IT GRADE IT MEASURE IT OTHER FACTORS PNI, LVI, ECE etc 3

What do clinicians really (really) want? Which mm linear extent do you use? Surg Onc Both Don't use 30 (38) 11 (46) 41 (40) mm each core 21 (27) 2 (8) 23 (22) Maximum mm in a core 37 (47) 11 (46) 48 (47) Aggregate mm 12 (15) 3 (13) 15 (15) Which % linear extent do you use? Don't use 24 (30) 3 (12) 27 (26) % each core 20 (25) 7 (27) 27 (26) maximum % in a core 25 (32) 8 (31) 33 (31) Aggregate % 33 (42) 10 (38) 43 (41) Other 0 (0) 2 (8) 2 (2) Survey Question Responses (percentage) Surgeon Oncologist Total Here is a prostate cancer with 60% core involvement. Which tumour extent parameter do you use? Number (+) cores 77 (97) 20 (83) 97 (94) Number (+) cores each side 35 (44) 8 (33) 43 (42) % number of cores 73 (92) 24 (100) 97 (94) mm linear extent 49 (62) 13 (54) 62 (60) And here is one with 20% core involvement! % linear extent 64 (81) 23 (96) 87 (84) 4

Percentages are determined by the amount of benign tissue biopsied! Precise measurements are pointless Different levels?! How long is a stromal gap and on which level? Biopsy measurement in age of mpmri Targeted Biased samples Should we be counting per SITE 5

Peri-Neural Invasion Is it worth the bother! Neurosafe Are we serving the patients, the clinicians or ourselves? TNM AJCC/UICC Editions Edition Publication Dates for cancer diagnosis 1st 1977 78-83 2nd 1983 84-88 3rd 1988 89-92 Is the data we provide of patient benefit? 4 th 1992 93-97 5thy 1997 98-02 6 th 2002 03-09 7 th 2009 10-17 8th 2016 18-6

Changes in 7 th edition Which? Microscopic bladder neck invasion downstaged from pt4 to pt3a Gleason score recognised as preferred grading method Prognostic factors: Gleason and PSA incorporated into prognostic stage groups Changes in AJCC 8 th edition Pathologically organ confined disease no longer subclassified Gleason score by 2014 criteria and grade group given AJCC prognostic stage 3 includes some organ confined tumours based on PSA and grade Statistical prediction models included 7

Clinical ct category Which Errata? Tx T0 T1 T1a T1b T1c Primary tumour cannot be assessed No evidence of primary tumour Clinically inapparent tumour which is non palpable Incidental finding in 5% or less of tissue resected Incidental finding in more than 5% of the tissue resected Tumour found by needle biopsy but impalpable Present the changes in AJCC TNM 8 th edition Critically look at the evidence base Examine areas of doubt Potential for further refinements T2 T2a T2b T2c T3 T3a T3b T4 Tumour is palpable and confined within the prostate Tumour occupies 1 half of one side or less Tumour involves more than one half of one side but not both sides Tumour involves both sides Extra-prostatic tumour that is not fixed or does not invade adjacent structures Extra-prostatic extension Seminal vesicle invasion Fixed or invades other structures other than SVs (rectum, muscles, pelvic wall) 8

Do not use.. MRI CT Biopsy information on laterality Staging of TURP Chips T1a 5% involvement T1b More than 5% Cantrell BB et al. Pathological factors that influence prognosis in stage A prostatic cancer: the influence of extent versus grade. J Urol. 1981;125:516 520 117 patients followed for 2 to 15 years In 14 patients (12%) extensive local (2) or metastatic (12) disease developed. Extent and grade of disease accurately predicted progression. No patient with Gleason 2 to 4 had progression Patients with <5 % cancer; 2% had progression. Patients >5 % cancer; 32% had progression 9

How do you measure % involvement? 1. Estimate of area involved overall. 2. Count positive and negative chippings. Conclusions Preoperative ct staging by TNM still has huge variability as it uses low level technology and some historic data. Survival from prostate cancer (%) 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 HR=2.08, 95% CI=1.8-2.4 P < 0.0001 0 2 4 6 8 10 Time since entry (years) cancerous chips <= 10% cancerous chips >10-25% cancerous chips >25-75% cancerous chips >75% pt staging Applicable only to men who have had a radical prostatectomy. Not WW, AM, RT, Brachytherapy, hormones etc etc! Rajab R et al. An improved prognostic model for stage T1a and T1b prostate cancer by assessments of cancer extent. Mod Pathol. 2011 Jan;24(1):58-63 (Fig. 1). 10

PATHOLOGIC STAGE T2 T3 T4 T3a T3b Organ Confined CRITERIA Extraprostatic extension Extraprostatic extension (unilateral or bilateral) or microscopic invasion of bladder neck Tumour invades seminal vesicles Tumour is fixed or invades adjacent structures other than seminal vesicles such as external sphincter, rectum, bladder, levator muscles and/or pelvic wall 2a 2c 2b 11

= pt2b What s also not there Tumour volume Extent of extra-prostatic extension Surgical margin assessment The prostatic capsule A condensed fibromusculr layer of prostatic stroma Well formed; Posterolateral Poorly seen Apex, anteriorly, bladder neck 12

EPE The presence of neoplastic glands abutting on or within periprostatic fat or beyond the adjacent fat plane in situations where no fat is present in the immediate area of interest (most useful at the lateral, posterolateral and posterior aspects of the prostate) Neoplastic glands surrounding nerves in the neurovascular bundle (posterolaterally) beyond the boundary of the normal prostatic glandular tissue. A nodular extension of tumour bulging beyond the periphery of the prostate or beyond the compressed fibromuscular prostatic stroma at the outer edge of the gland. T3a 13

T2 or T3a? 14

Subclassification of pt3a disease Tumour is found outside the prostate to a depth of <1 high-power field in 1-2 Sections F-EPE a few neoplastic glands outside the prostate on 1-2 slides 15

Other TNM changes 16

Conclusions We need to lead and be better in biopsy reporting with education of clinicians and pathologists. TNM Improved from previous but still crude. Much further work is necessary to catch up with other organ risk prediction models Risk assessment tools 15 multivariate models assessed Only 2 models on metastatic disease from large Phase 3 studies accepted All OC models rejected! 17