David J. Grignon

The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma.

Five years after the last prostatic carcinoma grading consensus conference of the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP), accrual of new data and modification of clinical practice require an update of current pathologic grading guidelines. This manuscript summarizes the proceedings of the ISUP consensus meeting for grading of prostatic carcinoma held in September 2019, in Nice, France. Topics brought to consensus included the following: (1) approaches to reporting of Gleason patterns 4 and 5 quantities, and minor/tertiary patterns, (2) an agreement to report the presence of invasive cribriform carcinoma, (3) an agreement to incorporate intraductal carcinoma into grading, and (4) individual versus aggregate grading of systematic and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsies. Finally, developments in the field of artificial intelligence in the grading of prostatic carcinoma and future research perspectives were discussed.

The World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology consensus classification of urothelial (transitional cell) neoplasms of the urinary bladder

In October 1997, Dr. F.K. Mostofi assembled a group of individuals interested in bladder neoplasia at a meeting in Washington DC. The participants included urologic pathologists, urologists, urologic oncologists, and basic scientists with an interest in bladder neoplasia. The purpose of this meeting was to discuss bladder terminology and make recommendations to the World Health Organization (WHO) Committee on urothelial tumors. Following this meeting, a group of the urologic pathologists who attended the Washington meeting decided to broaden the representation of the group and arranged a meeting primarily of the members of the International Society of Urologic Pathologists (ISUP) at the 1998 United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology Meeting held in Boston. Massachusetts. At this meeting. issues regarding terminology of bladder lesions, primarily neoplastic and putative preneoplastic lesions, were discussed, resulting in a consensus statement. The WHO/ ISUP consensus classification arises from this consensus conference committees recommendations to the WHO planning committee and their agreement with virtually all of the proposals presented herein. 29 The effort involved in reaching such a consensus was often considerable. Many of those involved in this process have compromised to arrive at a consensus. The aim was to develop a universally acceptable classification system for bladder neoplasia that could be used effectively by pathologists, urologists, and oncologists.

Phase III radiation therapy oncology group (RTOG) trial 86-10 of androgen deprivation adjuvant to definitive radiotherapy in locally advanced carcinoma of the prostate

PURPOSE To test the hypothesis that androgen ablation before and during radiotherapy for locally advanced carcinoma of the prostate may, by reducing tumor bulk and enhancing tumor cell kill, improve locoregional control and ultimately survival. METHODS AND MATERIALS The study was conducted from 1987 to 1991. Eligible patients were those with bulky tumors (T2--T4) with or without pelvic lymph node involvement and without evidence of distant metastases. They were randomized to receive goserelin, 3.6 mg every 4 weeks; and flutamide, 250 mg t.i.d. for 2 months before radiation therapy and during radiation therapy (Arm I), or radiation therapy alone (Arm II). Of 471 randomized patients, 456 were evaluable: 226 on Arm I and 230 on Arm II. RESULTS As of November 1999, the median follow-up has reached 6.7 years for all patients and 8.6 years for alive patients. At 8 years, androgen ablation has been associated with an improvement in local control (42% vs. 30%, p = 0.016), reduction in the incidence of distant metastases (34% vs. 45%, p = 0.04), disease-free survival (33% vs. 21%, p = 0.004), biochemical disease-free survival = PSA <1.5 (24% vs. 10%, p < 0.0001), and cause-specific mortality (23% vs. 31%, p = 0.05). However, subset analysis indicates that the beneficial effect of short-term androgen ablation appears preferentially in patients with Gleason score 2--6. In that population, there is a highly significant improvement in all endpoints, including survival (70% vs. 52%, p = 0.015). In patients with Gleason 7--10 tumors, the regimen has not resulted in a significant enhancement in either locoregional control or survival. CONCLUSION In patients with Gleason score 2--6 carcinoma of the prostate, a short course of androgen ablation administered before and during radiotherapy has been associated with a highly significant improvement in local control, reduction in disease progression, and overall survival.

Phase III Trial of Long-Term Adjuvant Androgen Deprivation After Neoadjuvant Hormonal Cytoreduction and Radiotherapy in Locally Advanced Carcinoma of the Prostate: The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Protocol 92–02

PURPOSE Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) Protocol 92-02 was a randomized trial testing long-term (LT) adjuvant androgen deprivation (AD) after initial AD with external-beam radiotherapy (RT) in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer (PC; T2c-4) and with prostate-specific antigen level less than 150 ng/mL. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients received a total of 4 months of goserelin and flutamide, 2 months before and 2 months during RT. A radiation dose of 65 to 70 Gy was given to the prostate and a dose of 44 to 50 Gy to the pelvic lymph nodes. Patients were randomly assigned to receive no additional therapy (short-term [ST]AD-RT) or 24 months of goserelin (LTAD-RT); 1,554 patients were entered onto the study. RESULTS The LTAD-RT arm showed significant improvement in all efficacy end points except overall survival (OS; 80.0% v 78.5% at 5 years, P =.73), compared with the STAD-RT arm. In a subset of patients not part of the original study design, with tumors assigned Gleason scores of 8 to 10 by the contributing institutions, the LTAD-RT arm had significantly better OS (81.0% v 70.7%, P =.044). There was a small but significant increase in the frequency of late radiation grades 3, 4, and 5 gastrointestinal toxicity ascribed to the LTAD-RT arm (2.6% v 1.2% at 5 years, P =.037), the cause of which is not clear. CONCLUSION The RTOG 92-02 trial supports the addition of LT adjuvant AD to STAD with RT for T2c-4 PC. In the exploratory subset analysis of patients with Gleason scores 8 to 10, LT adjuvant AD resulted in a survival advantage.

Phase III trial of androgen suppression using goserelin in unfavorable-prognosis carcinoma of the prostate treated with definitive radiotherapy: report of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Protocol 85-31.

PURPOSE Although androgen suppression results in a tumor response/remission in the majority of patients with carcinoma of the prostate, its potential value as an adjuvant has not been substantiated. MATERIALS AND METHODS In 1987, the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) initiated a randomized phase III trial of adjuvant goserelin in definitively irradiated patients with carcinoma of the prostate. A total of 977 patients had been accessioned to the study. Of these, 945 remained analyzable: 477 on the adjuvant arm and 468 on the observation arm. RESULTS Actuarial projections show that at 5 years, 84% of patients on the adjuvant goserelin arm and 71% on the observation arm remain without evidence of local recurrence (P < .0001). The corresponding figures for freedom from distant metastases and disease-free survival are 83% versus 70% (P < .001) and 60% and 44% (P < .0001). If prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level greater than 1.5 ng is included as a failure (after > or = 1 year), the 5-year disease-free survival rate on the adjuvant goserelin arm is 53% versus 20% on the observation arm (P < .0001). The 5-year survival rate (for the entire population) is 75% on the adjuvant arm versus 71% on the observation arm (P = .52). However, in patients with centrally reviewed tumors with a Gleason score of 8 to 10, the difference in actuarial 5-year survival (66% on the adjuvant goserelin arm v 55% on the observation arm) reaches statistical significance (P = .03). CONCLUSION Application of androgen suppression as an adjuvant to definitive radiotherapy has been associated with a highly significant improvement in local control and freedom from disease progression. At this point, with a median follow-up time of 4.5 years, a significant improvement in survival has been observed only in patients with centrally reviewed tumors with a Gleason score of 8 to 10.

Ten-Year Follow-Up of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Protocol 92-02: A Phase III Trial of the Duration of Elective Androgen Deprivation in Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE To determine whether adding 2 years of androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) improved outcome for patients electively treated with ADT before and during radiation therapy (RT). PATIENTS AND METHODS Prostate cancer patients with T2c-T4 prostate cancer with no extra pelvic lymph node involvement and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) less than 150 ng/mL were included. All patients received 4 months of goserelin and flutamide before and during RT. They were randomized to no further ADT (short-term ADT [STAD] + RT) or 24 months of goserelin (long-term ADT [LTAD] + RT). A total of 1,554 patients were entered. RT was 45 Gy to the pelvic nodes and 65 to 70 Gy to the prostate. Median follow-up of all survival patients is 11.31 and 11.27 years for the two arms. RESULTS At 10 years, the LTAD + RT group showed significant improvement over the STAD + RT group for all end points except overall survival: disease-free survival (13.2% v 22.5%; P < .0001), disease-specific survival (83.9% v 88.7%; P = .0042), local progression (22.2% v 12.3%; P < .0001), distant metastasis (22.8% v 14.8%; P < .0001), biochemical failure (68.1% v 51.9%; P <or= .0001), and overall survival (51.6% v 53.9%, P = .36). One subgroup analyzed consisted of all cancers with a Gleason score of 8 to 10 cancers. An overall survival difference was observed (31.9% v 45.1%; P = .0061), as well as in all other end points herein. CONCLUSION LTAD as delivered in this study for the treatment of locally advanced prostate cancer is superior to STAD for all end points except survival. A survival advantage for LTAD + RT in the treatment of locally advanced tumors with a Gleason score of 8 to 10 suggests that this should be the standard of treatment for these high-risk patients.

Androgen deprivation with radiation therapy compared with radiation therapy alone for locally advanced prostatic carcinoma: a randomized comparative trial of the radiation therapy oncology group

OBJECTIVES Androgen deprivation therapy before and during radiation therapy could, by reducing tumor volume, increase local tumor control, disease-free survival, and overall survival in patients with locally advanced adenocarcinomas of the prostate. METHODS In a randomized controlled clinical trial, patients with large T2, T3, and T4 prostate tumors, but no evidence of osseous metastasis, were randomized to receive goserelin 3.6 mg subcutaneously every 4 weeks and flutamide 250 mg orally three times daily 2 months before and during the radiation therapy course (Arm I) compared with radiation therapy alone (Arm II). Pelvic irradiation was administered with 1.8 to 2.0 Gy per day to a total dose of 45 +/- 1 Gy followed by a boost to the prostate target volume to a total dose of 65 to 70 Gy. RESULTS Of 471 randomized patients, 456 were evaluable, 226 on Arm I and 230 on Arm II. With a median potential follow-up of 4.5 years, the cumulative incidence of local progression at 5 years was 46% in Arm I and 71% in Arm II (P < 0.001). The 5-year incidence of distant metastasis on Arms I and II was 34% and 41%, respectively (P = 0.09). Progression-free survival rates including normal prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels for 396 patients with at least one PSA recorded were 36% in Arm I and 15% in Arm II at 5 years (P < 0.001). At this time, no significant difference in overall survival could be detected (P = 0.7). CONCLUSIONS Short-term androgen deprivation with radiation therapy results in a marked increase in local control and disease-free survival compared with pelvic irradiation alone in patients with locally advanced carcinoma of the prostate. Long-term surveillance is required to assess effects on overall survival.

Short-Term Neoadjuvant Androgen Deprivation Therapy and External-Beam Radiotherapy for Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer: Long-Term Results of RTOG 8610

PURPOSE Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 8610 was the first phase III randomized trial to evaluate neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in combination with external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in men with locally advanced prostate cancer. This report summarizes long-term follow-up results. MATERIALS AND METHODS Between 1987 and 1991, 456 assessable patients (median age, 70 years) were enrolled. Eligible patients had bulky (5 x 5 cm) tumors (T2-4) with or without pelvic lymph node involvement according to the 1988 American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM staging system. Patients received combined ADT that consisted of goserelin 3.6 mg every 4 weeks and flutamide 250 mg tid for 2 months before and concurrent with EBRT, or they received EBRT alone. Study end points included overall survival (OS), disease-specific mortality (DSM), distant metastasis (DM), disease-free survival (DFS), and biochemical failure (BF). RESULTS Ten-year OS estimates (43% v 34%) and median survival times (8.7 v 7.3 years) favored ADT and EBRT, respectively; however, these differences did not reach statistical significance (P = .12). There was a statistically significant improvement in 10-year DSM (23% v 36%; P = .01), DM (35% v 47%; P = .006), DFS (11% v 3%; P < .0001), and BF (65% v 80%; P < .0001) with the addition of ADT, but no differences were observed in the risk of fatal cardiac events. CONCLUSION The addition of 4 months of ADT to EBRT appears to have a dramatic impact on clinically meaningful end points in men with locally advanced disease with no statistically significant impact on the risk of fatal cardiac events.

Age and racial distribution of prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia

AIMS To study the prevalence, extent and evolution of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN) in African-American and Caucasian men of a wide age range in order to help clarify the role this lesion may play in the racial differences of prostate cancer. METHODS The lesion was documented in step-sectioned, entirely submitted prostates of two study populations: 525 autopsied men who died of trauma and 1,000 patients who had retropubic radical prostatectomy for clinically localized carcinoma of the prostate. RESULTS We found that HGPIN starts in young individuals and increases progressively with advancing age in both races but is more prevalent in African-Americans. Additionally, the more extensive form of HGPIN with multifocal or diffuse involvement of the gland appears at a younger age in African-Americans. CONCLUSIONS Microscopic foci of HGPIN can be documented in males in the 3rd and 4th decades with the lesion becoming more extensive in older men. The finding that HGPIN is both more prevalent and its more diffuse form appears earlier in African-Americans, indicates a potentially important role for this lesion in the race-related discrepancies associated with this disease.

Limited role of radionuclide bone scintigraphy in patients with prostate specific antigen elevations after radical prostatectomy

PURPOSE Bone scintigrams of patients with increasing serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) after radical prostatectomy are only rarely positive. We identify clinical parameters that would improve our ability to select patients for this imaging study. MATERIALS AND METHODS We reviewed all bone scintigrams done at our institution between 1991 and 1996 in patients with persistently increasing serum PSA after radical prostatectomy. What prompted the clinician to obtain the bone scintigram was trigger PSA (tPSA). The rate of increase in PSA to tPSA was measured by tPSA/time from radical prostatectomy (slope 1) and tPSA/time from last undetectable PSA (slope 2). These parameters were evaluated together with standard clinicopathological data in univariate and multivariate analyses to determine the ability to predict the bone scintigram result. RESULTS In univariate analysis tPSA (p = 0.003), slope 1 (p = 0.005) and slope 2 (p = 0.004) were useful in predicting the bone scintigram result but pathological stage, Gleason score, preoperative PSA and time to recurrence were not. In multivariate analysis the single most useful parameter in predicting the bone scintigram result was tPSA (p = 0.01). Based on a logistic regression model the probability of a positive bone scintigram was less than 5% until tPSA increased to 40 to 45 ng./ml. CONCLUSIONS In patients with increasing serum PSA after radical prostatectomy current serum PSA is the best predictor of the bone scintigram result. Furthermore, there is limited usefulness of bone scintigraphy until PSA increases above 30 to 40 ng./ml.