Reporting trends, practices, and resource utilization in neuroendocrine tumors of the prostate gland: a survey among thirty-nine genitourinary pathologists

Background: Neuroendocrine differentiation in the prostate gland ranges from clinically insignificant neuroendocrine differentiation detected with markers in an otherwise conventional prostatic adenocarcinoma to a lethal high-grade small/large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma. The concept of neuroendocrine differentiation in prostatic adenocarcinoma has gained considerable importance due to its prognostic and therapeutic ramifications and pathologists play a pivotal role in its recognition. However, its awareness, reporting, and resource utilization practice patterns among pathologists are largely unknown. Methods: Representative examples of different spectrums of neuroendocrine differentiation along with a detailed questionnaire were shared among 39 urologic pathologists using the survey monkey software. Participants were specifically questioned about the use and awareness of the 2016 WHO classification of neuroendocrine tumors of the prostate, understanding of the clinical significance of each entity, and use of different immunohistochemical (IHC) markers. De-identified respondent data were analyzed. Results: A vast majority (90%) of the participants utilize IHC markers to confirm the diagnosis of small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma. A majority (87%) of the respondents were in agreement regarding the utilization of type of IHC markers for small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma for which 85% of the pathologists agreed that determination of the site of origin of a high-grade neuroendocrine carcinoma is not critical, as these are treated similarly. In the setting of mixed carcinomas, 62% of respondents indicated that they provide quantification and grading of the acinar component. There were varied responses regarding the prognostic implication of focal neuroendocrine cells in an otherwise conventional acinar adenocarcinoma and for Paneth cell-like differentiation. The classification of large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma was highly varied, with only 38% agreement in the illustrated case. Finally, despite the recommendation not to perform neuroendocrine markers in the absence of morphologic evidence of neuroendocrine differentiation, 62% would routinely utilize IHC in the work-up of a Gleason score 5 + 5 = 10 acinar adenocarcinoma and its differentiation from high-grade neuroendocrine carcinoma. Conclusion: There is a disparity in the practice utilization patterns among the urologic pathologists with regard to diagnosing high-grade neuroendocrine carcinoma and in understanding the clinical significance of focal neuroendocrine cells in an otherwise conventional acinar adenocarcinoma and Paneth cell-like neuroendocrine differentiation. There seems to have a trend towards overutilization of IHC to determine neuroendocrine differentiation in the absence of neuroendocrine features on morphology. The survey results suggest a need for further refinement and development of standardized guidelines for the classification and reporting of neuroendocrine differentiation in the prostate gland

Status of TMPRSS2–ERG fusion in prostate cancer patients from India: correlation with clinico-pathological details and TMPRSS2 Met160Val polymorphism

Background: Prostate cancer (PCa) shows considerable clinical heterogeneity that has been primarily attributed to variable molecular alterations. TMPRSS2–ERG fusion is one such molecular subtype that has been associated with predominantly poor prognosis. More recently, a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in the TMPRSS2 gene rs12329760 C>T (Met160Val) has been shown to positively correlate with the fusion status and also to be associated with increased risk for PCa. The aim of the present study is to determine the frequency of TMPRSS2–ERG fusion and association of rs12329760 in Indian PCa patients with fusion status. Methods: TMPRSS2–ERG fusion by fluorescence in situ hybridization was determined in 102 of 150 PCa biopsy-proven cases. Genotyping for rs12329760 was performed on the entire cohort of 150 cases by Sanger sequencing. Results: TMPRSS2–ERG fusion was seen in 27 of 102 (26%) cases. Fusion-positive patterns in this study showed fusion by translocation in nine of 27 cases (33.5%), by deletion in six of 27 (22%) cases, and by insertion in 12 of 27 cases (44.5%). No association of the fusion status with Gleason Score, pattern, or perineural invasion was seen. The TMPRSS2 SNP rs12329760 ‘T’ allele was prevalent with a frequency of 0.27 in the PCa patients. The SNP was significantly associated with fusion [odds ratio (OR) = 2.176, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.012–4.684, P = 0.04], more specifically fusion by deletion (P = 0.04). Conclusion: The results provided here determine the frequency of TMPRSS2–ERG fusions (26%) in a fairly large cohort of Indian PCa cases and also the association of rs12329760 SNP with TMPRSS2–ERG fusion. No association with other clinico-pathological features was observed. Future studies with clinical outcomes are warranted in this population. Keywords: Fluorescence in situ hybridization, Indians, Prostate cancer, rs12329760, Single nucleotide polymorphism, TMPRSS2–ER