Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-dfsvx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-29T00:38:07.753Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 13 - ♂♀ Prostate and Breast Pathology: Similarities and Differences

from Section 3 - Prostatic Lesions and Tumors

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2019

By
Ferran Algaba  and
Vicente Peg
Edited by
Maria Rosaria Raspollini  and
Antonio Lopez-Beltran
Maria Rosaria Raspollini
Affiliation:
University Hospital Careggi, Florence
Antonio Lopez-Beltran
Affiliation:
Cordoba University Medical School
Get access
Type
Chapter
Information
Gynecologic and Urologic Pathology
Similarities, Differences and Challenges
 , pp. 155 - 170
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Risbridger, G.P., Davis, I.D., Birrell, S.N., et al. Breast and prostate cancer: more similar than different. Nat Rev Cancer 2010; 10: 205–212.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McNeal, J.E.. Normal histology of the prostate. Am J Surg Pathol 1988; 12: 619–633.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McNeal, J.E.. Regional morphology and pathology of the prostate. Am J Clin Pathol 1968; 49: 347–357.Google Scholar
Schnitt, S. J., Millis, R.R., Hanby, A. M., et al. The breast. In: Mills, S.E., editor, Diagnostic Surgical Pathology, 4th edn. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2004, p. 323–395.Google Scholar
Epstein, J.I.. Diagnosis and reporting of limited adenocarcinoma of the prostate on needle biopsy. Mod Pathol 2004; 17: 307–315.Google Scholar
Wright, G.L., Haley, C., Beckett, M.L., et al. Expression of prostate-specific membrane antigen in normal, benign, and malignant prostate tissues. Urol Oncol 1995; 1: 18–28.Google Scholar
Deftos, L.J., Granin, A.. Parathyroid hormone-related protein, and calcitonin gene products in neuroendocrine prostate cancer. Prostate 1998; S8: 23–31.3.0.CO;2-H>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xue, Y., Smedts, F., Verhofstad, A., et al. Cell kinetics of prostate exocrine and neuroendocrine epithelium and their differential interrelationship: new perspectives. Prostate 1998; S8: 62–73.Google Scholar
Isaacs, J.T., Coffey, D.S.. Etiology and disease process of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Prostate Suppl 1989; 2: 33–50.Google Scholar
Algaba, F.. Pathophysiology of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Eur Urol 1994; S1: 3–5.Google Scholar
Chagas, M.A., Babinski, M.A., Costa, W.S., et al. Stromal and acinar components of the transition zone in normal and hyperplastic human prostate. BJU Int 2002; 89: 699–702.Google Scholar
Rosenblum, M.K., Purrazzella, R., Rosen, P.P.. Is microglandular adenosis a precancerous disease?: a study of carcinoma arising therein. Am J Surg Pathol 1986; 10: 237–245.Google Scholar
Montironi, R., Mazzucchelli, R., Algaba, F., et al. Morphological identification of the patterns of prostatic intraepithelial Neoplasia and their importance. J Clin Pathol 2000; 53: 655–665.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Epstein, J.I., Grignon, D.J., Humphrey, P.A., et al. Interobserver reproducibility in the diagnosis of prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia. Am J Surg Pathol 1995; 19: 873–886.Google Scholar
Epstein, J.I.. Precursor lesions to prostatic adenocarcinoma. Virchows Arch 2009; 454: 1–16.Google Scholar
Tavassoli, F.A., Norris, H.J.. A comparison of the results of long-term follow-up for atypical intraductal hyperplasia and intraductal hyperplasia of the breast. Cancer 1990; 65: 518–529.Google Scholar
Page, D.L., Dupont, W.D., Rogers, L.W., et al. Atypical hyperplastic lesions of the female breast: a long-term follow-up study. Cancer 1985; 55: 2698–2708.Google Scholar
Lakhani, S.R., Ellis, I.O., Schnitt, S.J., et al., editors. WHO Classification of Tumours of the Breast. Lyon: IARC Press; 2012.Google Scholar
Algaba, F., Epstein, J.I., Aldape, H.C., et al. Assessment of prostate carcinoma in core needle biopsy: definition of minimal criteria for the diagnosis of cancer in biopsy material. Cancer 1996; 78: 376–381.Google Scholar
Thorson, P., Humphrey, P.A.. Minimal adenocarcinoma in prostate needle biopsy tissue. Am J Clin Pathol 2000; 114: 896–909.Google Scholar
McNeal, J.E., Redwine, E.A., Freiha, F.S., et al. Zonal distribution of prostatic adenocarcinoma: correlation with histologic pattern and direction of spread. Am J Surg Pathol 1988; 12: 897–906.Google Scholar
Abdelsayed, G.A., Danial, T., Kaswick, J.A., et al. Tumors of the anterior prostate: implications for diagnosis and treatment. Urology 2015; 85: 1224–1228.Google Scholar
Erbersdobler, A., Augustin, H., Schlomm, T., et al. Prostate cancers in the transition zone. Part 1: pathological aspects. BJU Int 2004; 94: 1221–1225.Google Scholar
Egawa, S., Takashima, R., Matsumoto, K., et al. Infrequent involvement of the anterior base in low-risk patients with clinically localized prostate cancer and its possible significance in definitive radiation therapy. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2000; 30: 126–130.Google Scholar
Arora, R., Koch, M.O., Eble, J.N., et al. Heterogeneity of Gleason grade in multifocal adenocarcinoma of the prostate. Cancer 2004; 1(100): 2362–2366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noguchi, M., Stamey, T.A., McNeal, J.E., et al. Prognostic factors for multifocal prostate cancer in radical prostatectomy specimens: lack of significance of secondary cancers. J Urol 2003; 170: 459–463.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Epstein, J.I., Egevad, L., Amin, M.B., et al.; Grading Committee. The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma: definition of grading patterns and proposal for a new grading system. Am J Surg Pathol 2016; 40: 244–252.Google Scholar
Epstein, J.I., Zelefsky, M.J., Sjoberg, D.D., et al. A contemporary prostate cancer grading system: a validated alternative to the Gleason score. Eur Urol 2016; 69: 428–435.Google Scholar
Bloom, H.J., Richardson, W.W.. Histological grading and prognosis in breast cancer: a study of 1409 cases of which 359 have been followed for 15 years. Br J Cancer 1957; 11: 359–377.Google Scholar
Elston, C.W., Ellis, I.O.. Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology 1991; 19: 403–410.Google Scholar
Guo, C.C, Epstein, J.I.. Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate on needle biopsy: histologic features and clinical significance. Mod Pathol 2006; 19: 1528–1535.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Varma, M., Egevad, L., Algaba, F., et al. Intraductal carcinoma of prostate reporting practice: a survey of expert European uropathologists. J Clin Pathol 2016; 69: 852–857.Google Scholar
The Consensus Conference Committee. Consensus Conference on the Classification of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ. Cancer 1990; 80: 1798–1802.Google Scholar
Humphrey, P.A.. Histological variants of prostatic carcinoma and their significance. Histopathology 2012; 60: 59–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sorlie, T., Perou, C.M., Tibshirani, R., et al. Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2001; 98: 10869–10874.Google Scholar
Sotiriou, C., Pusztai, L.. Gene-expression signatures in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2009; 360: 790–800.Google Scholar
Herawi, M., Epstein, J.I.. Specialized stromal tumors of the prostate: a clinicopathologic study of 50 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 2006; 30: 694–704.Google Scholar
Bates, A.W., Baithun, S.I.. Secondary solid neoplasms of the prostate: a clinico-pathological series of 51 cases. Virchows Arch 2002; 440: 392–396.Google Scholar
Fraga-Guedes, C., Gobbi, H., Mastropasqua, M.G., et al. Primary and secondary angiosarcomas of the breast: a single institution experience. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2011; 132: 1081–1088.Google Scholar
Di Bonito, L., Luchi, M., Giarelli, L., et al. Metastatic tumors to the female breast: an autopsy study of 12 cases. Pathol Res Pract 1991; 187: 432–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hajdu, S.I., Urban, J.A.. Cancers metastatic to the breast. Cancer 1972; 9: 1961–1966.Google Scholar
Aras, E.C., Ali, I.S., Mehmet, A.K., et al. Metastatic tumors in the breast: report of 5 cases and review of the literature. Clin Breast Cancer 2007; 7: 638–643.Google Scholar
Macklin, M.T.. The genetic basis of human mammary cancer. In: Proceedings of the Second National Cancer Conference. New York: American Chemical Society; 1954, p. 1074–1087.Google Scholar
Thiessen, E.U.. Concerning a familial association between breast cancer and both prostatic and uterine malignancies. Cancer 1974; 34: 1102–1107.Google Scholar
Tulinius, H., Egilsson, V., Olafsdóttir, G.H., et al. Risk of prostate, ovarian, and endometrial cancer among relatives of women with breast cancer. Br Med J 1992; 305(6858): 855–857.Google Scholar
Anderson, D.E., Badzioch, M.D.. Breast cancer risks in relatives of male breast cancer patients. J Natl Cancer Inst 1992; 84: 1114–1117.Google Scholar
Andrieu, N., Clave, F., Auquier, A., et al. Association between breast cancer and family malignancies. Eur J Cancer 1991; 27: 244–248.Google Scholar
Rosenblatt, K.A., Thomas, D.B., McTiernan, A., et al. Breast cancer in men: aspects of familial aggregation. J Natl Cancer Inst 1991; 83: 849–854.Google Scholar
López-Otín, C., Diamandis, E.P.. Breast and prostate cancer: an analysis of common epidemiological, genetic, and biochemical features. Endocr Rev 1998; 19: 365–396.Google Scholar
Wooster, R., Mangion, J., Eeles, R., et al. A germline mutation in the androgen receptor gene in two brothers with breast cancer and Reifenstein syndrome. Nat Genet 1992; 2: 132–134.Google Scholar
Lobaccaro, J.M., Lumbroso, S., Belon, C., et al. Androgen receptor gene mutation in male breast cancer. Hum Mol Genet 1993; 2: 1799–1802.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lobaccaro, J.M., Lumbroso, S., Belon, C., et al. Male breast cancer and the androgen receptor gene. Nat Genet 1993; 5: 109–110.Google Scholar
Hall, R.E., Aspinall, J.O., Horsfall, D.J., et al. Expression of the androgen receptor and an androgen-responsive protein, apolipoprotein D, in human breast cancer. Br J Cancer 1996; 74: 1175–1180.Google Scholar
Zhu, X., Daffada, A.A., Chan, C.M., et al. Identification of an exon 3 deletion splice variant androgen receptor mRNA in human breast cancer. Int J Cancer 1997; 72: 574–580.Google Scholar
Mersch, J., Jackson, M.A., Park, M., et al. Cancers associated with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations other than breast and ovarian. Cancer 2015; 121: 269–275.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walker, R.A., Jones, J.L., Chappell, S., et al. Molecular pathology of breast cancer and its application to clinical management. Cancer Metastasis Rev 1997; 16: 5–27.Google Scholar
Barbacid, M.. Ras genes. Annu Rev Biochem 1987; 56: 779–827.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spencer, C.A., Groudine, M.. Control of c-myc regulation in normal and neoplastic cells. Adv Cancer Res 1991; 56: 1–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barbier, C.E., Tomlins, S.A.. The prostate cancer genome: perspectives and potential. Urol Oncol 2014; 32(53): e15–e22.Google Scholar
Jonsson, G., Staaf, J., Vallon-Christersson, J., et al. Genomic subtypes of breast cancer identified by array-comparative genomic hybridization display distinct molecular and clinical characteristics. Breast Cancer Res 2010; 12: R42.Google Scholar
Andre, F., Job, B., Dessen, P., et al. Molecular characterization of breast cancer with high-resolution oligonucleotide comparative genomic hybridization array. Clin Cancer Res 2009; 15: 441–451.Google Scholar
Partin, A.W., Catan, M.W., Subong, E.N.P., et al. Combination of prostate specific antigen, clinical stage, and Gleason score to predict pathological stage of localized prostate cancer: a multi-institutional up-date. JAMA 1997; 277: 1445–1451.Google Scholar
Kakehi, Y., Kamoto, T., Okuno, H., et al. Peri-operative frozen section examination of pelvic nodes is unnecessary for the majority of clinically localized prostate cancers in the prostate-specific antigen era. Int J Urol 2000; 7: 281–286.Google Scholar
Beissner, R.S., Stricker, J.B., Speights, V.O., et al. Frozen section diagnosis of metastatic prostate adenocarcinoma in pelvis lymphadenectomy compared with nomogram prediction of metastasis. Urology 2002; 59: 721–725.Google Scholar
Fasolis, G., Degiuli, P., Lancia, M., et al. Periprostatic tissues intraoperative frozen section during retrograde radical retropubic prostatectomy. Arch Ital Urol Androl 2006; 78: 107–111.Google Scholar
Dillenburg, W., Poulakis, V., Witzsch, U., et al. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the value of intraoperative frozen sections. Eur Urol 2005; 48: 614–621.Google Scholar
Shah, O., Melamed, J., Lepor, H.. Analysis of apical soft tissue margins during radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol 2001; 165: 1943–1948.Google Scholar
Giuliano, A.E., Hunt, K.K., Ballman, K.V., et al. Axillary dissection vs no axillary dissection in women with invasive breast cancer and sentinel node metastasis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2011; 305: 569–575.Google Scholar
Tsujimoto, M., Nakabayashi, K., Yoshidome, K., et al. One-step nucleic acid amplification for intraoperative detection of lymph node metastasis in breast cancer patients. Clin Cancer Res 2007; 13: 4807–4816.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Visser, M., Jiwa, M., Horstman, A., et al. Intra-operative rapid diagnostic method based on CK19 mRNA expression for the detection of lymph node metastases in breast cancer. Int J Cancer 2008; 122: 2562–2567.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schem, C., Maass, N., Bauerschlag, D. O., et al. One-step nucleic acid amplification-a molecular method for the detection of lymph node metastases in breast cancer patients; results of the German study group. Virchows Arch 2009; 454: 203–210.Google Scholar
Peg, V., Espinosa-Bravo, M., Vieites, B., et al. Intraoperative molecular analysis of total tumor load in sentinel lymph node: a new predictor of axillary status in early breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2013; 139: 87–93.Google Scholar
Espinosa-Bravo, M., Sansano, I., Pérez-Hoyos, S., et al. Prediction of non-sentinel lymph node metastasis in early breast cancer by assessing total tumoral load in the sentinel lymph node by molecular assay. Eur J Surg Oncol 2013; 39: 766–773.Google Scholar
Rubio, I.T., Espinosa-Bravo, M., Rodrigo, M., et al. Nomogram including the total tumoral load in the sentinel nodes assessed by one-step nucleic acid amplification as a new factor for predicting nonsentinel lymph node metastasis in breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2014; 147: 371–380.Google Scholar
Piñero, A., Canteras, M., Moreno, A., et al. Multicenter validation of two nomograms to predict non-sentinel node involvement in breast cancer. Clin Transl Oncol 2013; 15: 117–123.Google Scholar
Jacobs, L.. Positive margins: the challenge continues for breast surgeons. Ann Surg Oncol 2008; 15: 1271–1272.Google Scholar
Pleijhuis, R.G., Graafland, M., de Vries, J., et al. Obtaining adequate surgical margins in breast-conserving therapy for patients with early-stage breast cancer: current modalities and future directions. Ann Surg Oncol 2009; 16: 2717–2730.Google Scholar
Trpkov, K., Thompson, J., Kulaga, A., et al. How much tissue sampling is required when unsuspected minimal prostate carcinoma is identified on transurethral resection? Arch Pathol Lab Med 2008; 132: 1313–1316.Google Scholar
Samaratunga, H., Montironi, R., True, L., et al. International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Handling and Staging of Radical Prostatectomy Specimens. Working group 1: specimen handling. Mod Pathol 2011; 24: 6–15.Google Scholar
Azu, M., Abrahamse, P., Katz, S.J., et al. What is an adequate margin for breast-conserving surgery? Surgeon attitudes and correlates. Ann Surg Oncol 2010; 17: 558–563.Google Scholar
Weaver, D.L.. Pathology evaluation of sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer: protocol recommendations and rationale. Mod Pathol 2010; 23(Suppl 2): S26–S32.Google Scholar
Weaver, D.L., Ashikaga, T., Krag, D.N., et al. Effect of occult metastases on survival in node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2011; 364: 412–421.Google Scholar
Giuliano, A.E., Hawes, D., Ballman, K.V., et al. Association of occult metastases in sentinel lymph nodes and bone marrow with survival among women with early-stage invasive breast cancer. JAMA 2011; 306: 385–393.Google Scholar
Weaver, D.L., Ashikaga, T., Krag, D.N., et al. Effect of occult metastases on survival in node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2011; 364: 412–421.Google Scholar
Giuliano, A.E., Hawes, D., Ballman, K.V., et al. Association of occult metastases in sentinel lymph nodes and bone marrow with survival among women with early-stage invasive breast cancer. JAMA 2011; 306: 385–393.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×