Glandular Lesions of the Urinary Bladder: Diagnostic and Molecular Updates.

Glandular lesions in the urinary tract or their associated pathologies can pose a diagnostic challenge. There is a variety of benign alterations and tumor types that need to be taken into account in differential diagnostic considerations. In recent times, efforts for better defining these alterations or lesions both on the histopathological and molecular levels have been undertaken. This article will provide an update on current diagnostic and molecular considerations of these lesions.

Cystic Features in Renal Epithelial Neoplasms and Their Increasing Clinical and Pathologic Significance.

Most cystic renal tumors after resection (Boniak IIF to IV cysts) have an indolent course despite the significantly higher proportion of malignant [ie, renal cell carcinoma (RCC)] diagnosis. Most cystic renal tumors have clear cell histology that include cystic clear cell RCC and multilocular cystic renal neoplasm of low malignant potential (MCNLMP). There is growing evidence to suggest that MCNLMP, cystic clear cell RCC, and noncystic clear cell RCC form a cystic-to-solid biological spectrum with MCNLMP representing the most indolent form and with cystic clear cell RCC behaving better than noncystic (solid) clear cell RCC. Extensively (>75%) cystic clear cell RCC also has an excellent outcome similar to MCNLMP stressing the need to reevaluate the histologic criteria that separate these 2 cystic clear cell tumors. Other tumors with clear cells that can be extensively cystic such as the recently reclassified noncancerous clear cell papillary renal tumor and the newly described MED15::TFE3 RCC also have indolent course and may mimic MCNLMP. Cystic features occur also in renal tumors with nonclear cell histology including tumors capable of metastasis such as acquired cystic disease-associated, tubulocystic, fumarate hydratase-deficient, and eosinophilic solid and cystic RCCs. Cystic imaging presentation of some renal tumors such as papillary RCC can be attributed in part to pseudocystic necrosis and hemorrhage. It is important to know that tubulocystic RCC may have a lower Bosniak class presentation that overlaps with benign renal cysts (Bosniak I to IIF) that are managed conservatively. This review highlights the cystic renal tumors with clear cell and nonclear cell morphologies including some novel RCC subtypes that may have cystic features. The presence of cystic features and their extent may aid in the classification and prognostication of renal neoplasms underscoring its increasing importance in the pathologic diagnosis and reporting of renal neoplasia.

NKX3.1 Expression in Non-Prostatic Tumors and Characterizing its Expression in Esophageal/Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma.

The NKX3.1 immunohistochemical stain is widely recognized as a highly sensitive and specific marker for prostate adenocarcinoma. Nevertheless, its expression has been documented in various nonprostatic tissues and malignancies. This review aims to provide an overview of NKX3.1 expression in diverse tumor types, with a specific focus on its aberrant expression in esophageal/gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (E/GE-ADC). In our investigation, we explored the expression of NKX3.1 in a series of E/GE-ADC to shed light on its prevalence in this tumor category. A total of 50 samples, comprising primary and metastatic E/GE-ADC specimens from 34 patients, were subjected to immunohistochemical analysis. Stained sections were scored based on the intensity and distribution-categorized as negative, weak, moderate, or strong in either a focal or diffuse pattern. Strong staining corresponds to the intensity observed in normal prostate controls, while focal and diffuse staining denote <50% and ≥50% of tumor nuclei staining positive, respectively. Our semiquantitative scoring revealed that 6 (12%) of the primary and metastatic E/GE-ADC specimens exhibited variable positivity for NKX3.1. This finding suggests that E/GE-ADC can sporadically stain positive for NKX3.1, introducing potential challenges in definitively determining the primary site of origin in certain clinical scenarios. Along with a literature review of NKX3.1 expression in other tumor types, our study provides additional important information about the extent to which this immunostain can be seen in E/GE-ADCs, which, to our knowledge, has not been reported.

Renaming Grade Group 1 Prostate "Cancer" From a Pathology Perspective: A Call for Multidisciplinary Discussion.

Despite the innovations made to enhance smarter screening and conservative management for low-grade prostate cancer, overdiagnosis, and overtreatment remains a major health care problem. Driven by the primary goal of reducing harm to the patients, relabeling of nonlethal grade group 1 (GG 1) prostate cancer has been proposed but faced varying degrees of support and objection from clinicians and pathologists. GG 1 tumor exhibits histologic (invasive) and molecular features of cancer but paradoxically, if pure, is unable to metastasize, rarely extends out of the prostate, and if resected, has a cancer-specific survival approaching 100%. Most of the arguments against relabeling GG 1 relate to concerns of missing a higher-grade component through the unsampled area at biopsy. However, the designation of tumor benignity or malignancy should not be based on the shortcomings of a diagnostic procedure and sampling errors. This review explores possible solutions, mainly the feasibility of renaming GG 1 in radical prostatectomy (RP) with ramifications in biopsy diagnosis, acceptable for both pathologists and clinicians. One workable approach is to rename GG 1 in RP with a cautious neutral or nonbenign non-cancer term (eg, acinar neoplasm) using "defined criteria" that will stop the indiscriminate reporting of every GG 1 in biopsy as carcinoma including eventual insignificant microtumors in RPs. Use of a corresponding noncommittal term at biopsy while commenting on the possibility of an undersampled nonindolent cancer, might reduce the pathologist's concerns about upgrading. Dropping the word "carcinoma" in biopsy preempts the negative consequences of labeling the patient with cancer, including unnecessary definitive therapy (the root cause of overtreatment). Renaming should retain the status quo of contemporary grading and risk stratifications for management algorithms while trying to minimize overtreatment. However, the optimal approach to find answers to this issue is through multidisciplinary discussions of key stakeholders with a specific focus on patient-centered concerns and their ramifications in our practices. GG 1 renaming has been brought up in the past and came up again despite the continued counterarguments, and if not addressed more comprehensively will likely continue to reemerge as overdiagnosis, overtreatment, and patient's sufferings persist.

Flat intraurothelial lesions of the urinary bladder-do hyperplasia, dysplasia, and atypia of unknown significance need to exist as diagnostic entities? and how to handle in routine clinical practice.

Classification of the putative flat preneoplastic and neoplastic lesions of the urothelium with features subthreshold for urothelial carcinoma in situ remains a challenging, indeed, vexing problem in diagnostic surgical pathology. This area, subtending lesions including flat urothelial hyperplasia, urothelial dysplasia, and atypia of unknown significance, has struggled under evolving classifications, changing criteria, and limited clinical actionability, all confounded by the recognized lack of diagnostic reproducibility. Herein, we review the state of the literature around these lesions, reviewing contemporary criteria and definitions, assessing the arguments in favor and against of retaining hyperplasia, dysplasia, and atypia of unknown significance as diagnostic entities. We clarify the intent of the original definitions for dysplasia as a lesion felt to be clearly neoplastic but with morphologic features that fall short of the threshold of urothelial carcinoma in situ. While several pathologists, including some experts in the field, conflate the term dysplasia with urothelial atypia of unknown significance, the latter is defined as a descriptive diagnosis term to express diagnostic uncertainty of a lesion of whether it is clearly reactive or neoplastic. Both molecular studies and clinical needs are considered, as we outline our approach on diagnosing each of these lesions in clinical practice. Recommendations are made to guide consistency and interoperability in future scholarship, and the place of these lesions in context of evolving trends in the field is considered.

Multi-Site Concordance of Diffusion-Weighted Imaging Quantification for Assessing Prostate Cancer Aggressiveness.

BACKGROUND: Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) is commonly used to detect prostate cancer, and a major clinical challenge is differentiating aggressive from indolent disease. PURPOSE: To compare 14 site-specific parametric fitting implementations applied to the same dataset of whole-mount pathologically validated DWI to test the hypothesis that cancer differentiation varies with different fitting algorithms. STUDY TYPE: Prospective. POPULATION: Thirty-three patients prospectively imaged prior to prostatectomy. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 3 T, field-of-view optimized and constrained undistorted single-shot DWI sequence. ASSESSMENT: Datasets, including a noise-free digital reference object (DRO), were distributed to the 14 teams, where locally implemented DWI parameter maps were calculated, including mono-exponential apparent diffusion coefficient (MEADC), kurtosis (K), diffusion kurtosis (DK), bi-exponential diffusion (BID), pseudo-diffusion (BID*), and perfusion fraction (F). The resulting parametric maps were centrally analyzed, where differentiation of benign from cancerous tissue was compared between DWI parameters and the fitting algorithms with a receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (ROC AUC). STATISTICAL TEST: Levene's test, P < 0.05 corrected for multiple comparisons was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The DRO results indicated minimal discordance between sites. Comparison across sites indicated that K, DK, and MEADC had significantly higher prostate cancer detection capability (AUC range = 0.72-0.76, 0.76-0.81, and 0.76-0.80 respectively) as compared to bi-exponential parameters (BID, BID*, F) which had lower AUC and greater between site variation (AUC range = 0.53-0.80, 0.51-0.81, and 0.52-0.80 respectively). Post-processing parameters also affected the resulting AUC, moving from, for example, 0.75 to 0.87 for MEADC varying cluster size. DATA CONCLUSION: We found that conventional diffusion models had consistent performance at differentiating prostate cancer from benign tissue. Our results also indicated that post-processing decisions on DWI data can affect sensitivity and specificity when applied to radiological-pathological studies in prostate cancer. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 3.

Updates in Grading of Renal Cell Carcinomas Beyond Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma and Papillary Renal Cell Carcinoma.

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends grading of clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and papillary RCC using the WHO/International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade, which is primarily based on nuclear features. As the spectrum of RCC continues to evolve, with more recently described subtypes in the past decade, literature evidence on grading these subtypes is limited or not available for some tumor types. Herein, we outline a pragmatic approach to the topic of grading RCC, dividing the contemporarily described RCC subtypes into 7 categories based on the potential clinical applicability of grading as a useful prognostic parameter: (1) RCC subtypes that are reasonably validated and recommended for WHO/ISUP grading; (2) RCC subtypes where WHO/ISUP is not applicable; (3) RCC subtypes where WHO/ISUP grading is potentially clinically useful; (4) inherently aggressive RCC subtypes where histologic classification itself confers an aggressive biologic potential; (5) renal epithelial tumors where WHO/ISUP grading provides potentially misleading prognostic implication; (6) renal epithelial neoplasms where low WHO/ISUP grade features are a prerequisite for accurate histologic classification; and (7) renal epithelial neoplasms with no or limited data on grading or incomplete understanding of the biologic potential. Our aim in outlining this approach is 2-fold: (a) identify the gaps in understanding and application of grading in RCC subtypes so that researchers in the field may perform additional studies on the basis of which the important pathologic function of assignment of grade may be recommended to be performed as a meaningful exercise across a wider spectrum of RCC; and (b) to provide guidance in the interim to surgical pathologists in terms of providing clinically useful grading information in RCC based on currently available clinicopathologic information.

Should Grade Group 1 (GG1) be called cancer?

INTRODUCTION: ISUP Grade Group 1 prostate cancer is the lowest histologic grade of prostate cancer with a clinically indolent course. Removal of the term 'cancer' has been proposed and has historical precedent both in urothelial and thyroid carcinoma. METHODS: Evidence-based review identifying arguments for and against Grade Group 1 being referred to as cancer. RESULTS: Grade Group 1 has histologic evidence of tissue microinvasion and 0.3-3% rate of extraprostatic extension. Genomic evaluation suggests overlap of a minority of Grade Group 1 cancers with those of Grade Group 2. Conversely, Grade Group 1 tumors appear to have distinct genetic and genomic profiles from Grade Group 3 or higher tumors. Grade Group 1 has no documented ability for regional or distant metastasis and long-term follow up after treatment or active surveillance is safe with excellent oncologic outcomes. DISCUSSION: Grade Group 1 prostate cancer, while showing evidence of neoplasia on histology has a remarkably indolent natural history more akin to non-neoplastic precursor lesions. Consideration should be given to renaming Grade Group 1 prostate cancer, which has the potential to minimize overtreatment, treatment-related side effects, patient anxiety, and financial burden on the healthcare system.

Similarities and Differences in the 2019 ISUP and GUPS Recommendations on Prostate Cancer Grading: A Guide for Practicing Pathologists.

Contemporary subspecialization of practice in prostate pathology has seen a transition to complex, nuanced reporting, where a growing number of histopathologic parameters may signal differences in patient management. In this context, the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) and the Genitourinary Pathology Society (GUPS) both published proceedings papers on the grading of prostate cancer in 2019. Overall, the 2 prostate cancer grading manuscripts reached many of the same conclusions and recommendations. Yet, each consensus was conducted somewhat differently, and in a couple of key areas, each reached different conclusions and recommendations. Herein, sourced from the experience and viewpoints of members of both societies, we provide the practicing pathologist a summary of the shared recommendations, and of the discordances. It is anticipated that these 2 documents will inform future iterations of recommendations and guidelines for reporting prostate cancer by organizations such as the College of American Pathologists, the Royal College of Pathologists, and the European Society of Pathology, which will promote best practices for their respective constituents. Our goal is to provide the practicing pathologist a useful catalog of the main points of both, allowing each practitioner to make informed decisions and understand any divergent opinions as may arise between observers for individual cases.

The Genitourinary Pathology Society Update on Classification and Grading of Flat and Papillary Urothelial Neoplasia With New Reporting Recommendations and Approach to Lesions With Mixed and Early Patterns of Neoplasia.

The Genitourinary Pathology Society (GUPS) undertook a critical review of the recent advances in bladder neoplasia with a focus on issues relevant to the practicing surgical pathologist for the understanding and effective reporting of bladder cancer, emphasizing particularly on the newly accumulated evidence post-2016 World Health Organization (WHO) classification. The work is presented in 2 manuscripts. Here, in the first, we revisit the nomenclature and classification system used for grading flat and papillary urothelial lesions centering on clinical relevance, and on dilemmas related to application in routine reporting. As patients of noninvasive bladder cancer frequently undergo cystoscopy and biopsy in their typically prolonged clinical course and for surveillance of disease, we discuss morphologies presented in these scenarios which may not have readily applicable diagnostic terms in the WHO classification. The topic of inverted patterns in urothelial neoplasia, particularly when prominent or exclusive, and beyond inverted papilloma has not been addressed formally in the WHO classification. Herein we provide a through review and suggest guidelines for when and how to report such lesions. In promulgating these GUPS recommendations, we aim to provide clarity on the clinical application of these not so uncommon diagnostically challenging situations encountered in routine practice, while also importantly advocating consistent terminology which would inform future work.

Update of the International Consultation on Urological Diseases on bladder cancer 2018: non-urothelial cancers of the urinary bladder.

PURPOSE: To provide a comprehensive update of the joint consultation of the International Consultation on Urological Diseases (ICUD) for the diagnosis and management of non-urothelial cancer of the urinary bladder. METHODS: A detailed analysis of the literature was conducted reporting on the epidemiology, etiology, diagnosis, treatment and outcomes of non-urothelial cancer of the urinary bladder. An international, multidisciplinary expert committee evaluated and graded the evidence according to the Oxford System of Evidence-based Medicine modified by the ICUD. RESULTS: The major non-urothelial cancers of the urinary bladder are squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, and neuroendocrine tumors. Several other non-urothelial tumors are rare but important to identify because of their aggressive behavior when compared to urothelial bladder tumors. Radical cystectomy and urinary diversion, preceded by neoadjuvant radiation or chemotherapy in some of these tumors, is the main method or treatment for resectable disease. Adjuvant therapy is not usually successful and no novel targeted or immunotherapeutic agents have been identified to provide benefit. Patients with small cell neuroendocrine tumors of the bladder should be offered chemotherapy before surgery. Because non-urothelial cancers are usually locally advanced and/or metastatic at the time of diagnosis, 5-year survival is generally poor. CONCLUSIONS: Non-urothelial cancers of the urinary bladder are rare and mostly lack established protocols for treatment. The prognosis of most of these tumors is poor because they are usually advanced at the time of diagnosis. A multimodal treatment approach should be considered to improve outcomes.

[Comparison of UICC and AJCC 8th edition TNM classifications in uropathology]. / Comparaison des classifications TNM des 8es éditions de l'UICC et de l'AJCC en uropathologie.

The pTNM stage is one of the most important parameters in the handling of tumor patients. The pathologist plays a major role in the determination of the stage. The classifications undergo an evolution according to the state of art. The TNM system is used worldwide and allows to precise the tumor (T) and lymph node stage and the presence of distant metastasis. This system helps to stratify patient groups and determine their prognosis. In 2017, the Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) and the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) published their 8th edition. Unluckily several differences exist between both classifications. The UICC neglected to make several recommendations according to the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) decisions, which organises the consensus in uropathology.

The New Realization About Cribriform Prostate Cancer.

Data from the past 6 years have shown that the presence of any amount of cribriform (or more comprehensively, large acinar cribriform to papillary) pattern of invasive prostate cancer is associated with adverse pathologic features and leads to uniquely adverse outcomes. Sixteen papers and numerous abstracts have reached these conclusions concordantly. Not only does this justify removal of all cribriform cancer from Gleason grade 3, it shows that cribriform cancer has pathologic, outcome, and molecular features distinct from noncribriform Gleason grade 4. Suggestions for accommodating the presence of cribriform cancer into the 2014 Grade Group scheme are proposed.

Circulating tumor cells capture disease evolution in advanced prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Genetic analysis of advanced cancer is limited by availability of representative tissue. Biopsies of prostate cancer metastasized to bone are invasive with low quantity of tumor tissue. The prostate cancer genome is dynamic, however, with temporal heterogeneity requiring repeated evaluation as the disease evolves. Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) offer an alternative, "liquid biopsy", though single CTC sequencing efforts are laborious with high failure rates. METHODS: We performed exome sequencing of matched treatment-naïve tumor tissue, castrate resistant tumor tissue, and pooled CTC samples, and compared mutations identified in each. RESULTS: Thirty-seven percent of CTC mutations were private to CTCs, one mutation was shared with treatment-naïve disease alone, and 62% of mutations were shared with castrate-resistant disease, either alone or with treatment-naïve disease. An acquired nonsense mutation in the Retinoblastoma gene, which is associated with progression to small cell cancer, was identified in castrate resistant and CTC samples, but not treatment-naïve disease. This timecourse correlated with the tumor acquiring neuroendocrine features and a change to neuroendocrine-specific therapy. CONCLUSIONS: These data support the use of pooled CTCs to facilitate the genetic analysis of late stage prostate cancer.

Iatrogenic changes in the urinary tract.

A handful of therapeutic procedures are used to treat malignancies of the urinary tract, most frequently intravesical immunotherapy or chemotherapy, but also neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy. These treatment modalities produce morphological changes in the urothelium that can be mistaken for carcinoma; in particular, these therapies frequently mimic urothelial carcinoma in situ (CIS) urothelial dysplasia or true invasive neoplasia. Drugs such as mitomycin C used after transurethral resection of bladder tumour to reduce recurrences, bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) intravesical immunotherapy to treat high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer and urothelial CIS and platin-based systemic chemotherapy to improve postcystectomy disease-specific survival are examples of therapy-related atypia seen in the urinary tract. To complicate the pathologist's life, a number of systemic drugs in use to treat other diseases, such cyclophosphamide, used to treat some autoimmune disorders or certain haematological malignancies or, in the case of anaesthetics, ketamine, used increasingly as an illegal recreational drug, may produce similarly relevant atypical changes in the urothelium, and therefore need to be differentiated from intraepithelial neoplasia. Other less frequent procedures, such as photodynamic and laser therapy or the newer gene therapy to treat urothelial neoplasia, remain experimental. An immunohistochemical approach to reactive urothelium versus carcinoma in situ using p53, cytokeratin 20 and CD44 is also valid in the post-therapy setting. The pathologist should be aware of these novelties, as he or she plays a crucial role in evaluating treatment efficacy, but at the same time needs to avoid misdiagnosing secondary atypia as intraepithelial neoplasia.

Challenges in Pathologic Staging of Bladder Cancer: Proposals for Fresh Approaches of Assessing Pathologic Stage in Light of Recent Studies and Observations Pertaining to Bladder Histoanatomic Variances.

The paradigm of pathologic stage (pT) categorization in bladder cancer remains the depth of invasion into the different histologic layers of the bladder wall. However, the approaches to assigning pT stage category toward an enhanced outcome stratification have been marked by challenges and innovations, due in part to our growing appreciation of the surprisingly perplexing bladder histoanatomy. Upstaging of pT1 tumors after radical cystectomy is substantial and underscores the potential value of pT1 substaging in transurethral resection (TUR) specimens. The 2017 American Joint Committee on Cancer tumor-node-metastasis system recommends pT1 substaging but recognizes the need to optimize the approach. Over the years, the cut-off for microinvasion has been significantly lowered to 0.5 mm and is now a promising scheme for pT1 (micrometric) substaging. Unlike the micrometric approach, histoanatomic substaging using muscularis mucosae (MM) and vascular plexus as landmarks is less feasible in TUR specimens and inconsistent in stratifying the outcome of pT1 tumors. The lamina propria possesses inherent variations in depth, MM, and vascular plexus dispositions that should be factored in future pT1 substaging proposals. Histoanatomic variations among the bladder regions also occur, and studies suggest that trigone and bladder neck cancers may have more adverse outcomes. The muscularis propria (MP), besides being the essential histologic landmark for assigning pT2 stage category, is also considered a surrogate for the adequacy of TUR, furthering the importance of identifying its presence in TUR specimens. MP, however, may be mimicked by hyperplastic or isolated MP-like MM muscle bundles in the lamina propria with overstaging implications, and caution should be exercised in distinguishing these 2 muscle types morphologically and immunohistochemically. Presence of additional superficial MP unique from the detrusor muscle proper may also complicate staging at the trigone and ureter insertion sites. With regard to the depth of MP invasion, large and multicenter studies have reaffirmed the prognostic significance of pT2a/b subcategories. It is revealed that there are at least 3 ways used to demarcate the irregular MP to perivesical soft tissue junction, and use of a common criterion indicates improvement in pT2b/pT3a staging reproducibility. Although studies have shown significantly poorer outcome in pT3b compared with pT3a tumors, this designation has a substantial reliance on the prosector's gross assessment of perivesical soft tissue invasion which if performed incorrectly may lead to staging inaccuracy of pT3 tumors. The 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer has updated the staging schema for bladder cancers with concomitant prostatic stromal invasion and cancers within bladder diverticula. Because of 2 possible pT designations, prostatic stromal invasion in TUR specimens should not be automatically staged as either pT4a or pT2 (urethral). Recent data support that bladder cancer invading into the seminal vesicle has comparable outcome to pT4b tumors. Interestingly, several studies in pT4a tumors, which are staged based on sex-specific organs, have shown poorer outcome in females than males after radical cystectomy, and while there are possibly several reasons, they may also include anatomic factors. Despite the progress has been made, work remains to be done to inform future bladder cancer pT category definitions and their reproducibility in application and prognostication.

Prostate cancer detection following diagnosis of atypical small acinar proliferation.

INTRODUCTION: To report the incidence and characteristics of cancer following a diagnosis of atypical small acinar proliferation (ASAP) and comment on current clinical practice recommendations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed patients that underwent prostate biopsy between 2008 and 2013 at a single institution. Men with ASAP without previous cancer were included. Clinicopathologic features including prostate-specific antigen (PSA), presence of ASAP or cancer, tumor volume, number of involved cores, and Gleason score were analyzed in men that received a repeat prostate biopsy. RESULTS: Of 1450 men, ASAP was found in 75 (5%) patients. Repeat biopsy was performed in 49 (65%) patients. Fifteen (31%) were diagnosed with cancer, 10 (20%) with ASAP, and 24 (49%) were benign. PSA, age, and number of cores with ASAP were not associated with cancer. Gleason 6 disease was diagnosed in 12 (80%) patients. Gleason ≥ 7 cancer was found in 3 patients, or 6% of all patients with a repeat biopsy. The average linear amount of tumor was 3.2 mm, and the average tumor volume was 14.2%. CONCLUSION: In a contemporary prostate biopsy series, the incidence of ASAP was 5%. Among men with ASAP, incidence of cancer at repeat biopsy was 31%, with the overwhelming majority being low grade and low volume. Patients with ASAP may not require repeat biopsy within 6 months in the appropriate clinical context.