Prognostic Significance of High Androgen Receptor Expression in Prostatic Acinar Adenocarcinoma

Background: Quantitative immunohistochemical expression of Androgen receptor (AR) has not been evaluated as a prognostic biomarker of prostate cancer in our population, therefore in the current study we aimed to evaluate the association of AR expression in prostatic acinar adenocarcinoma with various prognostic parameters like tumor quantification, Gleason score, WHO grade group and perineural invasion. Methods: Total 121 cases of biopsy proven prostatic acinar adenocarcinoma were selected from records of pathology department archives from January 2013 till December 2017. Hematoxylin and eosin stained slides and paraffin blocks were retrieved and new sections were cut where necessary. Slides of all cases were reviewed by two senior histopathologists and pathologic characteristics like Gleason score, WHO grade, tumor quantification, perineural and lymphovascular invasion were evaluated. Androgen receptor immunohistochemistry was applied on all cases. Results: Low AR expression was noted in 53 cases (43.8%) while high AR expression was seen in 68 cases (56.2%). Significant association of AR expression was noted with total Gleason score, WHO grade and percentage of tissue involvement (tumor quantification). Univariate binary logistic regression showed patients with low Gleason scores (scores 6,7 or 8) and low WHO grade (grade 1, 2 or 3) were less likely to express high AR expression in comparison to high Gleason score (score 9) and high WHO grade group (grade 5) respectively. Similarly, cases with low tissue involvement by carcinoma (<50%) were less likely to show high AR expression in comparison to cases with >50% tissue involvement by carcinoma. Conclusion: Significant association of AR expression was noted with total Gleason score, WHO grade and percentage of tissue involvement (tumor quantification) which are among the most important markers of tumor progression; therefore we suggest that AR expression should be performed in patients with prostatic adenocarcinoma for prognostic stratification of the patients.

ERG oncoprotein expression in prostatic acinar adenocarcinoma; clinicopathologic significance.

OBJECTIVES: T/E fusion results in constitutive expression of ERG oncoprotein resulting in enhanced proliferation and invasive potential of prostatic cancer cells. In the present study we aimed to evaluate the ERG overexpression in 78 cases prostate acinar adenocarcinoma and its association with other prognostic parameters. RESULTS: ERG protein expression was noted in 39.7% (31 cases), out of which 3 cases (3.8%) showed low ERG expression, 10 cases (12.8%) showed intermediate expression and 18 cases (23.1%) revealed high ERG expression. Significant association of ERG expression was noted with gleason score (p = 0.009), WHO grade group (p = 0.008) and perineural invasion (p = 0.043). We found a significant proportion of our patients of prostatic acinar adenocarcinoma to over-express ERG protein which can help in devising therapeutic protocols. Significant association of ERG protein expression with gleason score and perineural invasion signifies its prognostic significance in prostatic carcinoma. Moreover, we also suggest that molecular studies should be performed in patients with prostatic carcinoma to look for T/E fusion gene and its correlation with ERG protein expression.

Prognostic utility of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) expression in prostatic acinar adenocarcinoma

Background: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is potential prognostic biomarker expressed in many human cancers. Prognostic significance of EGFR immunohistochemical expression has not been established in prostatic acinar adenocarcinoma, therefore we aimed to evaluate the frequency of expression of EGFR in prostatic adenocarcinoma and its association with other prognostic parameters. Methods: The study included 123 cases of biopsy proven prostatic acinar adenocarcinoma treated at Liaquat National hospital, Karachi from January 2013 till December 2017. Paraffin blocks of all cases were retrieved; sections were cut and stained with haematoxylin and eosin. Pathologic characteristics including tumor quantification, WHO grade group, gleason score, perineural and lymphovascular invasion were evaluated. EGFR immunohistochemistry (IHC) was performed on all tissue blocks. Results: Mean age of the patients included in the study was 69.05±8.68years. High gleason scores i.e. 8 & 9 were noted in 22% (27 cases) and 22.8% (28 cases) respectively. Similarly, 22.8% (28 cases) showed WHO grade group 5. 52.8% (65 cases) had > 50% tissue involvement by carcinoma and perineural invasion was seen in 37.4% (46 cases). Positive EGFR expression was noted in 18.7% (23 cases), while 81.3% (100 cases) showed negative EGFR expression. Significant association of EGFR expression was noted with gleason score (p-value = < 0.001), WHO grade (p = < 0.001), tumor quantification (p =0.007) and perineural invasion (p = < 0.001). Moreover, significant association of EGFR expression was also seen with disease recurrence and Her2neu over expression. Patients with low gleason scores (score 6 and 7) and lower grade group (1, 2 & 3) were less likely to have positive EGFR expression as compared to patients with high gleason score (score 9) and higher grade group (5). Similarly, patients with perineural invasion were more likely to have positive EGFR expression. Conclusion: We found a relatively low EGFR expression in our patients with prostatic adenocarcinoma; however, its association with poor prognostic parameters like high gleason score, higher grade group, perineural invasion, higher tissue involvement by cancer and disease recurrence signifies its importance as a prognostic parameter in prostatic acinar adenocarcinoma (AU)