Objective: To review atypical/positive urine cytology specimens from patients with confirmed prostatic duct adenocarcinoma (PDA), describe the cytomorphologic features and discuss the differential diagnosis. Study Design: A retrospective review of the cytopathology archives of The Johns Hopkins Hospital revealed 14 cases of abnormal urinary cytology in patients with histologically confirmed PDAs. Cytologic material was reviewed; cytomorphologic characteristics were analyzed and correlated with histopathologic features wherever possible. Results: There were 7 patients ranging in age from 52 to 80 years (mean age: 68 years). The clinical presentation included; hematuria, bladder obstruction and perineal mass. The cytomorphologic characteristics were: large crowded sheets and three-dimensional fragments (some with papillary architecture) of columnar epithelium with scant amphophilic cytoplasm, basally placed round to oval nuclei with coarse chromatin and absent or inconspicuous nucleoli. Histologic findings showed papillary and cribriform architecture of columnar cells with crowding, nuclear stratification and overlapping with or without nucleoli. Conclusion: PDAs usually present at an advanced clinical stage and may exfoliate owing to their location in the central prostatic urethra. Differentiating PDA from acinar prostatic adenocarcinoma, urothelial carcinoma and metastatic adenocarcinoma is important due to the differences in patient management. Since prostate-specific antigen values are variable, urine cytology may provide a valuable tool for the early detection of these aggressive lesions.

Keywords:
Liquid-based cytology, Prostatic adenocarcinoma, SurePath, Urinary cytology
1.
Petersen RO, Sesterhenn I, Davis CJ: Urologic Pathology, ed 3. Philadelphia, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2009, p 502.
2.
Epstein JI: Prostatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a mini review. Med Princ Pract 2010;19:82–85.
3.
Christensen WN, Steinberg G, Walsh PC, Epstein JI: Prostatic duct adenocarcinoma. Findings at radical prostatectomy. Cancer 1991;67:2118–2124.
4.
Vandersteen DP, Wiemerslage SJ, Cohen MB: Prostatic duct adenocarcinoma: a cytologic and histologic case report with review of the literature. Diagn Cytopathol 1997;17:480–483.
5.
Tyler KL, Selvaggi SM: Morphologic features of prostatic adenocarcinoma on ThinPrep® urinary cytology. Diagn Cytopathol 2011;39:101–104.
6.
Amin A, Epstein JI: Pathologic stage of prostatic ductal adenocarcinoma at radical prostatectomy: effect of percentage of the ductal component and associated grade of acinar adenocarcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 2011;35:615–619.
7.
Samaratunga H, Delahunt B: Ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate: current opinion and controversies. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 2008;30:237–246.
8.
Samaratunga H, Duffy D, Yaxley J, Delahunt B: Any proportion of ductal adenocarcinoma in radical prostatectomy specimens predicts extraprostatic extension. Hum Pathol 2010;41:281–285.
9.
Tavora F, Epstein JI: High-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasialike ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate: a clinicopathologic study of 28 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 2008;32:1060–1067.
10.
Rioux-Leclercq N, Leray E, Patard JJ, Lobel B, Guillé F, Jouan F, Bellaud P, Epstein JI: The utility of Ki-67 expression in the differential diagnosis of prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and ductal adenocarcinoma. Hum Pathol 2005;36:531–535.
11.
Ramzy I, Larson V: Prostatic duct carcinoma: exfoliative cytology. Acta Cytol 1977;21:417–420.
12.
Masood S, Swartz DA, Meneses M, Hardy NH, Prempree T: Fine needle aspiration cytology of papillary endometrioid carcinoma of the prostate. The grooved nucleus as a cytologic marker. Acta Cytol 1991;35:451–455.
13.
Tetu B: Diagnosis of urothelial carcinoma from urine. Mod Pathol 2009;22(suppl 2):S53–S59.
14.
Bardales RH, Pitman MB, Stanley MW, Korourian S, Suhrland MJ: Urine cytology of primary and secondary urinary bladder adenocarcinoma. Cancer 1998;84:335–343.
15.
Epstein JI, Allsbrook WC Jr, Amin MB, Egevad LL, ISUP Grading Committee: The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 2005;29:1228–1242.
© 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel
2013
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.