Clinical characteristics and influencing factors of extraglandular invasion of prostatic ductal adenocarcinoma

  • Xiaoyong YANG 1 ,
  • Fan ZHANG 1 ,
  • Lulin MA , 1, * ,
  • Cheng LIU , 1, 2, *
Expand
  • 1. Department of Urology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China
  • 2. Department of Urology, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200080, China
MA Lulin, e-mail,
LIU Cheng, e-mail,

Received date: 2023-01-17

  Online published: 2024-01-30

Supported by

the National Natural Science Foundation of China(82070778)

Copyright

All rights reserved. Unauthorized reproduction is prohibited.

Abstract

Objective: To explore the differences in perioperative clinical and pathological characteristics of patients with different pathological types of prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy, and to analyze the influencing factors that may affect the extraglandular invasion of ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate. Methods: Retrospective collection was made of the radical prostatectomy patients who were admitted to Peking University Third Hospital from December 2011 to April 2021. The patients were screened based on inclusion criteria to obtain basic clinical features and postoperative pathological results. According to the pathological results, the patients were divided into ductal adenocarcinoma group (mixed with ductal adenocarcinoma) and acinar adenocarcinoma group, and a 1 ∶1 propensity score matching was performed to compare the differences in clinical characteristics between the two groups. Univariate and multivariate analyses of the factors related to extraglandular invasion were performed in the matched ductal adenocarcinoma groups. Results: A total of 764 patients with prostate cancer were enrolled in this study, of which 62 patients were confirmed to have ductal adenocarcinoma components by postoperative pathology. There was a statistically significant difference in the proportion of the patients with a history of diabetes in baseline characteristics between the two groups before propensity score matching (29.5% vs. 17.7%, P=0.027). A total of 61 patients with simple acinar adenocarcinoma were successfully matched with the patients with ductal adenocarcinoma, and there was no statistically significant difference in baseline characteristics between the two groups after matching (P>0.05). The comparison of perioperative clinical and pathological features showed that International Society of Urology Pathology (ISUP) grade (P=0.003), pT stage (P=0.004), extraglandular invasion rate (P=0.018) and vascular thrombus rate (P=0.019) in ductal adenocarcinoma group were significantly higher than those in simple acinous adenocarcinoma group. Univariate analysis of the influence factors of extraglandular invasion showed that prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, prostate volume, ISUP grade, seminal vesicle invasion and perineural invasion might be the influencing factors of extraglandular invasion (P < 0.10). Binary Logistic regression analysis showed that perineural invasion was an independent factor of extraglandular invasion (OR=11.78, 95%CI: 1.97-70.56, P=0.007). Conclusion: Prostatic ductal adenocarcinoma has a worse prognosis than simple acinar adenocarcinoma. Perineural invasion is the influencing factor of extraglandular invasion of ductal adenocarcinoma.

Cite this article

Xiaoyong YANG , Fan ZHANG , Lulin MA , Cheng LIU . Clinical characteristics and influencing factors of extraglandular invasion of prostatic ductal adenocarcinoma[J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2025 , 57(5) : 956 -960 . DOI: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2025.05.021

前列腺癌是老年男性常见恶性肿瘤之一,其发病率近年呈逐渐升高趋势,2020年全球约有140万患者确诊[1]。有研究表明,前列腺癌患病率随着年龄增长而不断增加,美国男性前列腺癌终生患病率可达12.6%[2]。根治性前列腺切除术(radical prostatectomy,RP)是局限性前列腺癌标准治疗方法之一。围绕前列腺癌临床特征及RP术后病理分期和分级展开研究,以探索评估患者预后的影响因素,在临床研究中具有重要意义。目前,已有研究表明,RP术后病理证实的腺外侵犯是患者术后生化复发的独立危险因素[3]
前列腺癌有不同的病理亚型,其中,导管腺癌是一种少见病理亚型,常与其他病理亚型共同存在,且缺乏针对性的治疗方法,目前的研究认为前列腺导管腺癌预后较单纯腺泡腺癌差,生化复发风险更高[4]。但受发病率影响,国内关于导管腺癌的研究样本量通常较小,且多集中于肿瘤的病理形态及免疫组织化学、治疗方式、生化复发等方面。本研究拟通过回顾性分析,探索前列腺导管腺癌患者RP围术期临床特征差异及腺外侵犯的影响因素,为个体化临床治疗决策提供帮助。

1 资料与方法

1.1 资料收集

对2011年12月至2021年4月在北京大学第三医院行RP且病理明确为前列腺癌患者的临床资料进行回顾。收集患者年龄、体重指数(body mass index,BMI)、既往史、术前前列腺特异性抗原(prostate specific antigen,PSA)水平、前列腺体积、术前穿刺Gleason评分、手术时长、出血量、术后切缘状态及是否有腺外侵犯和精囊侵犯等信息。其中,前列腺体积由术前前列腺超声获取,手术时长为麻醉后手术开始至手术结束时间。

1.2 纳入及排除标准

纳入标准:(1)可获取术前3个月内的PSA及影像学检查(前列腺超声或磁共振成像)结果;(2)相应住院志、手术记录、麻醉记录、术后病理等均可自电子病历系统获取。排除标准:(1)前述信息不完整者;(2)因肿瘤侵犯或合并其他肿瘤同时进行其他手术患者,如同时切除膀胱及前列腺,或同时切除前列腺及部分直肠。所有手术均由经验丰富的医师操作完成。

1.3 分组方法及倾向评分匹配

根据术后病理结果是否明确混有导管腺癌成分,将患者分为导管腺癌组和单纯腺泡腺癌组。为避免数据偏差和混杂因素的影响,本研究采用倾向评分匹配来改善两组患者的可比性。

1.4 统计学方法

利用SPSS 24.0软件进行统计分析。符合正态分布的连续变量用均值±标准差表示,采用独立样本t检验进行两组间比较;不符合正态分布的连续变量用中位数及四分位数(Q1Q3)表示,采用Mann-Whitney U检验进行组间比较。分类变量用频数(百分比)表示,对样本量预期频数进行分析,如预期频数小于5则采用Fisher精确检验进行差异性比较,否则采用卡方检验进行比较。按导管腺癌患者的术后切缘状态(阳性或阴性)进行分组,利用单因素Logistic回归分析对变量进行筛选,排除重叠变量后将P<0.10的变量纳入多因素Logistic回归,分析前列腺导管腺癌腺外侵犯影响因素。P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。

2 结果

2.1 倾向评分匹配前两组患者的临床特征

本研究共纳入前列腺癌患者764例,其中术后病理结果明确混有导管腺癌成分的患者62例,其余702例为单纯腺泡腺癌。对全部患者的基本临床特征进行分析,结果表明导管腺癌和单纯腺泡腺癌患者手术时平均年龄[(69.45±6.62)岁vs. (69.01± 7.13)岁]、平均BMI[(25.17±2.93) kg/m2 vs. (24.77±2.95) kg/m2]及既往有高血压病史(53.0% vs. 47.0%)、恶性肿瘤病史(3.2% vs. 2.1%)、前列腺手术史(4.8% vs. 6.6%)的比例差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05),但既往有糖尿病病史的比例差异有统计学意义(29.5% vs. 17.7%,P= 0.027)。

2.2 倾向评分匹配后两组患者的临床及病理特征

对62例导管腺癌患者进行1 ∶ 1倾向评分匹配,有61例单纯腺泡腺癌患者与之匹配成功。对匹配后的导管腺癌组和单纯腺泡腺癌组(各61例)进行比较,两组基线情况差异无统计学意义。进一步分析围术期临床及病理特征发现,匹配后的两组患者术前PSA水平、前列腺体积、手术时长及出血量等差异均无统计学意义,但导管腺癌组国际泌尿病理协会(International Society of Urology Pathology,ISUP)分级(P=0.003)、pT分期(P=0.004)、腺外侵犯率(P=0.018)及脉管癌栓率(P=0.019)均明显高于单纯腺泡腺癌组(表 1)。
表1 倾向评分匹配后患者临床特征

Table 1 Clinical characteristics and pathological analysis of patients after propensity score matching

Items DAP (n=61) PAA (n=61) P value
Age/years, ${\bar x}$±s 69.39±6.66 68.85±7.54 0.675
BMI/(kg/m2), ${\bar x}$±s 25.13±2.94 24.98±3.17 0.783
Hypertension, n(%) 33 (54.1) 34 (55.7) 0.856
Diabetes, n(%) 18 (29.5) 17 (27.9) 0.841
History of malignancy, n(%) 2 (3.3) 1 (1.6) 0.641
History of prostatic operation, n(%) 3 (4.9) 2 (3.3) 0.641
PSA/(μg/L), M(Q1, Q3) 11.80 (6.18, 26.89) 10.22 (5.83, 19.51) 0.408
Prostate volume/mL, M(Q1, Q3) 40.00 (30.15, 52.65) 39.51 (26.36, 52.18) 0.519
ISUP grade, n(%) 0.003
  1 1 (1.6) 8 (13.1)
  2 7 (11.5) 18 (29.5)
  3 7 (11.5) 7 (11.5)
  4 16 (26.2) 13 (21.3)
  5 30 (49.2) 15 (24.6)
Positive margin, n(%) 26 (42.6) 24 (39.3) 0.713
Extraglandular invasion, n(%) 40 (65.6) 27 (44.3) 0.018
Seminal vesicle invasion, n(%) 13 (21.3) 8 (13.1) 0.230
Perineural invasion, n(%) 51 (83.6) 43 (70.5) 0.085
Vascular cancer thrombus, n(%) 16 (26.2) 6 (9.8) 0.019
pT, n(%) 0.004
  2 19 (31.1) 33 (54.1)
  3 37 (60.7) 28 (45.9)
  4 5 (8.2) 0
Surgical duration/min, M(Q1, Q3) 218 (185, 256) 221 (187, 251) 0.828
Blood loss/mL, M(Q1, Q3) 50 (50, 150) 50 (50, 175) 0.647

DAP, ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate; PAA, prostatic acinar adenocarcinoma; BMI, body mass index; PSA, prostate specific antigen; ISUP, International Society of Urology Pathology.

2.3 导管腺癌腺外侵犯的单因素及多因素分析

为进一步明确前列腺导管腺癌腺外侵犯的影响因素,将单因素分析P<0.10的变量(表 2),包括PSA水平、前列腺体积、ISUP分级、精囊侵犯及神经侵犯纳入二元Logistic回归,结果表明,神经侵犯是前列腺导管腺癌腺外侵犯的独立影响因素(OR=11.78,95%CI:1.97~70.56,P=0.007)。
表2 前列腺导管腺癌腺外侵犯的单因素分析

Table 2 Univariate analysis of extraglandular invasion of DAP

Items Extraglandular invasion P value
Positive (n=40) Negative (n=21)
Age/years, ${\bar x}$±s 69.10±6.64 69.95±6.82 0.639
BMI/(kg/m2),${\bar x}$±s 25.33±2.78 24.74±3.24 0.454
PSA/(μg/L), M (Q1, Q3) 15.08 (7.22, 36.64) 9.83 (4.77, 13.32) 0.054
Volume/mL, M (Q1, Q3) 36.95 (28.58, 47.15) 44.80 (34.10, 55.10) 0.074
ISUP, n(%) 0.017
  1 1 (2.5) 0
  2 2 (5.0) 5 (23.8)
  3 2 (5.0) 5 (23.8)
  4 12 (30.0) 4 (19.0)
  5 23 (57.5) 7 (33.3)
Positive margin, n(%) 16 (40.0) 10 (47.6) 0.568
Seminal vesicle invasion, n(%) 12 (30.0) 1 (4.8) 0.024
Perineural invasion, n(%) 38 (95.0) 13 (61.9) 0.002
Vascular cancer thrombus, n(%) 13 (32.5) 3 (14.3) 0.124

DAP, ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate; BMI, body mass index; PSA, prostate specific antigen; ISUP, International Society of Urology Patho-logy.

3 讨论

前列腺癌是男性常见的恶性肿瘤,其发病率近年呈逐渐升高趋势,位列全球男性恶性肿瘤第2位[1]。随着医疗水平的进步以及PSA检测等筛查手段的推广,多数患者能够在疾病早期被诊断并得到有效治疗。RP是未发生转移的局限性前列腺癌患者的标准治疗方法之一。腹腔镜辅助与机器人辅助技术的迅速发展已使得越来越多的研究着眼于如何改善RP的安全性,减小手术创伤,以获得更好的疾病控制。围绕RP的手术难度、术后病理等相关特征展开的研究,也能为疾病认识和临床治疗策略的选择提供一些证据支持。
前列腺癌可进一步分为不同的病理学亚型,其中,导管腺癌发生率仅次于腺泡腺癌,其临床特征与腺泡腺癌难以区分,常需通过病理学检查来明确诊断[5]。在组织形态上导管腺癌可分为乳头状、筛状、腺样、实性等结构,不同结构也可共同存在[5-6]。临床上,单纯导管腺癌较为罕见(0.2%~0.4%),绝大多数病例表现为导管腺癌与腺泡腺癌成分混合存在,导管腺癌相关研究也主要以混有导管腺癌成分的病例作为研究对象。受限于缺乏多中心前列腺癌数据平台的局限性,目前国内的前列腺导管腺癌相关研究多为单中心研究,纳入的病例数较少,而本研究的导管腺癌病例数相对较多,且本研究进一步利用倾向评分匹配对前列腺导管腺癌和腺泡腺癌的肿瘤学、手术难度等临床特征进行了比较。
我们的研究结果显示,导管腺癌有更高比率的Gleason 4~5级高级别肿瘤,ISUP分级也多为4~5级,且pT分期、腺外侵犯及脉管癌栓比例均高于腺泡腺癌。通常认为,Gleason评分越高肿瘤分化越差, 且侵袭性越强,pT分期、腺外侵犯等特征也与肿瘤的侵袭性和患者预后密切相关。有研究表明,导管腺癌比腺泡腺癌具有更高比率的切缘阳性、腺外侵犯、精囊侵犯及更早的生化复发[7-8],与本研究结果相似。
临床研究中通常采用手术时长、术中出血等特征来对手术难度进行评价,此外,也有研究着眼于前列腺体积、PSA水平、新辅助治疗等因素对手术难度的影响[9],但分析不同病理类型肿瘤的手术难度差异的相关研究较少。本研究结果表明,前列腺癌的不同病理类型对手术难度没有明显影响,这一结论可为前列腺癌患者的个体化精准治疗提供参考。
RP术后生化复发及不良预后与术前PSA、手术切缘、Gleason评分、腺外侵犯等多种因素有关,其中腺外侵犯是一个极其重要的影响因素[4, 10]。有无腺外侵犯是判断患者为局限性前列腺癌或局部晚期前列腺癌的重要评价指标。临床中也可能出现术前评估考虑为局限性前列腺癌,但术后病理证实存在腺外侵犯的情况,有研究认为其与Gleason评分及前列腺体积相关[11-12]。但在导管腺癌等少见病理类型的前列腺癌中,是否存在不同的影响因素目前仍缺乏相关研究。
本研究对回顾性收集的61例导管腺癌患者的腺外侵犯进行了研究,多因素分析结果仅发现神经侵犯为导管腺癌腺外侵犯的独立影响因素,这与单纯腺泡腺癌中相关研究结论一致,即神经侵犯是前列腺癌高生化风险及不良预后的重要因素,与腺外侵犯、精囊侵犯、切缘阳性等密切相关[13-14]。此外,本研究中单因素分析还得出PSA水平、前列腺体积、ISUP分级等因素也可能是导管腺癌腺外侵犯的影响因素,但在纳入多因素分析后这些因素不再是导管腺癌腺外侵犯的独立影响因素,我们认为可能存在以下两个原因:首先,尽管本研究回顾了近10年的前列腺癌患者,导管腺癌患者样本量相对较大,但由于其相较于腺泡腺癌发生率低,样本数仍不足以体现出相关因素的统计学差异;其次,单纯导管腺癌极少见,多数患者为导管腺癌与腺泡腺癌混合的前列腺癌,但本研究并未对导管腺癌成分按比例分组,导管腺癌组中的部分患者可能仍以腺泡腺癌成分为主,可能对结果造成一定影响。
综上所述,导管腺癌成分通常与更高的肿瘤分级和分期相关,可能预示患者具有相对更差的预后,但并不影响手术难度,如果术前穿刺活检发现导管腺癌成分,临床医师需向患者交代清楚病情,并在术中谨慎操作。尽管导管腺癌相较于腺泡腺癌出现腺外侵犯的比例更高,但并未发现其存在与腺泡腺癌不同的腺外侵犯影响因素,将来可通过前瞻性多中心研究并依据导管腺癌成分含量进行分层,以进一步探究导管腺癌腺外侵犯的影响因素。

利益冲突  所有作者均声明不存在利益冲突。

作者贡献声明  杨小勇:资料收集、统计分析及论文撰写;张帆:确定研究内容及研究方法;马潞林、刘承:提出研究思路、总体把关及审定论文;所有作者均对最终文稿进行审读并确认。

1
Mottet N, Cornford P, van den Bergh RCN, et al. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-ISUP-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer, 2023[EB/OL]. https://uroweb.org/guidelines/prostate-cancer.

2
Bell KJ , Del Mar C , Wright G , et al. Prevalence of incidental prostate cancer: A systematic review of autopsy studies[J]. Int J Cancer, 2015, 137 (7): 1749- 1757.

DOI

3
Vn S , Türk H , Koca O , et al. Factors determining biochemical recurrence in low-risk prostate cancer patients who underwent radical prostatectomy[J]. Turk J Urol, 2015, 41 (2): 61- 66.

DOI

4
Jang WS , Shin SJ , Yoon CY , et al. Prognostic significance of the proportion of ductal component in ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate[J]. J Urol, 2017, 197 (4): 1048- 1053.

DOI

5
Amin A . Prostate ductal adenocarcinoma[J]. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol, 2018, 26 (7): 514- 521.

DOI

6
Liu TT , Wang YM , Zhou R , et al. The update of prostatic ductal adenocarcinoma[J]. Chin J Cancer Res, 2016, 28 (1): 50- 57.

7
Meeks JJ , Zhao LC , Cashy J , et al. Incidence and outcomes of ductal carcinoma of the prostate in the USA: Analysis of data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program[J]. BJU Int, 2012, 109 (6): 831- 834.

DOI

8
Seipel AH , Delahunt B , Samaratunga H , et al. Ductal adeno-carcinoma of the prostate: Histogenesis, biology and clinicopathological features[J]. Pathology, 2016, 48 (5): 398- 405.

DOI

9
McKay RR , Ye HH , Xie WL , et al. Evaluation of intense androgen deprivation before prostatectomy: A randomized phase Ⅱ trial of enzalutamide and leuprolide with or without abiraterone[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2019, 37 (11): 923- 931.

DOI

10
Kurose H , Ueda K , Ogasawara N , et al. Impact of Gleason score of the tumor at the positive surgical margin as a prognostic factor[J]. Mol Clin Oncol, 2022, 16 (4): 82.

DOI

11
Sfoungaristos S , Perimenis P . Clinical and pathological parameters predicting extracapsular disease in patients undergoing a radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer[J]. Prague Med Rep, 2012, 113 (1): 5- 15.

DOI

12
张帆, 黄毅, 陆敏, 等. 临床局限性前列腺癌根治性切除术后病理包膜侵犯的危险因素分析[J]. 临床泌尿外科杂志, 2012, 27 (12): 901- 903.

13
DeLancey JO , Wood DP Jr , He C , et al. Evidence of perineural invasion on prostate biopsy specimen and survival after radical prostatectomy[J]. Urology, 2013, 81 (2): 354- 357.

DOI

14
Li H , Chang XF , Du YQ . Perineural invasion detected in prostate biopsy is a predictor of positive surgical margin of radical prostatectomy specimen: A meta-analysis[J]. Andrologia, 2022, 54 (5): e14395.

Outlines

/