Abstract
Prostatic lesions on routine staining sometimes cause diagnostic dilemma especially in premalignant lesions like atypical adenomatous hyperplasia and prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia. Benign small acinar lesions also may be difficult to differentiate from small acinar adenocarcinoma. An important differentiating point is the loss of basal cell layer in adenocarcinoma and its presence in benign lesions. Basal cell markers (e.g. 34βE12 cytokeratin) & proliferative markers (e.g. AgNOR and PCNA) can help in this regard. Total 60 cases of different prostatic lesions studied. After history taking, clinical examination, radiological & other investigations were done. Routine H&E staining, immunohistochemical staining against 34βE12 cytokeratin & proliferative markers (AgNOR & PCNA) was performed. Statistically significant differences found in expression of 34βE12 cytokeratin and proliferative markers between benign, premalignant and malignant prostatic lesions. Basal cell markers and proliferative markers are important parameters to distinguish between different benign, premalignant and malignant prostatic lesions.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
The pathologic processes which affect the prostate gland with sufficient frequency are inflammation, benign nodular hyperplasia and tumors. Nodular hyperplasia is an extremely common in men over age 50; adenocarcinoma of prostate is the most common form of cancer in men and second leading cause of cancer death [1]. There are a number of benign small acinar lesions in the prostate gland that may be difficult to differentiate from small acinar adenocarcinoma [2].
Prostatic lesions on routine Haematoxylin & Eosin (H&E) staining sometimes cause diagnostic dilemma between benign and malignant lesions and especially in premalignant lesions like atypical adenomatous hyperplasia (AAH) and prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN). An important diagnostic criterion in the differentiation is the loss of basal cell layer in adenocarcinoma and its presence in the benign lesions. Several immunohistochemical stains have been used to stain the basal cells of prostate against their markers, e.g. high molecular weight cytokeratin (34βE12), p63 etc [2–4]. The proliferative activity also signifies the nature of the cells. Proliferative markers e.g. silver staining nucleolar organizer regions (AgNOR), proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) etc are also of great help in this grey zone [5–10].
Our study was performed to evaluate the role of basal cell markers and proliferative markers in different benign and malignant lesions of prostate and especially in the premalignant lesions like atypical adenomatous hyperplasia and prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia so far the diagnosis is concerned.
Material and Method
Our study population was the patients attending urology/surgery OPD having the clinical features of BHP, PIN or adenocarcinoma like increased frequency of micturition, dysuria, nocturia, difficulty in starting and stopping the stream of urine, urinary retention, over flow dribbling and low back pain due to matastasis to vertebrae [1]. Detailed history, clinical findings especially digital rectal examination (DRE), prostate specific antigen (PSA), radiological and other investigation findings were noted. The surgical specimens were taken from transurethral prostatectomy (TURP), trans-rectal ultrasono-guided biopsy (TRUS) and open prostatectomy.
The specimens were examined for gross findings and the tissue obtained were fixed in formalin, processed and embedded in paraffin wax block. One section of three micron thickness from each block was affixed on egg albumin coated slide and three sections of three micron thickness from each block were affixed on poly-l-lysine coated slides. The former slide was stained by H&E staining and the later group were used for cytokeratin 34βE12 study, PCNA labelling index study and AgNOR count. H&E stained slides were examined thoroughly and a provisional diagnosis of each case was made.
For immunohistochemical staining by antibody against 34βE12 cytokeratin and proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA), the kit literature of the manufacturer was followed [11–14]. Expression of 34βE12 cytokeratin was considered as cytoplasmic positivity of the basal cells of the prostatic epithelium. Continuity of basal cells staining was assessed. For PCNA labelling index study, at least 1000 nuclei were counted under 400× magnification and the results expressed as stained to total nuclei counted in percentage (PCNA labelling index i.e. L.I. %). All immunostained nuclei independent of intensity were scored positive.
AgNOR staining was done with 50% silver nitrate solution and gelatin solution [14]. The nuclei were examined under 1000× magnification. The nucleolar organizer regions were seen as black dots in yellow background. They were counted as number per nuclei and an average count were noted.
After provisional diagnosis by H&E stained slides, final diagnosis was made by assessing the basal cell staining by 34βE12 cytokeratin and proliferative markers (PCNA & AgNOR). Statistical analysis was done by unpaired Student’s‘t’ test and P values were obtained. The study was done as per the criteria of institutional ethics committee (no. Inst/IEC/459) and the papers are ready for submission.
Results
Total 60 cases were studied, all patients were aged (Table 1). Most of them presented with the lower urinary tract symptoms. In two cases symptoms like bone pain and in one case weight loss were noted. On digital rectal examination (DRE) findings like smooth firm enlargement of prostate, palpable median sulcus and free rectal mucosa were suggestive of benign lesions. In malignant prostate lesions, suggestive DRE findings were nodular hard enlargement, obliterated median sulcus and fixed rectal mucosa. In two suspected cases, features of metastasis like bone pain was recorded.
Prostate specific antigen (PSA was <4 ng/ml in 26 cases of BHP and in one case of AAH. It was 4–10 ng/ml (in the ‘grey zone’) in 10 cases BHP, 3 cases AAH and in all the cases of PIN. It was >10 ng/ml in 4 cases of BHP and in all the cases of prostatic carcinoma (Table 2).
Histopathologically on H&E staining (prior to staining by antibody to 34βE12 cytokeratin), 42 cases were found to be benign hyperplasia of prostate (BHP), 6 cases were atypical adenomatous hyperplasia (AAH), 3 cases were of prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN) and 9 cases were of prostatic adenocarcinoma (Pca) (Table 3).
Basal cells of prostate was stained with high molecular weight cytokeratin antibody 34βE12 (Table 4, Figs. 1 and 2) and diagnosis of some prostatic lesions was to be modified. Final diagnosis was made accordingly (Table 5).
Tables 6 and 7 show the PCNA labelling index (LI %) and AgNOR count per nucleus respectively (Figs. 3, 4, 5 and 6). The P values in the comparison of different lesions are shown in Table 8.
Discussion
In our study all the patients were in older age group (Table 1). They mainly presented with symptoms like increased frequency, nocturia, retention of urine etc.
Majority of cases of BHP had normal P.S.A. value (<4 ng/ml). 10 cases had values falling in the ‘grey zone’ of 4–10 ng/ml. 4 cases had significantly raised P.S.A. levels (>10 ng/ml). One case of AAH had normal P.S.A. value less than 4 ng/ml and 3 cases had values in ‘grey zone’ in between 4–10 ng/dl. All cases of P.I.N. had P.S.A. values in ‘grey zone’. And all cases of Pca had significantly elevated level of serum P.S.A. values (11–41 ng/ml) (Table 2).
BHP was the most common finding after interpretation of H&E staining in the provisional diagnosis (Table 3) followed by prostatic adenocarcinoma, atypical adenomatous hyperplasia and prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia respectively.
Cytokeratin 34βE12 study (Table 4) showed continuous staining of basal cell in benign and premalignant lesions whereas discontinuous staining in malignant prostatic lesions (Figs. 1 and 2). Two cases of BHP (on provisional diagnosis) showed discontinuous staining of basal cells. Similarly two cases of AAH and one case of PIN (on H&E staining) showed discontinuous staining of basal cells. So the final diagnosis (Table 5) in these cases was revised to adenocarcinoma (Pca).
Two cases of BHP which were finally diagnosed as Pca after 34βE12 cytokeratin study had PSA values 12.3 ng/ml & 11.8 ng/ml respectively, PCNA labelling index 60% & 57% and AgNOR count 4.8/nucleus & 4.6/nucleus respectively. Similarly two cases of AAH which were finally diagnosed as Pca had PSA values 11.2 ng/ml & 13.5 ng/ml, PCNA labelling index 73% & 71% and AgNOR count 5.1/nucleus & 4.7/nucleus respectively. One case of PIN which was finally diagnosed as Pca had PSA value 14 ng/ml, PCNA labelling index 64% and AgNOR count 4.7/nucleus. These five cases were suspicious because in these cases PSA, PCNA labelling index & AgNOR count were high.
From the above parameters we see that on H&E staining, prostatic adenocarcinoma may be under diagnosed as PIN & AAH, even as BHP. Staining using antibody against basal cells to see its continuity and other investigations like PSA, PCNA labelling index study, AgNOR count along with clinical features can help in the proper diagnosis of benign, premalignant and malignant lesions.
Low PCNA (Table 6) values ranging from 2–8% were observed in BHP (Fig. 3). AAH had PCNA values ranging from 17–35%. Thus PCNA values had no overlapping between BHP and AAH. PIN had moderately high level of PCNA values 38–42%. Very high PCNA values (54–82%) were seen in Pca (Fig. 4). Interestingly it was found that adenocarcinoma, with higher Gleason’s grade, had comparatively higher PCNA values than that of lower Gleason’s grade lesions. However this point was not highlighted due to less number of cases of prostatic adenocarcinoma.
AgNOR count in BHP was between 0.4–2.5/nuclus (Table 7, Fig. 5). AAH had AgNOR count between 1.5–3.2/nuclus. Thus some overlapping in AgNOR values were noted between BHP and AAH. The focus of PIN showed higher AgNOR count ranging from 4.5–4.9/nuclus. Pca had AgNOR count between 4.5–5.1/nuclus (Fig. 6).
Considering the values of PCNA and AgNOR, we see that PCNA LI% is superior to AgNOR count as a proliferative marker because values for interpretation are wider and there is no overlapping of the values in different lesions.
P values (Table 8) of the difference between two groups revealed PCNA LI% is significantly higher in Pca than BHP, AAH & PIN. It is also significantly higher in AAH than BHP. AgNOR value is significantly higher in Pca than BHP & AAH. It is higher in Pca than PIN but not significant statistically. No significant difference was found in both the AgNOR count and PCNA LI% in AAH & PIN.
Our study showed identical results with the study done by Ghosh J [5]. Kawase N found AgNOR counts were higher in carcinoma (4.2+/−1.57) than in benign lesions (1.9+/−0.24) and more PCNA positive cells were identified in cancer areas [7]. Helpap B found lowest PCNA index and AgNOR score in prostatic hyperplasia and atypical adenomatous hyperplasia, while maximum values were in carcinoma of high malignancy [3]. Leed RD showed AgNOR cluster size was dependant on proliferative activity in normal and neoplastic tissues [15]. Wael A. Sakr found that AgNOR study is helpful for assessing tumour proliferation. The values were compared flow cytometrically and with PCNA patterns [16].
Our study on 34βE12 cytokeratin also showed similar results with studies done by Zhou M et al. They showed absence of basal cells in an atypical lesion supports a diagnosis of prostatic carcinoma [4]. Rennac et al found 34βE12 cytokeratin show the presence or absence of basal cells in a benign or malignant lesion respectively [8]. Ramos Soler D found that discontinuous or heterogenous reactivity of the basal compartment are indicative of malignancy [17]. Totten RS found that absence of basal cells in prostatic epithelium was key to the diagnosis of malignancy of atypical microglangular lesions of prostate [18]. Yang XJ found prostate cancer rarely expresses high molecular weight cytokeratin (34βE12) [19]. Yan-gao Man found that cytokeratin 34ßE12 has been routinely used to elucidate prostate basal cells for differentiation between non-invasive and invasive lesions [20].
Samaratunga H. found that differentiation of high-grade PIN from prostatic adenocarcinoma is difficult and presence of a basal cell layer favours the diagnosis of the former [21].
So we can conclude that both proliferative activity and invasiveness increases from benign to malignant end in the spectrum of prostatic lesions. Cocktail use of antibody to high molecular weight cytokeratin (34βE12), PCNA labelling index and AgNOR count with clinical & biochemical findings was found useful in the diagnosis of prostatic lesions especially which fall in the grey zone and create difficulty in the diagnosis in routine histopathological study.
Abbreviations
- BHP:
-
Benign hyperplasia of prostate
- AAH:
-
Atypical adenomatous hyperplasia
- PIN:
-
Prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia
- Pca:
-
Prostatic adenocarcinoma
- PSA:
-
Prostate specific antigen
- H&E:
-
Hematoxylin and Eosin stain
- 34βE12:
-
Monoclonal antibody against high molecular weight cytokeratin 34βE12
- AgNOR:
-
Silver staining nucleolar organizer regions
- PCNA:
-
Proliferating cell nuclear antigen
- DRE:
-
Digital rectal examination
References
Epstein JI (2006) The lower urinary tract and male genital system, chapter 21 In: Kumar V, Abbas AK, Fausto N. Robbins and Cotran pathologic basis of disease, 7th edn. Saunders, Elsevier, reprint pp 1047, 1048, 1050
O’Malley FP, Gignon DJ, Shum DT (1990) Usefulness of immunoperoxidase staining with high molecular weight cytokeratin in the differential diagnosis of small acinar lesions of prostate gland. Virchows Arch, A Pathol Anat Histopathol 417(3):191–196
Helpap B (1995) Cell kinetic studies of prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN) and atypical adenomatous hyperplasia (AAH) of prostate. Pathol Res Pract 191(9):904–907
Zhou M, Shah R, Shen R, Rubin MA (2003) Basal cell cocktail (34betaE12 + p63) improves the detection of prostate basal cells. Am J Surg Pathol 27(3):365–371
Ghosh J, Burman A, Chatterjee A (2004) Role of proliferative markers in prostatic lesions. Indian J Pathol Microbiol 47(3):354–358
Speights VO Jr, Cohen MK, Riggs MW, Coffield KS, Keegon G, Arber DA (1997) Neuroendocrine stains & proliferative indices of prostatic adenocarcinoma in transurethral resection samples. Br J Urol 80:281–286
Kawase N (1994) Nucleolar organizer regions and PCNA expression in prostatic cancer. Pathol Int 44(3):213–222
Rennac MD, Epstein JI (1999) Immunostains in prostatic lesions. Am J Surg Pathol 23(5):567–570
Shah RB, Zhou M, LeBlanc M (2000) Comparison of the basal cell-specific markers, 34βE12 and p63, in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Am J Surg Pathol 26:1161
Hedrick L, Epstein JI (1989) Use of keratin 903 as an adjunct in the diagnosis of prostate PCA. Am J Surg Pathol 13(5):389–396
Ostergaard J (2001) Monoclonal mouse antibody against high molecular weight cytokeratin Clone 34βE12, isotype IgG1, kappa. Primary antibodies and related products, DAKO catalogue, p 117, DAKO A/S, Produkionsvej 42, DK- 2600, Glostrup, Denmark
Ostergaard J (2001) Monoclonal mouse anti PCNA, Clone PC10, isotype IgG2a, kappa. Primary antibodies and related products, DAKO catalogue, p 139, DAKO A/S, Produkionsvej 42, DK-2600, Glostrup, Denmark
Miller K (1996) Immunocytochemical techniques, ch. 21. In: Bancroft JD, Stevens A (eds) Theory and practice of histochemical techniques, 4th edn. Churchill Livingstone, New York, pp 435–470
Bancroft JD, Stevens A (1996) Cytoplasmic granules, organelles and special tissues, ch. 17. In: Bancroft JD, Stevens A (eds) Theory and practice of histochemiPcal techniques, 4th edn. Churchill Livingstone, New York, p 389
Leed RD, Alison MR (1991) Variation in the occurrence of silver staining nucleolar organizer (AgNOR) in nonproliferating & proliferating tissue. J Pathol 165(1):43–51
Sakr WA, Sarkar FH, Prabhakar Sreepathi (2006) Measurement of cellular proliferation in human prostate by AgNOR, PCNA, and SPF, the prostate. Wiley InterScience, published online, 22(2):147–154, Jul
Ramos Soler D, Mayordomo Aranda E, Calatayud Blas A, Rubio Briones J, Solsona Narbón E, Llombart Bosch A (2006) Usefulness of Bcl-2 expression as a new basal cell marker in prostate disease. Actas Urol Esp 30(4):345–352
Totten RS, Heinemann MW, Hudson PB, Sproul EE, Stout AP (1953) Microscopic different diagnosis of latent carcinoma prostate. AMA Arch 55(2):131–141
Yang XJ, Lecksell K, Gaudin P, Epstein JI (1999) Rare expression of high molecular weight cytokeratin in adenocarcinoma of prostate gland, a study of 100 cases of metastatic and locally advanced prostate cancer. Am J Pathol 23(2):145–152
Man Y-G, Zhao C, Chen X (2006) A subset of prostate basal cell lacks the expression of corresponding phenotypic markers. ScienceDirect 292(9):651–662
Samaratunga H, Singh M (1997) Distribution pattern of basal cells detected by cytokeratin 34βE12 in primary prostatic duct adenocarcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 21(4):435–440
Funding/ support source acknowledgement
From departmental grant.
Presentation details regarding the articles presentation venue, and awards, if any
Nil.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Manna, A.K., Pathak, S., Gayen, P. et al. Study of Immunohistochemistry in Prostatic Lesions with Special Reference to Proliferation and Invasiveness. Indian J Surg 73, 101–106 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-010-0180-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-010-0180-7