Histological parameters and stromal desmoplastic status affecting accurate diagnosis of extraprostatic extension of prostate cancer using multi‐parametric magnetic resonance imaging

Abstract

ObjectiveTo investigate the clinicopathological factors affecting discrepancies between multi‐parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and histopathological evaluation for diagnosis of extraprostatic extension (EPE) of prostate cancer.MethodsOne hundred‐and‐three lesions from 96 cases with suspected EPE on preoperative mpMRI, of which 60 and 43 showed bulging and frank capsular breach, respectively, were grouped according to pathological (p)EPE in radical prostatectomy specimens. Additionally, clinicopathological/immunohistochemical findings for periostin reflecting a desmoplastic stromal reaction were compared between these groups.ResultspEPE was detected in 49 (48%) of the 103 lesions. Of these, 25 (42%) showed bulging and 24 (56%) showed frank capsular breach on MRI. In the total cohort, the absence of pEPE was significantly associated with a lower Gleason Grade Group (GG) (p < 0.0001), anterior location (p = 0.003), absence of intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC‐P) (p = 0.026), and high stromal periostin expression (p < 0.0001). These trends were preserved in subgroups defined by MRI findings, except for anterior location/IDC‐P in the bulging subgroup.ConclusionsGG, anterior location, and periostin expression may cause mpMRI–pathological discrepancies regarding EPE. Periostin expression was a significant pEPE‐negative factor in all subgroup analyses. Our results indicate that patients with suspected EPE on MRI, regardless of their pEPE results, should be followed as carefully as those with definite pEPE.