Published in

Elsevier, Human Pathology, 9(45), p. 1805-1812, 2014

DOI: 10.1016/j.humpath.2014.05.004

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Seminal vesicle intraepithelial involvement by prostate cancer: putative mechanism and clinicopathological significance

This paper is available in a repository.
This paper is available in a repository.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

We have recently shown seminal vesicle intraepithelial involvement of prostate cancer in cases with seminal vesicle invasion (pT3b). Based on the manner of seminal vesicle invasion, there could be two possible mechanisms of seminal vesicle intraepithelial involvement: direct intraepithelial invasion from prostate carcinoma in the muscular wall of seminal vesicles, or intraepithelial involvement of cancer from the invaginated extraprostatic space (IES)/ejaculatory duct system to extraprostatic seminal vesicle. We aimed to clarify the manner and clinicopathological significance of seminal vesicle intraepithelial involvement. Of 1,629 consecutive radical prostatectomies, 109 cases (6.7%) showed seminal vesicle invasion in whole-mounted radical prostatectomy specimens. In these pT3b cases, 18 (17%) showed seminal vesicle intraepithelial involvement by prostate cancer. Stromal invasion of the IES/ejaculatory duct system and ejaculatory duct intraepithelial invasion by prostate cancer were identified in 62 and 5 of 109 pT3b cases, respectively. However, the presence/absence of IES/ejaculatory duct system involvement by prostate cancer does not predict seminal vesicle intraepithelial involvement. No statistically significant correlation was observed between all pathological parameters/biochemical recurrence and the presence/absence of seminal vesicle intraepithelial involvement in the pT3b cases. These findings suggest that seminal vesicle intraepithelial involvement is more likely due to direct invasion of carcinoma from the muscular wall of seminal vesicles rather than intraepithelial extension from the ejaculatory duct system in the IES. Further studies with a substantially greater case number are needed to clarify the clinicopathologic significance of seminal vesicle intraepithelial involvement in a better manner.