Duct Quest: An International Survey of Genitourinary and Community Pathologists Reveals Diagnostic Uncertainties in Separating Atypical Intraductal Proliferation from High-grade Prostatic Intraepithelial Neoplasia and Intraductal Carcinoma of the Prostate.

Authors

Marit Bernhardt, Isabella Federica Bollen, Emily Chan, Liang Cheng, Katrina Collins, Michelle Downes, Nancy Greenland, Kenneth A Iczkowski, Laura Jufe, Charlotte Kweldam, Geert van Leenders, Gladell P Paner, Joanna Perry-Keene, Anna Katrin Scherping, Toyonori Tsuzuki, Murali Varma, Sean R Wiliamson, Sara Wobker, Ming Zhou, Xiaolin Zhou, Rajal B Shah, Glen Kristiansen

Published in

Human pathology. Pages 106233. Aug 14, 2026. Epub Aug 14, 2026.

Abstract

Atypical intraductal proliferations of the prostate encompass a spectrum from high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN) to intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDCP), the latter being strongly associated with aggressive prostate cancer. The recent WHO classification introduced atypical intraductal proliferation (AIP) to describe lesions intermediate between HGPIN and IDCP. To assess current diagnostic practice and variability prior to implementation of new consensus recommendations, we surveyed 541 pathologists from four national and international pathology societies (Genitourinary Society of Pathology (GUPS), International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP), British Association of Urological Pathology (BAUP), and German Division of the International Academy of Pathology (GDIAP)). Participants widely supported the Guo/Epstein criteria for diagnosing IDCP and generally agreed that when IDCP is found in the absence of high-grade cancer on needle biopsy, unsampled high-grade cancer is almost always present, reinforcing its role as an exclusion criterion for active surveillance. However, opinions varied on whether IDCP is a precursor lesion or a growth pattern of invasive cancer. Participants reviewed 25 images of intraductal lesions classified as benign, HGPIN, AIP, or IDCP. Consensus (>2/3 agreement) was reached in only 44% of cases, and no AIP case achieved consensus. Grouping lesions into low-grade (benign/HGPIN) versus high-grade (AIP/IDCP) categories increased consensus to 88%. Consensus was higher for AIP+IDCP (60%) than for HGPIN+AIP (28%), suggesting closer diagnostic alignment of AIP with IDCP. These findings highlight persistent interobserver variability and the need for clearer diagnostic criteria, education, and further biological characterization of AIP and IDCP.

PMID:
42600754
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 15 Aug 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.