Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

Clinical Research

Atypical small acinar proliferation (ASAP): Is a repeat biopsy necessary ASAP? A multi-institutional review

Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases volume 19, pages 68–71 (2016)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Background:

Atypical small acinar proliferation (ASAP) occurs in approximately 5% of prostate biopsies. Approximately 30–40% of patients with ASAP may develop prostate cancer (PCa) within a 5-year period. Current guidelines recommend a repeat biopsy within 3–6 months after the initial diagnosis. Our objective was to examine the association between ASAP and subsequent diagnosis of high-grade PCa and to evaluate the need for immediate repeat biopsy.

Methods:

A retrospective multi-institutional review identified 264 patients who underwent prostate biopsy from 2000 to 2013 (Brown), 2008 to 2013 (University of Massachusetts) and 1994 to 2005 (Mayo) and were diagnosed with ASAP. Patients underwent transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsies for elevated PSA and/or abnormal digital rectal exam. Clinicopathologic features were assessed, including rates of subsequent PCa detection of any high-grade (Gleason 7–10) PCa. Comparison was made between those with subsequent PCa on repeat biopsy and those with benign repeat pathology.

Results:

All 264 patients included underwent repeat biopsy with a median follow-up of 5.4 years (interquartile range: 4.6, 6.7). Of these patients, 89 (34%) were subsequently diagnosed with PCa including 21 (8%) with high-grade PCa. Pre-biopsy PSA was higher among patients subsequently diagnosed with (6.7 vs 5.8, P<0.001). Of those diagnosed with subsequent PCa, 69/89 (78%) had less than or equal to Gleason 3+3 disease and only 15/89 (17%) had Gleason 7 and 6/89 (6%) revealed Gleason ⩾8–10. Radical prostatectomy was performed on 36/89 (40%) patients. Surgical pathology revealed 11 patients ⩾Gleason 8–10 PCa.

Conclusions:

Although 34% of patients with an initial diagnosis of ASAP who had repeat biopsy were subsequently diagnosed with PCa only, only 22% (8% of the total cohort) were found to have high-grade disease. Higher PSA was associated with increased risk of identifying PCa on repeat biopsy. These findings suggest that immediate repeat biopsy may be omitted in the majority of men with ASAP.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Montironi R, Scattoni V, Mazzucchelli R, Lopez-Beltran A, Bostwick DG, Montorsi F . Atypical foci suspicious but not diagnostic of malignancy in prostate needle biopsies (also referred to as "atypical small acinar proliferation suspicious for but not diagnostic of malignancy"). Eur Urol 2006; 50: 666–674.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Cheville JC, Reznicek MJ, Bostwick DG . The focus of "atypical glands, suspicious for malignancy" in prostatic needle biopsy specimens: incidence, histologic features, and clinical follow-up of cases diagnosed in a community practice. Am J Clin Pathol 1997; 108: 633–640.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Chin AI, Dave DS, Rajfer J . Is repeat biopsy for isolated high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia necessary? Rev Urol 2007 Summer; 9: 124–131.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Borboroglu PG, Sur RL, Roberts JL, Amling CL . Repeat biopsy strategy in patients with atypical small acinar proliferation or high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia on initial prostate needle biopsy. J Urol 2001; 166: 866–870.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Scattoni V, Roscigno M, Freschi M, Deho F, Raber M, Briganti A et al. Atypical small acinar proliferation (ASAP) on extended prostatic biopsies: predictive factors of cancer detection on repeat biopsies. Arch Ital Urol Androl 2005; 77: 31–36.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Carroll PR, Parsons JK, Andriole G, Bahnson RR, Barocas DA, Catalona WJ et al. Prostate cancer early detection, version 1.2014. Featured updates to the NCCN Guidelines. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2014; 12: 1211–1219.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Heidenreich A, Bastian PJ, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, van der Kwast T et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent-update 2013. Eur Urol 2014; 65: 124–137.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. El-Hakim A, Moussa S . CUA guidelines on prostate biopsy methodology. Can Urol Assoc J 2010; 4: 89–94.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Cooperberg MR, Cowan JE, Hilton JF, Reese AC, Zaid HB, Porten SP et al. Outcomes of active surveillance for men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2011; 29: 228–234.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bostwick DG, Meiers I . Atypical small acinar proliferation in the prostate: clinical significance in 2006. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2006; 130: 952–957.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Leone L, Lacetera V, Montironi R, Cantoro U, Conti A, Sbrollini G et al. Biopsy follow-up in patients with isolated atypical small acinar proliferation (ASAP) in prostate biopsy. Arch Ital Urol Androl 2014; 86: 332–335.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lundstrom KJ, Drevin L, Carlsson S, Garmo H, Loeb S, Stattin P et al. Nationwide population based study of infections after transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. J Urol 2014; 192: 1116–1122.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Loeb S, Carter HB, Berndt SI, Ricker W, Schaeffer EM . Is repeat prostate biopsy associated with a greater risk of hospitalization? Data from SEER-Medicare. J Urol 2013; 189: 867–870.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. van Vugt HA, Roobol MJ, Kranse R, Maattanen L, Finne P, Hugosson J et al. Prediction of prostate cancer in unscreened men: external validation of a risk calculator. Eur J Cancer 2011; 47: 903–909.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ankerst DP, Hoefler J, Bock S, Goodman PJ, Vickers A, Hernandez J et al. Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator 2.0 for the prediction of low- vs high-grade prostate cancer. Urology 2014; 83: 1362–1367.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Moyer VA,, Force USPST. Screening for prostate cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 2012; 157: 120–134.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Nam RK, Saskin R, Lee Y, Liu Y, Law C, Klotz LH et al. Increasing hospital admission rates for urological complications after transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. J Urol 2010; 183: 963–968.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Tosoian JJ, Trock BJ, Landis P, Feng Z, Epstein JI, Partin AW et al. Active surveillance program for prostate cancer: an update of the Johns Hopkins experience. J Clin Oncol 2011; 29: 2185–2190.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Raskolnikov D, Rais-Bahrami S, George AK, Turkbey B, Shakir NA, Okoro C et al. The role of image guided biopsy targeting in patients with atypical small acinar proliferation. J Urol 2015; 193: 473–478.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Bryant RJ, Sjoberg DD, Vickers AJ, Robinson MC, Kumar R, Marsden L et al. Predicting high-grade cancer at ten-core prostate biopsy using four kallikrein markers measured in blood in the ProtecT study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2015; 107, pii: djv095.

  21. Iczkowski KA, Bassler TJ, Schwob VS, Bassler IC, Kunnel BS, Orozco RE et al. Diagnosis of “suspicious for malignancy” in prostate biopsies: predictive value for cancer. Urology 1998; 51: 749–757; discussion 57–58.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Epstein JI, Herawi M . Prostate needle biopsies containing prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia or atypical foci suspicious for carcinoma: implications for patient care. J Urol 2006; 175: 820–834.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Dorin RP, Wiener S, Harris CD, Wagner JR . Prostate atypia: does repeat biopsy detect clinically significant prostate cancer? Prostate 2015; 75: 673–678.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Warlick C, Feia K, Tomasini J, Iwamoto C, Lindgren B, Risk M . Rate of Gleason 7 or higher prostate cancer on repeat biopsy after a diagnosis of atypical small acinar proliferation. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2015; 18: 255–259.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Ploussard G, Plennevaux G, Allory Y, Salomon L, Azoulay S, Vordos D et al. High-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and atypical small acinar proliferation on initial 21-core extended biopsy scheme: incidence and implications for patient care and surveillance. World J Urol 2009; 27: 587–592.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Epstein JI, Allsbrook WC Jr, Amin MB, Egevad LL,, Committee IG. The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 2005; 29: 1228–1242.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Chen YB, Pierorazio PM, Epstein JI . Initial atypical diagnosis with carcinoma on subsequent prostate needle biopsy: findings at radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2010; 184: 1953–1957.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. R J Karnes and J Renzulli: These authors share senior authorship

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Urology, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, RI, USA

    A Leone, K Rotker, C Butler, S Schiff, G Pareek, D Golijanin & J Renzulli

  2. Division of Urology, The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA

    A Leone, K Rotker, C Butler, S Schiff, G Pareek, D Golijanin & J Renzulli

  3. Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA

    B Gershman & R J Karnes

  4. Department of Urology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA

    J Fantasia, A Miller, A Afiadata, A Zhou, Z Jiang & J Yates

  5. Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, RI, USA

    A Amin

  6. Department of Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA

    T Sebo

  7. Department of Hematology/Oncology, The Miriam Hospital, Providence, RI, USA

    A Mega

Authors
  1. A Leone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. B Gershman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. K Rotker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. C Butler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. J Fantasia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. A Miller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. A Afiadata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. A Amin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. A Zhou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Z Jiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. T Sebo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. A Mega
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. S Schiff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. G Pareek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. D Golijanin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. J Yates
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  17. R J Karnes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  18. J Renzulli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J Renzulli.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Leone, A., Gershman, B., Rotker, K. et al. Atypical small acinar proliferation (ASAP): Is a repeat biopsy necessary ASAP? A multi-institutional review. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 19, 68–71 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2015.52

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2015.52

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links