Search

Prostate cancer accounts for 29% of malignant diagnoses among men in the United States and is the second leading cause of death from cancer. Effective screening methods and improved treatment have decreased the mortality rate significantly. This decreased mortality rate, however, does not apply to all histologic variants. Adenosquamous carcinoma of the prostate is an extremely aggressive neoplasm with no current known curative therapy. It is often diagnosed after chemotherapy, radiation, or androgen deprivation therapy for traditional prostatic adenocarcinomas. Primary carcinomas of the prostate with squamous features include, but are not limited to, pure squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma mixed with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). Important distinguishable clinical features of adenosquamous carcinoma include normal prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, even with advanced disease and osteolytic versus osteoblastic metastatic lesions in adenocarcinoma. Additional entities to consider in the differential diagnosis are squamous metaplasia of the prostate, secondary involvement of pure SCC, and urothelial carcinoma with squamous differentiation. Here, we present a de novo case of adenosquamous carcinoma in a 48-year-old man who rapidly developed extensive metastatic disease.

Nowadays, in the case of suspected prostate cancer (PCa), tissue needle biopsy remains the benchmark for diagnosis despite its invasiveness and poor tolerability, as serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is limited by low specificity. The aim of this proteomic study was to identify new diagnostic biomarkers in urine, an easily and non-invasively available sample, able to selectively discriminate cancer from benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), evaluating whether the presence of inflammation may be a confounding parameter. The analysis was performed by two-dimensional gel electrophoresis (2-DE), mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) and Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) on urine samples from PCa and BPH patients, divided into subgroups based on the presence or absence of inflammation. Significant quantitative and qualitative differences were found in the urinary proteomic profile of PCa and BPH groups. Of the nine differentially expressed proteins, only five can properly be considered potential biomarkers of PCa able to discriminate the two diseases, as they were not affected by the inflammatory process. Therefore, the proteomic research of novel and reliable urinary biomarkers of PCa should be conducted considering the presence of inflammation as a realistic interfering element, as it could hinder the detection of important protein targets.