1. Volume 62, Issue 3, Pages 518-522 (September 2012)
Do Not Misinterpret Intraductal Carcinoma of the Prostate as High-grade Prostatic Intraepithelial Neoplasia! 
Rodolfo Montironi, Marina Scarpelli, Liang Cheng, Antonio Lopez-Beltran, Ming Zhou, Francesco Montorsi 
European Urology 
Volume 62, Issue 3, Pages (September 2012)
DOI: /j.eururo
Copyright © 2012 European Association of Urology Terms and Conditions

2. Fig. 1
Morphologic features of intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P). (A, B) Low-power view of an IDC-P on prostate biopsy showing (A) a large, irregular, and branching cribriform gland; (B) basal cell markers highlight the peripheral layer of basal cells. Note the adjacent invasive cancer glands. IDC-P lesions show (C) dense cribriform pattern, (D) solid architecture, and (E) comedonecrosis. (F) An IDC-P showing pleomorphic nuclei, some of which are six times larger than adjacent benign nuclei. These morphologic features are diagnostic of IDC-P. However, IDC-P overlaps with cribriform high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN) at the “low-grade” end of the morphologic spectrum. (G) An IDC-P lesion has a slightly irregular contour with relatively uniform nuclei and lacks the nuclear features characteristic of IDC-P. (H) In comparison, a cribriform HPGIN gland has similar morphology with small size, rounded contour, irregular cribriform architecture, and uniform nuclei.
European Urology  , DOI: ( /j.eururo )
Copyright © 2012 European Association of Urology Terms and Conditions

3. Fig. 2
A diagnostic approach to the prostate biopsy containing atypical cribriform lesions [15]. IDC-P=intraductal carcinoma of the prostate [15].
European Urology  , DOI: ( /j.eururo )
Copyright © 2012 European Association of Urology Terms and Conditions