← Return to Cribriform cells: Does their presence change treatment approach?

Discussion
Comment receiving replies
Profile picture for bearcat998 @bearcat998

This was a small but interesting study. The only one I could find that compared cribiform with and without IDC.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31059665/
The study was too small to be definitive, but hopefully it leads to more studies.
My MO at the University of Cincinnati was the one who got me interested in it. She said when she sees cribiform she looks for 2 things;
- accompanying IDC or
-PTEN loss (on Decipher)
If either are present she treats it much more aggressively.
Obviously she didn't dismiss the need for treatment with cribiform. But she said alone it raises a yellow flag. In conjunction with IDC or PTEN loss, it's a red flag.

It's interesting that historically, IDC (much more aggressive) was lumped with cribiform and it wasn't until 2016 that the WHO recognized them as 2 distinct findings.

It was confusing to me when diagnosed because Dr. Google told me it was basically a death sentence but the none of the doctors I consulted with felt it would change there approach to therapy. The one thing it certainly did was rule out active survellience.

Jump to this post


Replies to "This was a small but interesting study. The only one I could find that compared cribiform..."

At that UCSF conference I went to the size of cribriform was a real critical issue. If over 2.5 mm it meant that the Gleason score had a 5 in it even if it was a 3+4

The doctors also mentioned that if somebody has intraductal they almost certainly have Cribriform. Tying the two together more than what do you seem to have heard?

Sure would be helpful if they could do a study that center on people that had cribriform, to see the long-term impact.