Abstract
Background:
Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the prostate has limited treatment choices and portends a dismal prognosis with an average survival time of ~14-months. This study provides a descriptive overview of SCC of the prostate in Saudi Arabia.
Materials and Methods:
A retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with prostatic SCC between 1 January 2008 and 31 December 2017. Information on demographic and tumor characteristics and the survival of patients was collected from the Saudi Cancer Registry. Survival was depicted through Kaplan–Meier plots. Fisher’s exact test was used to assess the association between categorical variables and death, while a Wilcoxon rank sum test was applied for numerical variables.
Results:
Out of a larger subset of 3607 patients, 16 patients were diagnosed with prostatic SCC, of which half resided in the Central region (50.0%) and most (81.2%) were aged greater than or equal to 60 years. Most patients (62.6%) had poorly differentiated (grade III, 43.8%) lesions, and 50% of cases were metastatic at diagnosis. 62.5% of patients died, all residing in the Eastern and Central regions. Regional extension (75.0%) and distant metastasis (87.5%) were significantly associated with death compared to localized lesions (0.0%) (P=0.022). The 5-year survival rate in our study was 33%.
Conclusion:
The present study is the first to describe the characteristics of prostatic SCC in Saudi Arabia. Our results are consistent with prior studies showing that prostatic SCC is often high-grade and metastatic at diagnosis, conferring a poor prognosis.
Highlights
This study provides a comprehensive analysis of 16 cases of squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the prostate, an uncommon and aggressive variant of prostate cancer, using data from the Saudi Cancer Registry.
The study reveals that SCC predominantly affects males above the age of 60, with high-grade lesions and frequent distant metastasis. Histological examination remains the primary mode of diagnosis.
Despite the challenging prognosis, the 5-year survival rate for SCC patients in this study was 33%, which is higher than previously reported. Factors such as place of residence and tumor extent were found to be significant predictors of mortality.
Background
Prostate cancer stands as the most prevalent cancer in males and constitutes the second-leading cause of cancer-related mortality among men1. The majority of prostate cancer cases are adenocarcinomas, whereas a rare and aggressive variant, squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), accounts for 05–1% of prostate cancer cases2,3. The literature on primary SCC of the prostate is limited, with fewer than 100 reported cases4.
The exact cause of SCC of the prostate remains unknown, with the prostatic urethral urothelium, periurethral ductal epithelium, prostatic acinar epithelium, or radiation- or endocrine-therapy-induced differentiation of adenocarcinoma cells all being implicated as potential origins of the cancer4–8. Patients with prostatic SCC often present with obstructive symptoms, such as weak stream, straining, and hesitancy, as well as metastatic symptoms like bone pain from osteolytic metastases, unlike the osteoblastic metastases that are typically a feature of adenocarcinomas9,10.
Histological examination of a biopsy or surgical specimen remains the mainstay of diagnosis11. Mott proposed the following criteria to identify primary SCC of the prostate: (i) the presence of clearly malignant invasive neoplasm with disordered growth and cellular anaplasia; (ii) definite squamous features of keratinization, squamous pearls and/or numerous distinct intercellular bridges; (iii) the absence of glandular or acinar pattern (indicative of adenocarcinoma with squamous metaplasia); (iv) no prior estrogen therapy; and (v) the absence of primary squamous cancer elsewhere, particularly in the bladder12. These criteria help distinguish prostatic SCC from non-neoplastic squamous metaplasia possibly secondary to an infarction, acute/chronic prostatitis, and granulomatous prostatitis due to Bacillus Calmette–Guérin (BCG), estrogen, or radiation therapy12.
Due to its aggressive nature and resistance to standard therapies, SCC of the prostate has limited treatment choices and portends a dismal prognosis with an average survival time of ~14-months13. Radiation therapy, chemotherapy, and radical prostatectomy have all been tried with limited success10,14,15.
This study provides a descriptive overview of SCC of the prostate with a comprehensive analysis of 16 cases retrieved from the Saudi Cancer Registry (SCR) in Saudi Arabia.
Methods
This retrospective cohort study included all patients diagnosed with prostatic SCC between 1 January 2008 and 31 December 2017. Patients with secondary lesions metastasizing to the prostate were excluded. The data was collected from the SCR, a registry that collects tumor data from all private, military, and health ministry hospitals across five regional offices in Saudi Arabia. The data analysis and periodic reporting take place at the main office in Riyadh. This work has been reported in line with the STROCSS criteria16. This study has been registered into the research registry [researchregistry9189].
Statistical analysis
All statistical analyses was performed using RStudio (R version 4.2.2.). Categorical variables were expressed as frequencies and percentages, while numerical variables were presented as the median and interquartile range (IQR). Survival analysis was conducted using the Kaplan–Meier method. Due to the large number of variables with zero frequencies and empty rows that could limit the validity of a Cox regression analysis, we opted to employ an inferential test to assess factors associated with cancer-related mortality. Fisher’s exact test was used to assess the association between categorical variables and death, while a Wilcoxon rank sum test was applied for numerical variables. Statistical significance was defined as P <0.05.
Results
Demographic characteristics
In this study, we focused on a subset of a larger dataset of 3607 patients with four types of cancers: acinar adenocarcinoma (n=3374, 93.5%), ductal adenocarcinoma (n=209, 5.8%), embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma (n=8, 0.2%) and SCC (n=16, 0.4%). Our analysis specifically examined 16 patients with SCC of the prostate and compared their survival rates to those with other types of cancer. Among patients with SCC, half of them resided in the Central region (50.0%), and most (81.2%) were aged greater than or equal to 60 years. Detailed demographic characteristics are presented in Table 1. The majority of our patients (n=7, 43.8%) were diagnosed with the disease in 2018 (Fig. 1). The median (IQR) interval between diagnosis and last contact or death was 4.0 years (2.0–10.2) (Fig. 2).
Table 1.
Demographic characteristics
| Parameter | Category | N (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Place of residency | Central region | 8 (50.0) |
| Eastern region | 4 (25.0) | |
| Western region | 3 (18.8) | |
| Northern region | 0 (0.0) | |
| Southern region | 1 (6.2) | |
| Age group | ≤18 Years | 0 (0.0) |
| 19–39 years | 0 (0.0) | |
| 40–59 years | 3 (18.8) | |
| ≥60 years | 13 (81.2) | |
| Marital status | Single | 0 (0.0) |
| Married | 16 (100.0) | |
| Divorced | 0 (0.0) | |
| Widowed | 0 (0.0) |
Figure 1.
The frequencies of patients with squamous cell carcinoma who had been diagnosed at different time points.
Figure 2.
A Kaplan–Meier curve for the overall survival of patients with squamous cell carcinoma.
Tumor characteristics
Only one patient (6.2%) had a grade I tumor, whereas grades II (five patients, 31.2%), III (seven patients, 43.8%), and IV (three patients, 18.8%) tumors were more prevalent. Localized tumors were detected in 25.0% of patients, whereas distant metastasis was reported among 50.0% of cases. The diagnosis was based on histological testing of the primary lesion in most patients (87.5%) and the histology of metastases in 12.5% of cases. Further details on tumor characteristics can be found in Table 2.
Table 2.
Characteristics of the tumors
| Parameter | Category | N (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Grade | Grade I (well diff) | 1 (6.2) |
| Grade II (mod diff) | 5 (31.2) | |
| Grade III (poor diff) | 7 (43.8) | |
| Grade IV (undiff anaplastic) | 3 (18.8) | |
| Extension | Localized | 4 (25.0) |
| Regional: lymph node | 0 (0.0) | |
| Regional: direct extension | 4 (25.0) | |
| Distant metastasis | 8 (50.0) | |
| Base of diagnosis | Laboratory test | 0 (0.0) |
| Histology of primary | 14 (87.5) | |
| Histology of metastases | 2 (12.5) | |
| Autopsy | 0 (0.0) | |
| Status | Alive | 6 (37.5) |
| Dead | 10 (62.5) | |
| Interval between diagnosis and event | Median (IQR) | 4.0 (2.0, 10.2) |
Analysis of mortality and associated factors
Among patients with SCC of the prostate, death occurred in 10 patients (62.5%). Residing in the Eastern and Central regions was significantly associated with death (100.0 and 75.0%, respectively) compared to other provinces (0% in all) (P=0.018). This phenomenon could be attributed to the fact that the most challenging cases are generally referred to these regions owing to the presence of the largest hospitals. Additionally, the waiting lists are very long in these hospitals. Regional extension (75.0%) and distant metastasis (87.5%) were also significantly associated with death compared to localized lesions (0.0%) (P=0.022). The time interval between diagnosis and last contact or death was significantly shorter among dead patients (median = 3.0 years, IQR = 2.0 to 4.0) compared to alive patients (median = 12.5 years, IQR = 10.2–14.0, P = 0.031, Table 3).
Table 3.
Factors associated with death among patients with squamous cell carcinoma
| Parameter | Category | Alive, N=6 | Dead, N=10 | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Place of residency | Central region | 2 (25.0%) | 6 (75.0%) | 0.018 |
| Eastern region | 0 (0.0%) | 4 (100.0%) | ||
| Western region | 3 (100.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | ||
| Northern region | 0 (NA%) | 0 (NA%) | ||
| Southern region | 1 (100.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | ||
| Age group | 40–59 years | 0 (0.0%) | 3 (100.0%) | 0.250 |
| ≥60 years | 6 (46.2%) | 7 (53.8%) | ||
| Grade | Grade I | 1 (100.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0.266 |
| Grade II | 3 (60.0%) | 2 (40.0%) | ||
| Grade III | 2 (28.6%) | 5 (71.4%) | ||
| Grade IV | 0 (0.0%) | 3 (100.0%) | ||
| Extension | Localized | 4 (100.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0.022 |
| Regional: direct extension | 1 (25.0%) | 3 (75.0%) | ||
| Distant metastasis | 1 (12.5%) | 7 (87.5%) | ||
| Base of diagnosis | Histology of primary | 4 (28.6%) | 10 (71.4%) | 0.125 |
| Histology of metastases | 2 (100.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | ||
| Interval between diagnosis and event | Median (IQR) | 12.5 (10.2, 14.0) | 3.0 (2.0, 4.0) | 0.031 |
Survival analysis
The survival of patients with SCC was compared to three histopathological types included in our dataset. The 5-year survival rate was 90.3% (95% CI: 89.3–91.3) for acinar adenocarcinoma, 88.0% (95% CI: 83.7–92.5) for ductal adenocarcinoma, 37.5% (95% CI: 15.3–91.7) for embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma and 33.3% (95% CI: 16.3–68.2) for SCC. The difference in survival rates among these different histopathological types was statistically significant (P <0.0001, Fig. 3).
Figure 3.
A Kaplan–Meier curve for the survival of patients with four types of cancer, including acinar adenocarcinoma, ductal adenocarcinoma, embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma and squamous cell carcinoma.
Discussion
Our study provides a descriptive overview and survival analysis of 16 cases of SCC of the prostate from the SCR in Saudi Arabia. Consistent with prior studies, our studies indicate that SCC predominantly affects males above 60 years old17. Most of our patients presented with high-grade lesions (≥grade III) and distant metastasis were common (50%) compared to localized tumors (25% of patients), which is also in agreement with prior studies where this type of tumor was found to be high-grade at presentation and metastasize most frequently to regional lymph nodes and bone, with the lungs, liver, and brain being less common sites17,18. Histological examination was the primary mode of diagnosing the primary lesions (87.5%), similar to prior case studies4,19,20.
Our study revealed a high mortality rate in SCC patients (62.5%), with place of residence and tumor extent being the strongest predictors of mortality. Encouragingly, the 5-year survival rate for the individuals in our study was 33%, which is significantly higher than most studies as per a meta-analysis that showed the 1-year survival of prostatic SCC to be 32% and a 3-year survival of only 9%17. Treatment options for SCC of the prostate are limited, with the contemporary literature reporting a mix of chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and prostatectomy use, either in combinations or alone, all with limited success17,21. However, long-term survival has recently been reported in recent independent case reports with a combination of radiotherapy to the whole pelvis and prostate along with a chemotherapy regimen of docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil4,22,23.
There are several limitations to our study, most notably the small sample size. A more comprehensive retrospective study with a larger sample size would provide a better understanding of the demographic and clinical characteristics, mortality rates, management, and prognosis of prostatic SCC among Saudi citizens. Furthermore, issues such as underreporting, lack of data on clinical characteristics, incomplete data representation in the TNM classification, distant metastasis, and failure to include crucial factors like specific treatment strategy are limitations in our study that should be addressed by future studies. Lastly, we could not compare differences in demographic and clinical characteristics between different geographical regions to the further our findings of region-specific mortality.
Conclusion
Our findings are in agreement with prior research showing that prostatic SCC is associated with a high-grade and metastasis at diagnosis. Place of residence, particularly in the Eastern and Central regions of Saudi Arabia, was a significant predictor of mortality. Further research is needed to identify the optimal treatment regimen of these patients.
Ethics approval
Ethical approval (NRC21R/499/11) was obtained from King Abdullah International Medical Research Center (KAIMRC) prior to the beginning of this study. This study is a secondary analysis.
Consent to participate
Written informed consent was obtained from the patient for publication and any accompanying images. A copy of the written consent is available for review by the Editor-in-Chief of this journal on request.
Sources of funding
This research did not receive any funding from institutions in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Author contribution
All authors contributed to the research and/or preparation of the manuscript. A.A., M.A., A.S., and B.N.S.: participated in the study design and wrote the first draft of the manuscript; A.A., A.S., B.N.S., M.A., A.A.A.S., N.A., K.M.A., R.A., Z.F.M., A.B.A., R.A.A., and S.B.O.: collected and processed the data; M.A.: participated in the study design and performed the statistical analyses; M.A., A.S., and B.N.S.: reviewed and finalized the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Conflicts of interest disclosures
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.
Research registration unique identifying number (UIN)
researchregistry9189.
Guarantor
Mohammad Alghafees.
Availability of data and material
Not applicable.
Provenance and peer review
Not commissioned, externally peer reviewed.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the Saudi Cancer Registry for providing access to the data for research purposes.
Footnotes
A.A., A.S., and B.N.S. contributed equally as first authors.
Sponsorships or competing interests that may be relevant to content are disclosed at the end of this article.
Published online 2 October 2023
Contributor Information
Ahmed Alasker, Email: alaskerah1@mngha.med.sa.
Areez Shafqat, Email: ashafqat@alfaisal.edu.
Belal Nedal Sabbah, Email: sabbahbelal@yahoo.com;belalsabbah@gmail.com;bsabbah@alfaisal.edu.
Mohammad Alghafees, Email: Alghafees687@gmail.com.
Aljoharah Adeeb Al Saud, Email: jalsaud17@gmail.com.
Nasouh Aljabi, Email: naljabi@outlook.com.
Khalid Mazin Altaweel, Email: Kaltaweel@alfaisal.edu.
Raghad Alhumaidan, Email: Raghoodi.I@gmail.com.
Ziyad F. Musalli, Email: musalli435@ksau-hs.edu.sa.
Abdulaziz Almanie, Email: almanieaz@hotmail.com.
Rakan Abu Alqam, Email: rakanalqam97@gmail.com.
Salman Bin Ofisan, Email: Salmanalofisan22@gmail.com.
References
- 1.Rawla P. Epidemiology of prostate cancer. World J Oncol 2019;10:63. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Bisson E, Bennamoun M. Squamous cell carcinoma of the prostate: a case report. Ann Clin Case Rep 2021;6:2046. [Google Scholar]
- 3.Randolph TL, Amin MB, Ro JY, et al. Histologic variants of adenocarcinoma and other carcinomas of prostate: pathologic criteria and clinical significance. Mod Pathol 1997;10:612–629. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Hanna K, Lele SM, McCormick G, et al. Primary prostatic squamous cell carcinoma. Urol Case Rep 2021;34:101478. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Thompson GJ, Albers DD, Broders AC. Unusual carcinomas involving the prostate gland. J Urol 1953;69:416–425. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Gray GF, Jr, Marshall VF. Squamous carcinoma of the prostate. J Urol 1975;113:736–738. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Sieracki JC. Epidermoid carcinoma of the human prostate: report of three cases. Lab Invest 1955;4:232–240. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Lee J. Transformation of adenocarcinoma of prostate to squamous cell carcinoma following hormonal treatment: a case report and review of the literature. Radiol Case Rep 2019;14:483–489. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Miller VA, Reuter V, Scher HI. Primary squamous cell carcinoma of the prostate after radiation seed implantation for adenocarcinoma. Urology 1995;46:111–113. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Malik RD, Dakwar G, Hardee ME, et al. Squamous cell carcinoma of the prostate. Rev Urol 2011;13:56–60. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Arva NC, Das K. Diagnostic dilemmas of squamous differentiation in prostate carcinoma case report and review of the literature. Diagn Pathol 2011;6:46. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Mott LJ. Squamous cell carcinoma of the prostate: report of 2 cases and review of the literature. J Urol 1979;121:833–835. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Moskovitz B, Munichor M, Bolkier M, et al. Squamous cell carcinoma of the prostate. Urol Int 1993;51:181–183. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Imamura M, Nishiyama H, Ohmori K, et al. Squamous cell carcinoma of the prostate without evidence of recurrence 5 years after operation. Urol Int 2000;65:122–124. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Wernert N, Goebbels R, Bonkhoff H, et al. Squamous cell carcinoma of the prostate. Histopathology 1990;17:339–344. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Mathew G, Agha R, Albrecht J, et al. STROCSS 2021: strengthening the reporting of cohort, cross-sectional and case–control studies in surgery. Int J Surg 2021;96:106165. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Brunnhoelzl D, Wang J. Clinical features, treatment, prognosis, and outcome of 47 patients with pure squamous cell carcinoma of the prostate. J Clin Oncol 2018;36(suppl_6):7.29072975 [Google Scholar]
- 18.Ichaoui H, Nasr SB, Gargouri F, et al. Transformation of a prostatic adenocarcinoma into squamous cell carcinoma after luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist and radiotherapy treatment. The Pan African Medical Journal 2019;34:125. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Okada E, Kamizaki H. Primary squamous cell carcinoma of the prostate. Int J Urol 2000;7:347–350. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Inaba M, Boku H, Tanaka S, et al. Primary squamous cell carcinoma of the prostate: a case report. Hinyokika Kiyo 2007;53:39–41. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Hutten RJ, Weil CR, Tward JD, et al. Patterns of care and treatment outcomes in locoregional squamous cell carcinoma of the prostate. Eur Urol Open Sci 2021;23:30–33. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Onoda M, Sugimoto R, Uesugi N, et al. Novel combination chemotherapy with radiotherapy for prostate squamous cell carcinoma. Int Cancer Conf J 2017;6:25–28. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Atagi K, Fukuhara H, Ishiguro M, et al. Successful treatment with DCF chemotherapy and radiotherapy for primary squamous cell carcinoma of the prostate. IJU Case Rep 2021;4:421–424. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
Not applicable.