Literature DB >> 10604335

A comparative analysis of sextant and an extended 11-core multisite directed biopsy strategy.

R J Babaian1, A Toi, K Kamoi, P Troncoso, J Sweet, R Evans, D Johnston, M Chen.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The 3 tumor locations unsampled by conventional sextant biopsies that have been identified on composite 3-dimensional reconstruction of 180 radical prostatectomy specimens are the anterior transition zone, midline peripheral zone and inferior portions of the anterior horn in the peripheral zone. We evaluated an 11-core multisite directed biopsy scheme incorporating these alternate areas and conventional sextant biopsies in 362 patients from 2 institutions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients without a prior diagnosis of cancer underwent ultrasound guided 11-core biopsies which included conventional sextant and 3 alternate sites. All specimens were separated for specific location identification. Biopsy was performed in 183 patients at MD Anderson Cancer Center (group 1) and in 179 at Toronto General Hospital (group 2). All group 2 and 54% of group 1 patients (98 of 183) had a prior biopsy negative for cancer.
RESULTS: Median prostate specific antigen was higher in group 2 than in group 1 patients (11.5 versus 9.5 ng./ml., p = 0.016). Overall a 33% increase (36 of 110 patients) in cancer detection was observed when biopsy technique included the alternate areas (p = 0.0021). The anterior horn was the most frequently positive biopsy site followed by the transition zone and midline sites. The 11-core technique had significantly better cancer detection rates when digital rectal examination and transrectal ultrasound were normal, and in men with serum prostate specific antigen between 4.1 and 10 ng./ml.
CONCLUSIONS: Biopsies of the alternate sites suggested by our simulation studies are feasible and reproducible. This new strategy significantly enhanced (p = 0.0075) prostate cancer detection compared to conventional sextant biopsies in men undergoing a repeat procedure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10604335

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  91 in total

1.  Calibrating disease progression models using population data: a critical precursor to policy development in cancer control.

Authors:  Roman Gulati; Lurdes Inoue; Jeffrey Katcher; William Hazelton; Ruth Etzioni
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2010-06-07       Impact factor: 5.899

2.  Evaluation of GSTP1 and APC methylation as indicators for repeat biopsy in a high-risk cohort of men with negative initial prostate biopsies.

Authors:  Bruce J Trock; Michelle J Brotzman; Leslie A Mangold; Joseph W Bigley; Jonathan I Epstein; David McLeod; Eric A Klein; J Stephen Jones; Songbai Wang; Theresa McAskill; Jyoti Mehrotra; Bhargavi Raghavan; Alan W Partin
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2011-11-11       Impact factor: 5.588

3.  [Complications of transrectal prostate biopsy. Determination of current status].

Authors:  H W Gottfried; B Volkmer
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 0.639

4.  [Transrectal ultrasound of the prostate. Current status and prospects].

Authors:  M Zacharias; K V Jenderka; H Heynemann; P Fornara
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 0.639

5.  CUA guidelines on prostate biopsy methodology.

Authors:  Assaad El-Hakim; Sabri Moussa
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 6.  When prostate cancer remains undetectable: The dilemma.

Authors:  Mahmoud Othman Mustafa; Louis Pisters
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2015-03

Review 7.  A comparison of the diagnostic performance of systematic versus ultrasound-guided biopsies of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Stijn W T P J Heijmink; Hilco van Moerkerk; Lambertus A L M Kiemeney; J Alfred Witjes; Ferdinand Frauscher; Jelle O Barentsz
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2006-01-04       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Prostate biopsy: targeting cancer for detection and therapy.

Authors:  Samir S Taneja
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2006

9.  Comparative effectiveness of alternative prostate-specific antigen--based prostate cancer screening strategies: model estimates of potential benefits and harms.

Authors:  Roman Gulati; John L Gore; Ruth Etzioni
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2013-02-05       Impact factor: 25.391

10.  Diagnostic prostate biopsy performed in a non-academic center increases the risk of re-classification at confirmatory biopsy for men considering active surveillance for prostate cancer.

Authors:  L M Wong; S Ferrara; S M H Alibhai; A Evans; T Van der Kwast; G Trottier; N Timilshina; A Toi; G Kulkarni; R Hamilton; A Zlotta; N Fleshner; A Finelli
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2014-12-09       Impact factor: 5.554

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.