Literature DB >> 18076947

The 20-core prostate biopsy protocol--a new gold standard?

Vincent Ravery1, Sébastien Dominique, Xavière Panhard, Marianne Toublanc, Liliane Boccon-Gibod, Laurent Boccon-Gibod.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We investigated the ability of a 20-core prostate biopsy protocol to enhance the prostate cancer diagnosis rate.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We compared the diagnosis rate of prostate biopsies in 2 groups of consecutive patients, including group 1-10 cores and group 2-20 cores. The prostate specific antigen range in the 2 groups was 3 to 30 ng/ml and biopsies were performed because of increased prostate specific antigen (more than 3 ng/ml) and/or abnormal digital rectal examination. To analyze the results we divided each group into 3 subgroups according to prostate specific antigen, including group 1-3 to less than 6 ng/ml, group 2-6 or greater to less than 10 ng/ml and group 3-10 or greater to up to 30 ng/ml. Multivariate analysis was performed to assess the difference in the diagnosis rate among the subgroups according to the number of cores taken.
RESULTS: The percent of positive biopsies was 39.7% in group 1 and 51.7% in group 2. Multivariate analysis confirmed that the number of biopsies taken was a factor that independently and significantly correlated with the prostate cancer diagnosis. The 20-core biopsy protocol was more efficient than the 10-core protocol in the 3 subgroups with 47.2% vs 28.1% of patients diagnosed in group 1 (OR 3.26, p = 0.001), 40.5% vs 36.1% in group 2 (OR 2.37, p = 0.009) and 69.8% vs 39.7% in group 3 (OR 2.01, p = 0.015).
CONCLUSIONS: The 20-core biopsy protocol was more efficient than the 10-core biopsy protocol, especially in patients with prostate specific antigen between 3 and 6 ng/ml. Nevertheless, it is mandatory to confirm whether detected tumors are clinically significant on pathological examination of the radical prostatectomy specimens.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18076947     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.09.033

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


  11 in total

Review 1.  When prostate cancer remains undetectable: The dilemma.

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

2.  The 20-core prostate biopsy as an initial strategy: impact on the detection of prostatic cancer.

Authors:  Mohamed Amine Jradi; Mohamed Dridi; Mourad Teyeb; Mokhtar Ould Sidi Mohamed; Ramzi Khiary; Samir Ghozzi; Nawfel Ben Rais
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 1.862

3.  How reliable is 12-core prostate biopsy procedure in the detection of prostate cancer?

Authors:  Ege Can Serefoglu; Serkan Altinova; Nevzat Serdar Ugras; Egemen Akincioglu; Erem Asil; M Derya Balbay
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2013-05-13       Impact factor: 1.862

4.  Is sampling transitional zone in patients who had prior negative prostate biopsy necessary?

Authors:  Bayram Dogan; Ege Can Serefoglu; Ali Fuat Atmaca; Abdullah Erdem Canda; Ziya Akbulut; M Derya Balbay
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2012-03-15       Impact factor: 2.370

5.  Gleason Misclassification Rate Is Independent of Number of Biopsy Cores in Systematic Biopsy.

Authors:  Liza Quintana; Ashley Ward; Sean J Gerrin; Elizabeth M Genega; Seymour Rosen; Martin G Sanda; Andrew A Wagner; Peter Chang; William C DeWolf; Huihui Ye
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2016-03-02       Impact factor: 2.649

6.  Current prostate biopsy protocols cannot reliably identify patients for focal therapy: correlation of low-risk prostate cancer on biopsy with radical prostatectomy findings.

Authors:  Philip Quann; David F Jarrard; Wei Huang
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Pathol       Date:  2010-03-30

7.  Analysis of histological findings obtained combining US/mp-MRI fusion-guided biopsies with systematic US biopsies: mp-MRI role in prostate cancer detection and false negative.

Authors:  Eliodoro Faiella; Domiziana Santucci; Federico Greco; Giulia Frauenfelder; Viola Giacobbe; Giovanni Muto; Bruno Beomonte Zobel; Rosario Francesco Grasso
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2017-10-10       Impact factor: 3.469

8.  Prostate cancer detection rates in different biopsy schemes. Which cores for which patients?

Authors:  Luigi Cormio; Vincenzo Scattoni; Fabrizio Lorusso; Antonia Perrone; Giuseppe Di Fino; Oscar Selvaggio; Francesca Sanguedolce; Pantaleo Bufo; Francesco Montorsi; Giuseppe Carrieri
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2012-11-25       Impact factor: 4.226

9.  DNA methylation status is more reliable than gene expression at detecting cancer in prostate biopsy.

Authors:  A Paziewska; M Dabrowska; K Goryca; A Antoniewicz; J Dobruch; M Mikula; D Jarosz; L Zapala; A Borowka; J Ostrowski
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2014-06-17       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  Metabolomic Prediction of Human Prostate Cancer Aggressiveness: Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy of Histologically Benign Tissue.

Authors:  Lindsey A Vandergrift; Emily A Decelle; Johannes Kurth; Shulin Wu; Taylor L Fuss; Elita M DeFeo; Elkan F Halpern; Matthias Taupitz; W Scott McDougal; Aria F Olumi; Chin-Lee Wu; Leo L Cheng
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-03-26       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.