Literature DB >> 18707706

Prostate cancers diagnosed at repeat biopsy are smaller and less likely to be high grade.

Nelly Tan1, Brian R Lane, Jianbo Li, Ayman S Moussa, Meghan Soriano, J Stephen Jones.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We investigated whether prostate cancer diagnosed on initial prostate biopsy had worse pathological outcomes compared to that diagnosed on repeat prostate biopsy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed 905 newly diagnosed prostate cancer cases from 2000 to 2007. Patients were stratified by the number of previous biopsies, including the initial biopsy in 690, and 1 and 2 or greater negative previous biopsies in 142 and 73, respectively. We analyzed Gleason sum, number of cores taken, percent of positive cores and bilaterality of prostate cancer. Clinically insignificant cancers were defined according to prostate specific antigen density 0.4 ng/ml or less, 3 or fewer positive cores, 50% or less of maximum cancer in any core and Gleason sum 6 or less.
RESULTS: Prostate cancer was diagnosed in 57%, 23% and 21% of cases in the initial, and 1 and 2 or greater negative previous biopsies groups, respectively. Initial prostate biopsy showed a higher number and percent of positive cores, and the maximum percent of prostate cancer involved in a core. However, the Gleason pattern distribution differed significantly in the 3 groups with the highest percent (14%) of Gleason sum 8 or greater in the subset with 2 or greater negative previous biopsies (p <0.01). On multivariate analysis accounting for prostate specific antigen, digital rectal examination, age and biopsy schema the number of previous biopsies was an independent predictor of the number and percent of positive cores, maximum prostate cancer involved in a core, and bilaterality (p <0.01). Only prostate specific antigen, digital rectal examination and age but not the number of previous biopsies independently predicted Gleason sum (p <0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: Prostate cancer diagnosed on initial prostate biopsy had higher volume. However, there were a significant number of high grade prostate cancers detected on the third or greater prostate biopsy, underscoring the importance of repeat prostate biopsy in the setting of increased or increasing prostate specific antigen despite negative previous prostate biopsy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18707706     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.06.022

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


  16 in total

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

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

Review 2.  Addressing the need for repeat prostate biopsy: new technology and approaches.

Authors:  Michael L Blute; E Jason Abel; Tracy M Downs; Frederick Kelcz; David F Jarrard
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2015-07-14       Impact factor: 14.432

3.  Detection rate of clinically insignificant prostate cancer increases with repeat prostate biopsies.

Authors:  Bumsoo Park; Seong-Soo Jeon; Sung-Ho Ju; Byong-Chang Jeong; Seong-Il Seo; Hyun-Moo Lee; Han-Yong Choi
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2012-12-31       Impact factor: 3.285

Review 4.  Random biopsy: when, how many and where to take the cores?

Authors:  Vincenzo Scattoni; Carmen Maccagnano; Umberto Capitanio; Andrea Gallina; Alberto Briganti; Francesco Montorsi
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-06-08       Impact factor: 4.226

5.  Are repeat prostate biopsies safe? A cohort analysis from the SEARCH database.

Authors:  Ryan P Kopp; Sean P Stroup; Florian R Schroeck; Stephen J Freedland; Frederick Millard; Martha K Terris; William J Aronson; Joseph C Presti; Christopher L Amling; Christopher J Kane
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-04-11       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  Impact of asymptomatic prostatitis on re-operations due to urethral stricture or bladder neck contracture developed after TUR-P.

Authors:  Omer Gokhan Doluoglu; Cevdet Serkan Gokkaya; Binhan Kagan Aktas; Cetin Volkan Oztekin; Suleyman Bulut; Ali Memis; Mesut Cetinkaya
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2012-01-18       Impact factor: 2.370

Review 7.  Prostate cancer: diagnosis and staging.

Authors:  Nigel Borley; Mark R Feneley
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2008-12-01       Impact factor: 3.285

8.  Optimal prostate biopsy regimen.

Authors:  Ryan K Berglund; J Stephen Jones
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 3.092

9.  Performance of transperineal template-guided mapping biopsy in detecting prostate cancer in the initial and repeat biopsy setting.

Authors:  A V Taira; G S Merrick; R W Galbreath; H Andreini; W Taubenslag; R Curtis; W M Butler; E Adamovich; K E Wallner
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2009-09-29       Impact factor: 5.554

10.  Are more low-risk prostate cancers detected by repeated biopsy? A retrospective pilot study.

Authors:  Seung Je Lee; Insang Hwang; Eu Chang Hwang; Seung Il Jung; Taek Won Kang; Dong Deuk Kwon; Kwangsung Park
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2013-06-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.