Literature DB >> 21704447

Predictors of unfavourable repeat biopsy results in men participating in a prospective active surveillance program.

Meelan Bul1, Roderick C N van den Bergh, Antti Rannikko, Riccardo Valdagni, Tom Pickles, Chris H Bangma, Monique J Roobol.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Active surveillance (AS) protocols for low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) generally include repeat prostate biopsies at predefined follow-up intervals.
OBJECTIVE: To study the outcome of routinely obtained 1-yr repeat biopsies and factors predicting reclassification to higher risk, to contribute to risk stratification for men on AS. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We analysed men with low-risk PCa (clinical stage ≤ T2, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≤ 10 ng/ml, PSA density <0.2 ng/ml per millilitre, one or two positive biopsy cores, and Gleason score ≤ 6) who had been included in a prospective AS protocol.
INTERVENTIONS: PSA was measured 3-monthly and the first volume-dependent repeat biopsy was scheduled 1 yr after diagnosis, independent of PSA doubling time (PSA-DT). Reclassification to higher risk disease on repeat biopsy was defined as Gleason score ≥ 7 or ≥ 3 positive cores. MEASUREMENTS: We analysed whether baseline patient characteristics and PSA-DT were associated with reclassification to more aggressive PCa on repeat biopsy. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A first repeat biopsy was taken in 757 patients after median follow-up of 1.03 yr. The results of repeat biopsies were favourable (no or low-risk PCa) in 594 patients (78.5%) and led to reclassification of risk in 163 (21.5%). Analysis showed that reclassification to higher risk was significantly influenced by the number of initial positive cores (two vs one) (odds ratio [OR]: 1.8; p=0.002) and higher PSA density (OR: 2.1; p=0.003). The outcome was not significantly influenced by age, clinical stage, total number of biopsy cores, or PSA. Adding PSA-DT at time of repeat biopsy to the model showed PSA-DT <3 yr to be significantly associated with reclassification to higher risk (OR: 1.7; p=0.015). Data on tumour involvement per biopsy core were not available.
CONCLUSIONS: Clinical features at baseline and during follow-up in our AS cohort are significantly associated with short-term reclassification to higher risk on repeat biopsy. These characteristics can potentially be used for risk stratification of men with PCa who are apparently at favourable risk.
Copyright © 2011 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21704447     DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.06.027

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol        ISSN: 0302-2838            Impact factor:   20.096


  16 in total

1.  PSA density: The comeback kid?

Authors:  Chris Morash
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 1.862

2.  Surveillance biopsy and active treatment during active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Katsuyoshi Hashine; Hiroyuki Iio; Yoshiteru Ueno; Shohei Tsukimori; Iku Ninomiya
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-06-22       Impact factor: 3.402

Review 3.  Active surveillance for prostate cancer: a systematic review of clinicopathologic variables and biomarkers for risk stratification.

Authors:  Stacy Loeb; Sophie M Bruinsma; Joseph Nicholson; Alberto Briganti; Tom Pickles; Yoshiyuki Kakehi; Sigrid V Carlsson; Monique J Roobol
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2014-10-31       Impact factor: 20.096

Review 4.  The management of rectal bleeding following transrectal prostate biopsy: A review of the current literature.

Authors:  Mark R Quinlan; Damien Bolton; Rowan G Casey
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2017-12-22       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 5.  Active surveillance as a practical strategy to differentiate lethal and non-lethal prostate cancer subtypes.

Authors:  Yoshiyuki Kakehi
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2012-04-16       Impact factor: 3.285

Review 6.  Active surveillance for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Javier Romero-Otero; Borja García-Gómez; José M Duarte-Ojeda; Alfredo Rodríguez-Antolín; Antoni Vilaseca; Sigrid V Carlsson; Karim A Touijer
Journal:  Int J Urol       Date:  2015-11-30       Impact factor: 3.369

7.  Should inclusion criteria for active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer be more stringent? From an interim analysis of PRIAS-JAPAN.

Authors:  Mikio Sugimoto; Hiromi Hirama; Akito Yamaguchi; Hirofumi Koga; Katsuyoshi Hashine; Iku Ninomiya; Nobuo Shinohara; Satoru Maruyama; Shin Egawa; Hiroshi Sasaki; Yoshiyuki Kakehi
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-11-27       Impact factor: 4.226

8.  Relationship Between Prebiopsy Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), Biopsy Indication, and MRI-ultrasound Fusion-targeted Prostate Biopsy Outcomes.

Authors:  Xiaosong Meng; Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Neil Mendhiratta; Michael Fenstermaker; Richard Huang; James S Wysock; Marc A Bjurlin; Susan Marshall; Fang-Ming Deng; Ming Zhou; Jonathan Melamed; William C Huang; Herbert Lepor; Samir S Taneja
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2015-06-22       Impact factor: 20.096

9.  An assessment of Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS) criteria for active surveillance of clinically low-risk prostate cancer patients.

Authors:  Vitor da Silva; Ilias Cagiannos; Luke T Lavallée; Ranjeeta Mallick; Kelsey Witiuk; Sonya Cnossen; James A Eastham; Dean A Fergusson; Chris Morash; Rodney H Breau
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 1.862

10.  Our results of active surveillance for localized prostate cancer patients.

Authors:  Hasan Soydan; Furkan Dursun; Ömer Yılmaz; Sezgin Okçelik; Ferhat Ateş; Kenan Karademir
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2013-03
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.