Literature DB >> 22116600

Contemporary pathologic characteristics and oncologic outcomes of prostate cancers missed by 6- and 12-core biopsy and diagnosed with a 21-core biopsy protocol.

Idir Ouzaid1, Evanguelos Xylinas, Alexandre Campeggi, Andras Hoznek, Dimitri Vordos, Claude-Clément Abbou, Francis Vacherot, Laurent Salomon, Alexandre de la Taille, Guillaume Ploussard.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess the pathological and the oncologic outcomes of the prostate cancer (PCa) missed by 6- and 12-core biopsy protocols by using a reference 21-core scheme.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2001 and 2009, all patients who had PCa detected in an initial 21-core TRUS biopsy scheme and were treated by a radical prostatectomy (RP) were included. Patients were sorted in 3 groups according to the diagnosis site: sextant (6 first cores; group 1), peripheral zone (12 first cores; group 2) or midline/transitional zone (after 21 cores; group 3). Demographics, pathological features in biopsy and RP specimens and follow-up after RP were analyzed. The 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) was studied in the 3 groups.
RESULTS: During the study period, 443 patients were included. Among them, 67, 23.7 and 9.2% were, respectively, diagnosed in groups 1, 2 and 3. Among PCa diagnosed in midline/transition zone cores, 42% were intermediate or high risk. Unfavorable disease was more frequently reported in group 1 in terms of extraprostatic extension (P = 0.001), high Gleason score (P = 0.001) and progression (P = 0.001). No significant difference was observed between groups 2 and 3 in terms of pathological features in RP specimens and oncologic outcome. The 5-year PFS was 89.7% and not significantly different in patients diagnosed with a 12-core scheme compared to those diagnosed only with 21-core scheme (P = 0.332).
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings emphasize that PCa diagnosed only in a 21-core protocol is at least as aggressive as PCa detected in a 12-core scheme. This study invalidates the widespread idea sustaining that cancers diagnosed by more than 12 biopsies are less aggressive.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22116600      PMCID: PMC3907356          DOI: 10.1007/s00345-011-0800-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Urol        ISSN: 0724-4983            Impact factor:   4.226


  23 in total

1.  Systematic 5 region prostate biopsy is superior to sextant method for diagnosing carcinoma of the prostate.

Authors:  L A Eskew; R L Bare; D L McCullough
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 7.450

2.  Extended peripheral zone biopsy schemes increase cancer detection rates and minimize variance in prostate specific antigen and age related cancer rates: results of a community multi-practice study.

Authors:  Joseph C Presti; Gerard J O'Dowd; M Craig Miller; Rubina Mattu; Robert W Veltri
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised disease.

Authors:  Axel Heidenreich; Joaquim Bellmunt; Michel Bolla; Steven Joniau; Malcolm Mason; Vsevolod Matveev; Nicolas Mottet; Hans-Peter Schmid; Theo van der Kwast; Thomas Wiegel; Filliberto Zattoni
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2010-10-28       Impact factor: 20.096

4.  Comparison of mid-lobe versus lateral systematic sextant biopsies in the detection of prostate cancer.

Authors:  M K Terris; E M Wallen; T A Stamey
Journal:  Urol Int       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 2.089

5.  Extensive repeat transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy in patients with previous benign sextant biopsies.

Authors:  P G Borboroglu; S W Comer; R H Riffenburgh; C L Amling
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  The sextant protocol for ultrasound-guided core biopsies of the prostate underestimates the presence of cancer.

Authors:  M Norberg; L Egevad; L Holmberg; P Sparén; B J Norlén; C Busch
Journal:  Urology       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 2.649

Review 7.  When to biopsy and when to stop biopsying.

Authors:  Bob Djavan; Mesut Remzi; Michael Marberger
Journal:  Urol Clin North Am       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 2.241

8.  Optimization of prostate biopsy strategy using computer based analysis.

Authors:  M E Chen; P Troncoso; D A Johnston; K Tang; R J Babaian
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Prospective evaluation of a 21-sample needle biopsy procedure designed to improve the prostate cancer detection rate.

Authors:  Alexandre de la Taille; Patrick Antiphon; Laurent Salomon; Maguy Cherfan; Raphael Porcher; Andras Hoznek; Fabien Saint; Dimitri Vordos; Anthony Cicco; René Yiou; Elie Serge Zafrani; Dominique Chopin; Claude Clément Abbou
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 2.649

10.  Ultrasound guided transrectal core biopsies of the palpably abnormal prostate.

Authors:  K K Hodge; J E McNeal; T A Stamey
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1989-07       Impact factor: 7.450

View more
  3 in total

1.  Incremental value of transition zone and midline apical biopsy at baseline TRUS-guided biopsy for prostate cancer detection.

Authors:  D M Somford; W Vreuls; T S Jansen; J P van Basten; H Vergunst
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2013-07-20       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  The association of level of practical experience in transrectal ultrasonography guided prostate biopsy with its diagnostic outcome.

Authors:  S Tadtayev; A Hussein; L Carpenter; N Vasdev; G Boustead
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2016-09-23       Impact factor: 1.891

Review 3.  Multivariate risk prediction tools including MRI for individualized biopsy decision in prostate cancer diagnosis: current status and future directions.

Authors:  Ivo G Schoots; Monique J Roobol
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2019-03-13       Impact factor: 4.226

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.