BACKGROUND: Extended transrectal ultrasound guided biopsies (TRUSB) of the prostate may not accurately convey true morphometric information and Gleason score (GS) of prostate cancer (PCa) and the clinical use of template-guided (5-mm grid) transperineal mapping biopsies (TPMBs) remains controversial. METHODS: We correlated the clinical-pathologic results of 1,403 TPMB cores obtained from 25 men diagnosed with PCa with 64 cancer lesions found in their corresponding radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens. Special computer models of three-dimensional, whole-mounted radical prostatectomy (3D-WMRP) specimens were generated and used as gold standard to determine tumor morphometric data. Between-sample rates of upgrade and downgrade (highest GS and a novel cumulative GS) and upstage and downstage (laterality) were determined. Lesions ≥ 0.5 cm(3) or GS ≥ 7 were considered clinically significant. RESULTS: From 64 separate 3D-WMRP lesions, 25 had significant volume (mean 1.13 cm(3)) and 39 were insignificant (mean 0.09 cm(3)) (P < 0.0001); 18/64 lesions were missed by TPMB, but only one was clinically significant with GS-8 (0.02 cm(3)). When comparing the cumulative GS of TPMB versus RP, 72% (n = 18) had identical scores, 12% (n = 3) were upgraded, and only 16% (n = 4) were downgraded. Laterality of TPMB and RP was strongly correlated, 80% same laterality, 4% were up-staged, and 16% down-staged. CONCLUSIONS: Our clinical-pathology correlation showed very high accuracy of TPMB with a 5-mm grid template to detect clinically significant PCa lesions as compared with 3D-WMRP, providing physicians and patients with a reliable assessment of grade and stage of disease and the opportunity to choose the most appropriate therapeutic options.
BACKGROUND: Extended transrectal ultrasound guided biopsies (TRUSB) of the prostate may not accurately convey true morphometric information and Gleason score (GS) of prostate cancer (PCa) and the clinical use of template-guided (5-mm grid) transperineal mapping biopsies (TPMBs) remains controversial. METHODS: We correlated the clinical-pathologic results of 1,403 TPMB cores obtained from 25 men diagnosed with PCa with 64 cancer lesions found in their corresponding radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens. Special computer models of three-dimensional, whole-mounted radical prostatectomy (3D-WMRP) specimens were generated and used as gold standard to determine tumor morphometric data. Between-sample rates of upgrade and downgrade (highest GS and a novel cumulative GS) and upstage and downstage (laterality) were determined. Lesions ≥ 0.5 cm(3) or GS ≥ 7 were considered clinically significant. RESULTS: From 64 separate 3D-WMRP lesions, 25 had significant volume (mean 1.13 cm(3)) and 39 were insignificant (mean 0.09 cm(3)) (P < 0.0001); 18/64 lesions were missed by TPMB, but only one was clinically significant with GS-8 (0.02 cm(3)). When comparing the cumulative GS of TPMB versus RP, 72% (n = 18) had identical scores, 12% (n = 3) were upgraded, and only 16% (n = 4) were downgraded. Laterality of TPMB and RP was strongly correlated, 80% same laterality, 4% were up-staged, and 16% down-staged. CONCLUSIONS: Our clinical-pathology correlation showed very high accuracy of TPMB with a 5-mm grid template to detect clinically significant PCa lesions as compared with 3D-WMRP, providing physicians and patients with a reliable assessment of grade and stage of disease and the opportunity to choose the most appropriate therapeutic options.
Authors: Michael Sinnott; Sara M Falzarano; Adrian V Hernandez; J Stephen Jones; Eric A Klein; Ming Zhou; Cristina Magi-Galluzzi Journal: Prostate Date: 2011-12-07 Impact factor: 4.104
Authors: Al B Barqawi; Kyle O Rove; Saeed Gholizadeh; Colin I O'Donnell; Hari Koul; E David Crawford Journal: J Urol Date: 2011-05-14 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Yipeng Hu; Hashim U Ahmed; Tim Carter; Nimalan Arumainayagam; Emilie Lecornet; Winston Barzell; Alex Freeman; Pierre Nevoux; David J Hawkes; Arnauld Villers; Mark Emberton; Dean C Barratt Journal: BJU Int Date: 2012-03-06 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Firas Abdollah; Giacomo Novara; Alberto Briganti; Vincenzo Scattoni; Marco Raber; Marco Roscigno; Nazareno Suardi; Andrea Gallina; Walter Artibani; Vincenzo Ficarra; Andrea Cestari; Giorgio Guazzoni; Patrizio Rigatti; Francesco Montorsi Journal: Urology Date: 2010-12-04 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Priya N Werahera; Gary J Miller; Kathleen Torkko; E David Crawford; J Scott Stewart; Edward P Deantoni; Heidi L Miller; M Scott Lucia Journal: Hum Pathol Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 3.466
Authors: Mrishta Brizmohun Appayya; Harbir S Sidhu; Nikolaos Dikaios; Edward W Johnston; Lucy Am Simmons; Alex Freeman; Alexander Ps Kirkham; Hashim U Ahmed; Shonit Punwani Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2017-12-15 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Priya N Werahera; E David Crawford; Francisco G La Rosa; Kathleen C Torkko; Beth Schulte; Holly T Sullivan; Adrie van Bokhoven; M Scott Lucia; Fernando J Kim Journal: Can J Urol Date: 2013-10 Impact factor: 1.344
Authors: Nelson N Stone; Vladimir Mouraviev; David Schechter; Josh Goetz; M Scott Lucia; E Erin Smith; E David Crawford Journal: Technol Cancer Res Treat Date: 2016-10-05
Authors: Frank-Jan H Drost; Daniël F Osses; Daan Nieboer; Ewout W Steyerberg; Chris H Bangma; Monique J Roobol; Ivo G Schoots Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2019-04-25
Authors: F Distler; J P Radtke; C Kesch; M Roethke; H-P Schlemmer; W Roth; M Hohenfellner; B Hadaschik Journal: Urologe A Date: 2016-02 Impact factor: 0.639
Authors: M Abd-Alazeez; A Kirkham; H U Ahmed; M Arya; E Anastasiadis; S C Charman; A Freeman; M Emberton Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2013-10-15 Impact factor: 5.554