Literature DB >> 23664820

A negative confirmatory biopsy among men on active surveillance for prostate cancer does not protect them from histologic grade progression.

Lih-Ming Wong1, Shabbir M H Alibhai2, Greg Trottier1, Narhari Timilshina2, Theodorus Van der Kwast3, Alexandre Zlotta1, Nathan Lawrentschuk1, Girish Kulkarni1, Robert Hamilton1, Sarah Ferrara1, David Margel1, John Trachtenberg1, Michael A Jewett1, Ants Toi4, Andrew Evans3, Neil E Fleshner1, Antonio Finelli5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Many men (21-52%) are reported to have no cancer on the second, also known as the confirmatory, biopsy (B2) for prostate cancer active surveillance (AS). If these men had a reduced risk of pathologic progression, particularly grade related, the intensity of their follow-up could be decreased.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate if men with no cancer on B2 are less likely to undergo subsequent pathologic progression. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Men were identified from our tertiary care center AS prostate cancer database (1995-2012). Eligibility criteria were prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≤ 10, cT2 or lower, no Gleason grade 4 or 5, three or fewer positive cores, and no core >50% involved. Only patients with three or more biopsies were selected and then dichotomized on cancer status (yes or no) at B2. INTERVENTION AS OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Pathologic progression was defined as grade (advancement in Gleason score) and/or volume (more than three positive cores, >50% core involved). Progression-free survival was compared. Predictors of progression were investigated using a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Of the 286 patients remaining on AS after B2, 149 (52%) had no cancer and 137 (48%) had cancer. The median follow-up after B2 was 41 mo (interquartile range [IQR]: 26.5-61.9). Progression-free survival at 5 yr was 85.2% versus 67.3% for negative B2 versus cancer on B2, respectively (p = 0.002). Men with no cancer at B2 had a 53% reduction in risk of subsequent progression (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.29-0.77; p = 0.003). Subanalysis showed prognostic indicators of volume-related progression were absence of cancer (HR: 0.36; 95% CI, 0.20-0.62; p = 0.0006) and PSA density (HR: 1.79; 95% CI, 1.12-2.89; p = 0.01). The only predictor of grade-related progression was age (HR: 1.05; 95% CI, 1.00-1.10; p = 0.04). Retrospective analysis was the major limitation of the study.
CONCLUSIONS: Absence of cancer on B2 is associated with a significantly decreased risk of volume-related but not grade-related progression. This must be considered when counseling men on AS.
Copyright © 2013 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Active surveillance; Biopsy; Pathology; Progression; Prostate cancer; Reclassification

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23664820     DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.04.038

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


  13 in total

1.  Predicting Gleason Group Progression for Men on Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance: Role of a Negative Confirmatory Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy.

Authors:  Jonathan B Bloom; Graham R Hale; Samuel A Gold; Kareem N Rayn; Clayton Smith; Sherif Mehralivand; Marcin Czarniecki; Vladimir Valera; Bradford J Wood; Maria J Merino; Peter L Choyke; Howard L Parnes; Baris Turkbey; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 7.450

2.  Evaluation of models predicting insignificant prostate cancer to select men for active surveillance of prostate cancer.

Authors:  L M Wong; D E Neal; A Finelli; S Davis; C Bonner; J Kapoor; J Trachtenberg; B Thomas; C M Hovens; A J Costello; N M Corcoran
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2015-02-10       Impact factor: 5.554

Review 3.  [Is there still a role for active surveillance in prostate cancer?]

Authors:  M Stöckle
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 0.639

4.  Prostate cancer: does a negative second biopsy give patients false hope?

Authors:  Melanie Clyne
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2013-05-21       Impact factor: 14.432

5.  Active Surveillance in Younger Men With Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Michael S Leapman; Janet E Cowan; Hao G Nguyen; Katsuto K Shinohara; Nannette Perez; Matthew R Cooperberg; William J Catalona; Peter R Carroll
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-03-27       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  Active surveillance in patients with a PSA >10 ng/mL.

Authors:  Paul Toren; Lih-Ming Wong; Narhari Timilshina; Shabbir Alibhai; John Trachtenberg; Neil Fleshner; Antonio Finelli
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 1.862

7.  Radical Prostatectomy Findings in White Hispanic/Latino Men With NCCN Very Low-risk Prostate Cancer Detected by Template Biopsy.

Authors:  Oleksandr N Kryvenko; Kirill Lyapichev; Felix M Chinea; Nachiketh Soodana Prakash; Alan Pollack; Mark L Gonzalgo; Sanoj Punnen; Merce Jorda
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 6.394

8.  The performance of PI-RADSv2 and quantitative apparent diffusion coefficient for predicting confirmatory prostate biopsy findings in patients considered for active surveillance of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Stephanie Nougaret; Nicola Robertson; Jennifer Golia Pernicka; Nicolas Molinari; Andreas M Hötker; Behfar Ehdaie; Evis Sala; Hedvig Hricak; Hebert Alberto Vargas
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2017-07

9.  Diagnostic prostate biopsy performed in a non-academic center increases the risk of re-classification at confirmatory biopsy for men considering active surveillance for prostate cancer.

Authors:  L M Wong; S Ferrara; S M H Alibhai; A Evans; T Van der Kwast; G Trottier; N Timilshina; A Toi; G Kulkarni; R Hamilton; A Zlotta; N Fleshner; A Finelli
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2014-12-09       Impact factor: 5.554

10.  Targeted prostate biopsy in select men for active surveillance: do the Epstein criteria still apply?

Authors:  Jim C Hu; Edward Chang; Shyam Natarajan; Daniel J Margolis; Malu Macairan; Patricia Lieu; Jiaoti Huang; Geoffrey Sonn; Frederick J Dorey; Leonard S Marks
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2014-02-08       Impact factor: 7.450

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.