James E Thompson1,2,3, Andrew Hayen4, Adam Landau5, Anne-Maree Haynes2, Arveen Kalapara5, Joseph Ischia5, Jayne Matthews1, Mark Frydenberg5, Phillip D Stricker1,2,3. 1. St Vincent's Prostate Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia. 2. Garvan Institute of Medical Research and Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia. 3. Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Kensington, NSW, Australia. 4. School of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of New South Wales, Kensington, NSW, Australia. 5. Monash Institute of Medical Research, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess, in men undergoing active surveillance (AS) for low-risk prostate cancer, whether saturation or transperineal biopsy altered oncological outcomes, compared with standard transrectal biopsy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from two cohorts with localised prostate cancer (1998-2012) undergoing AS. Prostate cancer-specific, metastasis-free and treatment-free survival, unfavourable disease and significant cancer at radical prostatectomy (RP) were compared for standard (<12 core, median 10) vs saturation (>12 core, median 16), and transrectal vs transperineal biopsy, using multivariate analysis. RESULTS: In all, 650 men were included in the analysis with a median (mean) follow-up of 55 (67) months. Prostate cancer-specific, metastasis-free and biochemical recurrence-free survival were 100%, 100% and 99% respectively. Radical treatment-free survival at 5 and 10 years were 57% and 45% respectively (median time to treatment 7.5 years). On Kaplan-Meier analysis, saturation biopsy was associated with increased objective biopsy progression requiring treatment (log-rank P = 0.01). On multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis, saturation biopsy (hazard ratio 1.68, P < 0.01) but not transperineal approach (P = 0.89) was associated with increased objective biopsy progression requiring treatment. On logistic regression analysis of 179 men who underwent RP for objective progression, transperineal biopsy was associated with lower likelihood of unfavourable RP pathology (odds ratio 0.42, P = 0.03) but saturation biopsy did not alter the likelihood (P = 0.25). Neither transperineal nor saturation biopsy altered the likelihood of significant vs insignificant cancer at RP (P = 0.19 and P = 0.41, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: AS achieved satisfactory oncological outcomes. Saturation biopsy increased progression to treatment on AS; longer follow-up is needed to determine if this represents beneficial earlier detection of significant disease or over-treatment. Transperineal biopsy reduced the likelihood of unfavourable disease at RP, possibly due to earlier detection of anterior tumours.
OBJECTIVE: To assess, in men undergoing active surveillance (AS) for low-risk prostate cancer, whether saturation or transperineal biopsy altered oncological outcomes, compared with standard transrectal biopsy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from two cohorts with localised prostate cancer (1998-2012) undergoing AS. Prostate cancer-specific, metastasis-free and treatment-free survival, unfavourable disease and significant cancer at radical prostatectomy (RP) were compared for standard (<12 core, median 10) vs saturation (>12 core, median 16), and transrectal vs transperineal biopsy, using multivariate analysis. RESULTS: In all, 650 men were included in the analysis with a median (mean) follow-up of 55 (67) months. Prostate cancer-specific, metastasis-free and biochemical recurrence-free survival were 100%, 100% and 99% respectively. Radical treatment-free survival at 5 and 10 years were 57% and 45% respectively (median time to treatment 7.5 years). On Kaplan-Meier analysis, saturation biopsy was associated with increased objective biopsy progression requiring treatment (log-rank P = 0.01). On multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis, saturation biopsy (hazard ratio 1.68, P < 0.01) but not transperineal approach (P = 0.89) was associated with increased objective biopsy progression requiring treatment. On logistic regression analysis of 179 men who underwent RP for objective progression, transperineal biopsy was associated with lower likelihood of unfavourable RP pathology (odds ratio 0.42, P = 0.03) but saturation biopsy did not alter the likelihood (P = 0.25). Neither transperineal nor saturation biopsy altered the likelihood of significant vs insignificant cancer at RP (P = 0.19 and P = 0.41, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: AS achieved satisfactory oncological outcomes. Saturation biopsy increased progression to treatment on AS; longer follow-up is needed to determine if this represents beneficial earlier detection of significant disease or over-treatment. Transperineal biopsy reduced the likelihood of unfavourable disease at RP, possibly due to earlier detection of anterior tumours.
Authors: Roman Sosnowski; Hubert Kamecki; Siamak Daneshmand; Jan K Rudzinski; Marc A Bjurlin; Francesco Giganti; Monique J Roobol; Laurence Klotz Journal: Cent European J Urol Date: 2020-06-25
Authors: Alexandre Cavalcante; Públio Cesar C Viana; Giuliano B Guglielmetti; José Pontes Junior; Henrique Nonemacher; Mauricio D Cordeiro; Regis Otaviano F Bezerra; Rafael F Coelho; William Carlos Nahas Journal: Clinics (Sao Paulo) Date: 2018-12-10 Impact factor: 2.365
Authors: Vasilis Stavrinides; Francesco Giganti; Bruce Trock; Shonit Punwani; Clare Allen; Alex Kirkham; Alex Freeman; Aiman Haider; Rhys Ball; Neil McCartan; Hayley Whitaker; Clement Orczyk; Mark Emberton; Caroline M Moore Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2020-04-30 Impact factor: 20.096