L M Wong1, S Ferrara2, S M H Alibhai3, A Evans4, T Van der Kwast4, G Trottier2, N Timilshina5, A Toi6, G Kulkarni2, R Hamilton2, A Zlotta2, N Fleshner2, A Finelli2. 1. 1] Division of Urologic Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada [2] Department of Urology and Surgery, University of Melbourne, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 2. Division of Urologic Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. 3. Department of Medicine, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada. 4. Department of Pathology, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada. 5. 1] Department of Urology and Surgery, University of Melbourne, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia [2] Department of Medicine, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada. 6. 1] Department of Pathology, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada [2] Department of Radiology, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To examine whether diagnostic biopsy (B1), for patients on active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer, performed at an outside referral centre (external) compared with our in-house tertiary center (internal), increased the risk of re-classification on the second (confirmatory) biopsy (B2). METHODS: Patients on AS were identified from our tertiary center database (1997-2012) with PSA<10, Gleason sum (GS) ⩽6, clinical stage ⩽cT2, ⩽3 positive cores, <50% of single core involved, age ⩽75 years and having a B2. Patients who had <10 cores at B1 and delay in B2 >24 mo were excluded. Depending on center where B1 was performed, men were dichotomized to internal or external groups. All B2 were performed internally. Multivariate logistic regression examined if external B1 was a predictor of re-classification at B2. RESULTS: A total of 375 patients were divided into external (n=71, 18.9%) and internal groups (n=304, 81.1%). At B2, more men in the external group re-classified (26.8%) compared with the internal group (13.8%) (P=0.008). On multivariate analysis, external B1 predicted grade-related re-classification (odds ratio (OR) 4.14, confidence interval (CI) 2.01-8.54, P<0.001) and volume-related re-classification (OR 3.43, CI 1.87-6.25, P<0.001). Other significant predictors for grade-related re-classification were age (OR 2.13 per decade, CI 1.32-3.57, P<0.001), PSA density (OR 2.56 per unit, CI 1.44-4.73, P<0.001), maximum % core involvement (OR 1.04 per percentage point, CI 1.01-1.09, P=0.02) and time between B1 and B2 (OR 1.43 per 6 months, CI 1.21-1.71, P<0.001). CONCLUSION: At our institution, patients on AS who had their initial B1 performed externally were more likely to have adverse pathological features and re-classify on internal B2.
BACKGROUND: To examine whether diagnostic biopsy (B1), for patients on active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer, performed at an outside referral centre (external) compared with our in-house tertiary center (internal), increased the risk of re-classification on the second (confirmatory) biopsy (B2). METHODS:Patients on AS were identified from our tertiary center database (1997-2012) with PSA<10, Gleason sum (GS) ⩽6, clinical stage ⩽cT2, ⩽3 positive cores, <50% of single core involved, age ⩽75 years and having a B2. Patients who had <10 cores at B1 and delay in B2 >24 mo were excluded. Depending on center where B1 was performed, men were dichotomized to internal or external groups. All B2 were performed internally. Multivariate logistic regression examined if external B1 was a predictor of re-classification at B2. RESULTS: A total of 375 patients were divided into external (n=71, 18.9%) and internal groups (n=304, 81.1%). At B2, more men in the external group re-classified (26.8%) compared with the internal group (13.8%) (P=0.008). On multivariate analysis, external B1 predicted grade-related re-classification (odds ratio (OR) 4.14, confidence interval (CI) 2.01-8.54, P<0.001) and volume-related re-classification (OR 3.43, CI 1.87-6.25, P<0.001). Other significant predictors for grade-related re-classification were age (OR 2.13 per decade, CI 1.32-3.57, P<0.001), PSA density (OR 2.56 per unit, CI 1.44-4.73, P<0.001), maximum % core involvement (OR 1.04 per percentage point, CI 1.01-1.09, P=0.02) and time between B1 and B2 (OR 1.43 per 6 months, CI 1.21-1.71, P<0.001). CONCLUSION: At our institution, patients on AS who had their initial B1 performed externally were more likely to have adverse pathological features and re-classify on internal B2.
Authors: Roderick C N van den Bergh; Stijn Roemeling; Monique J Roobol; Wouter Roobol; Fritz H Schröder; Chris H Bangma Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2007-05-25 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Ryan K Berglund; Timothy A Masterson; Kinjal C Vora; Scott E Eggener; James A Eastham; Bertrand D Guillonneau Journal: J Urol Date: 2008-09-17 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Jeffrey J Tosoian; Bruce J Trock; Patricia Landis; Zhaoyong Feng; Jonathan I Epstein; Alan W Partin; Patrick C Walsh; H Ballentine Carter Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-04-04 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Mark S Soloway; Cynthia T Soloway; Ahmed Eldefrawy; Kristell Acosta; Bruce Kava; Murugesan Manoharan Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2010-08-20 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Nathan Lawrentschuk; Ants Toi; Gina A Lockwood; Andrew Evans; Antonio Finelli; Martin O'Malley; Myles Margolis; Sangeet Ghai; Neil E Fleshner Journal: J Urol Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Nicholas J van As; Andrew R Norman; Karen Thomas; Vincent S Khoo; Alan Thompson; Robert A Huddart; Alan Horwich; David P Dearnaley; Christopher C Parker Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2008-03-07 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Christina B Ching; Ayman S Moussa; Jianbo Li; Brian R Lane; Craig Zippe; J Stephen Jones Journal: J Urol Date: 2009-03-14 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Lih-Ming Wong; Shabbir M H Alibhai; Greg Trottier; Narhari Timilshina; Theodorus Van der Kwast; Alexandre Zlotta; Nathan Lawrentschuk; Girish Kulkarni; Robert Hamilton; Sarah Ferrara; David Margel; John Trachtenberg; Michael A Jewett; Ants Toi; Andrew Evans; Neil E Fleshner; Antonio Finelli Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2013-05-02 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: L-M Wong; D E Neal; R B Johnston; N Shah; N Sharma; A Y Warren; C M Hovens; S Larry Goldenberg; M E Gleave; A J Costello; N M Corcoran Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2012-10-04 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: G I Russo; T Castelli; V Favilla; G Reale; D Urzì; S Privitera; E Fragalà; S Cimino; G Morgia Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2015-06-02 Impact factor: 5.554