Literature DB >> 25897467

Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Transrectal Ultrasonography Fusion Prostate Biopsy Significantly Outperforms Systematic 12-Core Biopsy for Prediction of Total Magnetic Resonance Imaging Tumor Volume in Active Surveillance Patients.

Chinonyerem Okoro1, Arvin K George1, M Minhaj Siddiqui1, Soroush Rais-Bahrami1, Annerleim Walton-Diaz1, Nabeel A Shakir1, Jason T Rothwax1, Dima Raskolnikov1, Lambros Stamatakis1, Daniel Su1, Baris Turkbey2, Peter L Choyke2, Maria J Merino3, Howard L Parnes4, Bradford J Wood1,5, Peter A Pinto1,5.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To correlate the highest percentage core involvement (HPCI) and corresponding tumor length (CTL) on systematic 12-core biopsy (SBx) and targeted magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasonography (MRI/TRUS) fusion biopsy (TBx), with total MRI prostate cancer (PCa) tumor volume (TV). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty patients meeting criteria for active surveillance (AS) based on outside SBx, who underwent 3.0T multiparametric prostate MRI (MP-MRI), followed by SBx and TBx during the same session at our institution were examined. PCa TVs were calculated using MP-MRI and then correlated using bivariate analysis with the HPCI and CTL for SBx and TBx.
RESULTS: For TBx, HPCI and CTL showed a positive correlation (R(2)=0.31, P<0.0001 and R(2)=0.37, P<0.0001, respectively) with total MRI PCa TV, whereas for SBx, these parameters showed a poor correlation (R(2)=0.00006, P=0.96 and R(2)=0.0004, P=0.89, respectively). For detection of patients with clinically significant MRI derived tumor burden greater than 500 mm(3), SBx was 25% sensitive, 90.9% specific (falsely elevated because of missed tumors and extremely low sensitivity), and 54% accurate in comparison with TBx, which was 53.6% sensitive, 86.4% specific, and 68% accurate.
CONCLUSIONS: HPCI and CTL on TBx positively correlates with total MRI PCa TV, whereas there was no correlation seen with SBx. TBx is superior to SBx for detecting tumor burden greater than 500 mm(3). When using biopsy positive MRI derived TVs, TBx better reflects overall disease burden, improving risk stratification among candidates for active surveillance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25897467      PMCID: PMC4593891          DOI: 10.1089/end.2015.0027

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Endourol        ISSN: 0892-7790            Impact factor:   2.942


  36 in total

1.  Relationship and significance of greatest percentage of tumor and perineural invasion on needle biopsy in prostatic adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  M A Rubin; N Bassily; M Sanda; J Montie; M S Strawderman; K Wojno
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 6.394

2.  Percent prostate needle biopsy tissue with cancer is more predictive of biochemical failure or adverse pathology after radical prostatectomy than prostate specific antigen or Gleason score.

Authors:  Stephen J Freedland; George S Csathy; Frederick Dorey; William J Aronson
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound (MRI-US) fusion-guided prostate biopsies obtained from axial and sagittal approaches.

Authors:  Cheng W Hong; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Annerleim Walton-Diaz; Nabeel Shakir; Daniel Su; Arvin K George; Maria J Merino; Baris Turkbey; Peter L Choyke; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2014-12-15       Impact factor: 5.588

4.  The percent of cores positive for cancer in prostate needle biopsy specimens is strongly predictive of tumor stage and volume at radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  T J Sebo; B J Bock; J C Cheville; C Lohse; P Wollan; H Zincke
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 7.450

5.  Percentage of cancer on biopsy cores accurately predicts extracapsular extension and biochemical relapse after radical prostatectomy for T1-T2 prostate cancer.

Authors:  V Ravery; C Chastang; M Toublanc; L Boccon-Gibod; V Delmas; L Boccon-Gibod
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 20.096

6.  Prediction of tumour volume and pathological stage in radical prostatectomy specimens is not improved by taking more prostate needle-biopsy cores.

Authors:  D J Grossklaus; C S Coffey; S B Shappell; G S Jack; M S Cookson
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 5.588

7.  Staging of early prostate cancer: a proposed tumor volume-based prognostic index.

Authors:  D G Bostwick; S D Graham; P Napalkov; P A Abrahamsson; P A di Sant'agnese; F Algaba; P A Hoisaeter; F Lee; P Littrup; F K Mostofi
Journal:  Urology       Date:  1993-05       Impact factor: 2.649

8.  Prostate needle biopsies: multiple variables are predictive of final tumor volume in radical prostatectomy specimens.

Authors:  Chistopher K Poulos; Joanne K Daggy; Liang Cheng
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2004-08-01       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  Pathologic and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostate cancer.

Authors:  J I Epstein; P C Walsh; M Carmichael; C B Brendler
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1994-02-02       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  Localized prostate cancer. Relationship of tumor volume to clinical significance for treatment of prostate cancer.

Authors:  T A Stamey; F S Freiha; J E McNeal; E A Redwine; A S Whittemore; H P Schmid
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1993-02-01       Impact factor: 6.860

View more
  23 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

Review 2.  Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion-Guided Prostate Biopsy: Review of Technology, Techniques, and Outcomes.

Authors:  Michael Kongnyuy; Arvin K George; Ardeshir R Rastinehad; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 3.  Optimizing Patient Population for MP-MRI and Fusion Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Detection.

Authors:  Thomas P Frye; Peter A Pinto; Arvin K George
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 4.  Risk stratification of prostate cancer: integrating multiparametric MRI, nomograms and biomarkers.

Authors:  Matthew J Watson; Arvin K George; Mahir Maruf; Thomas P Frye; Akhil Muthigi; Michael Kongnyuy; Subin G Valayil; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  Future Oncol       Date:  2016-07-12       Impact factor: 3.404

5.  Update of the Standard Operating Procedure on the Use of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Diagnosis, Staging and Management of Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Marc A Bjurlin; Peter R Carroll; Scott Eggener; Pat F Fulgham; Daniel J Margolis; Peter A Pinto; Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Jonathan N Rubenstein; Daniel B Rukstalis; Samir S Taneja; Baris Turkbey
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2019-10-23       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  Midline lesions of the prostate: role of MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy and implications in Gleason risk stratification.

Authors:  Akhil Muthigi; Abhinav Sidana; Arvin K George; Michael Kongnyuy; Nabeel Shakir; Meet Kadakia; Mahir Maruf; Thomas P Frye; Francesca Mertan; Daniel Su; Maria J Merino; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2016-06-15       Impact factor: 2.370

7.  A urologist's perspective on prostate cancer imaging: past, present, and future.

Authors:  Arvin K George; Baris Turkbey; Subin G Valayil; Akhil Muthigi; Francesca Mertan; Michael Kongnyuy; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2016-05

8.  Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Transrectal Ultrasound Guided Fusion Biopsy to Detect Progression in Patients with Existing Lesions on Active Surveillance for Low and Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Thomas P Frye; Arvin K George; Amichai Kilchevsky; Mahir Maruf; M Minhaj Siddiqui; Michael Kongnyuy; Akhil Muthigi; Hui Han; Howard L Parnes; Maria Merino; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey; Brad Wood; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2016-09-06       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Prostate Cancer Diagnosis on Repeat Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy of Benign Lesions: Recommendations for Repeat Sampling.

Authors:  Raju Chelluri; Amichai Kilchevsky; Arvin K George; Abhinav Sidana; Thomas P Frye; Daniel Su; Michele Fascelli; Richard Ho; Steven F Abboud; Baris Turkbey; Maria J Merino; Peter L Choyke; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2016-02-13       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  What Are We Missing? False-Negative Cancers at Multiparametric MR Imaging of the Prostate.

Authors:  Samuel Borofsky; Arvin K George; Sonia Gaur; Marcelino Bernardo; Matthew D Greer; Francesca V Mertan; Myles Taffel; Vanesa Moreno; Maria J Merino; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2017-10-20       Impact factor: 11.105

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.