Jonathan Lopater1, Pierre Colin2, Frédéric Beuvon2, Mathilde Sibony2, Eugénie Dalimier3, François Cornud4, Nicolas Barry Delongchamps5. 1. Service d'Urologie, Hôpital Cochin, Paris Descartes University, 27 rue du Faubourg Saint Jacques, 75014, Paris, France. 2. Department of Pathology, Cochin Hospital, Paris Descartes University, Paris, France. 3. LLTech SAS, Paris, France. 4. Department of Radiology, Cochin Hospital, Paris Descartes University, Paris, France. 5. Service d'Urologie, Hôpital Cochin, Paris Descartes University, 27 rue du Faubourg Saint Jacques, 75014, Paris, France. nicolasbdl@hotmail.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy (Acc) of full-field optical coherence tomography (FFOCT) for cancer detection on prostate biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-eight consecutive patients with elevated PSA and/or suspicious digital rectal examination were prospectively included. For each patient, 1-10 cores were randomly selected and imaged with FFOCT immediately after sampling. The images obtained were de-identified and analyzed by three pathologists blinded to the results of pathological evaluation. The overall average Acc was measured, as well as sensitivity (Se), specificity (Sp), positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV). The Acc learning curve was assessed by multivariate logistic regression, and inter-reader concordance was assessed by Kappa index. RESULTS: One hundred and nineteen cores were imaged. Of them, 40 (33.6%) were involved with cancer. The overall average Acc of FFOCT for cancer detection was of 70.6%. Se, Sp, PPV, and NPV were of 63, 74, 55.5, and 80%, respectively. A substantial agreement was observed among pathologists (κ = 0.6, p < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, Acc was associated with the number of previously interpreted cases, with a predicted Acc of 82% at the end of learning curve. The overall average accuracy for high Gleason score (>3 + 3) determination was of 72%, although results were limited by the small amount of cases. CONCLUSIONS: FFOCT of prostate biopsy cores may provide a diagnostic accuracy greater than 80%, with a good reliability and a high NPV. TAKE HOME MESSAGE: "Full-field optical coherence tomography is a novel imaging modality that could have a potential value in real-time diagnosis of prostate cancer during prostate biopsy procedures."
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy (Acc) of full-field optical coherence tomography (FFOCT) for cancer detection on prostate biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-eight consecutive patients with elevated PSA and/or suspicious digital rectal examination were prospectively included. For each patient, 1-10 cores were randomly selected and imaged with FFOCT immediately after sampling. The images obtained were de-identified and analyzed by three pathologists blinded to the results of pathological evaluation. The overall average Acc was measured, as well as sensitivity (Se), specificity (Sp), positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV). The Acc learning curve was assessed by multivariate logistic regression, and inter-reader concordance was assessed by Kappa index. RESULTS: One hundred and nineteen cores were imaged. Of them, 40 (33.6%) were involved with cancer. The overall average Acc of FFOCT for cancer detection was of 70.6%. Se, Sp, PPV, and NPV were of 63, 74, 55.5, and 80%, respectively. A substantial agreement was observed among pathologists (κ = 0.6, p < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, Acc was associated with the number of previously interpreted cases, with a predicted Acc of 82% at the end of learning curve. The overall average accuracy for high Gleason score (>3 + 3) determination was of 72%, although results were limited by the small amount of cases. CONCLUSIONS: FFOCT of prostate biopsy cores may provide a diagnostic accuracy greater than 80%, with a good reliability and a high NPV. TAKE HOME MESSAGE: "Full-field optical coherence tomography is a novel imaging modality that could have a potential value in real-time diagnosis of prostate cancer during prostate biopsy procedures."
Entities:
Keywords:
Biopsy; Diagnostic; Full-field optical coherence tomography; Prostate cancer
Authors: Daniel Portalez; Pierre Mozer; François Cornud; Raphaëlle Renard-Penna; Vincent Misrai; Matthieu Thoulouzan; Bernard Malavaud Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2012-06-27 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Jennifer A Linehan; Erika R Bracamonte; Lida P Hariri; Mitchell H Sokoloff; Photini S Rice; Jennifer K Barton; Mike M Nguyen Journal: BJU Int Date: 2011-05-18 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Adam W Levinson; Nathaniel M Fried; Gwen A Lagoda; Alexandra Hristov; Ying Chuang; Arthur L Burnett; Li-Ming Su Journal: Urology Date: 2008-02-20 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Louise Dickinson; Hashim U Ahmed; Clare Allen; Jelle O Barentsz; Brendan Carey; Jurgen J Futterer; Stijn W Heijmink; Peter J Hoskin; Alex Kirkham; Anwar R Padhani; Raj Persad; Philippe Puech; Shonit Punwani; Aslam S Sohaib; Bertrand Tombal; Arnauld Villers; Jan van der Meulen; Mark Emberton Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2010-12-21 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Osnath Assayag; Martine Antoine; Brigitte Sigal-Zafrani; Michael Riben; Fabrice Harms; Adriano Burcheri; Kate Grieve; Eugénie Dalimier; Bertrand Le Conte de Poly; Claude Boccara Journal: Technol Cancer Res Treat Date: 2013-08-31
Authors: Oscar M Carrasco-Zevallos; Christian Viehland; Brenton Keller; Mark Draelos; Anthony N Kuo; Cynthia A Toth; Joseph A Izatt Journal: Biomed Opt Express Date: 2017-02-21 Impact factor: 3.732
Authors: Labrinus van Manen; Paulien L Stegehuis; Arantza Fariña-Sarasqueta; Lorraine M de Haan; Jeroen Eggermont; Bert A Bonsing; Hans Morreau; Boudewijn P F Lelieveldt; Cornelis J H van de Velde; Alexander L Vahrmeijer; Jouke Dijkstra; J Sven D Mieog Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-04-17 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Labrinus van Manen; Jouke Dijkstra; Claude Boccara; Emilie Benoit; Alexander L Vahrmeijer; Michalina J Gora; J Sven D Mieog Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2018-06-20 Impact factor: 4.553