Literature DB >> 26267808

Prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3) is of additional predictive value in patients with PI-RADS grade III (intermediate) lesions in the MR-guided re-biopsy setting for prostate cancer.

S Kaufmann1,2, J Bedke3, S Gatidis4, J Hennenlotter5, U Kramer4, M Notohamiprodjo4, K Nikolaou4, A Stenzl5, S Kruck5.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) improves diagnostic accuracy in re-biopsies of men with prostate cancer (PC) suspicion, but predictive value is limited despite the use of the new Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS). Prognostic value of the PC-specific biomarker prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3) added to the PI-RADS score was evaluated.
METHODS: The study was a retrospective analysis of the institutional database for men with MR-guided biopsy (MR-GB) for suspicious lesion in mpMRI and who had an additional pre-MR-GB PCA3 testing for ongoing PC suspicion. All men had ≥ 1 negative ultrasound GB. Lesions were retrospectively scored by PI-RADS in three MRI sequences (T2w, DCE, and DWI). PCA3 was analyzed with cutoffs of 25 and 35. The prognostic value of mpMRI and PCA3 and the additional value of both were explored.
RESULTS: Tumor detection rate (49 men, mean PSA 10 ng/ml, lesion size 40 mm(2)) was 45 % (22/49 patients). In the subgroup of PI-RADS IV°, 17/17 patients had PC; in PI-RADS III° (intermediate) 5/15 had PC, and all 5 had a PCA3 > 35. PCA3 > 35 had no additional prognostic value in the whole cohort. Out of the 10/15 PC negative patients (PI-RADS III°), PCA3 was < 35 in 6. The inclusion of PCA3 value in PI-RADS III° patients improved predictive accuracy to 91.8 %.
CONCLUSION: MpMRI and subsequent grading to PI-RADS significantly improves PC detection in the re-biopsy setting. The diagnostic uncertainty in the PI-RADS intermediate group can be ameliorated by the addition of PCA3 cutoff of 35 to avoid potential unnecessary biopsies.

Entities:  

Keywords:  MR-guided biopsy; MRI; PCA3; PI-RADS; Prostate cancer; Targeted prostate biopsy

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26267808     DOI: 10.1007/s00345-015-1655-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Urol        ISSN: 0724-4983            Impact factor:   4.226


  30 in total

1.  Clinical evaluation of the PCA3 assay in guiding initial biopsy decisions.

Authors:  Alexandre de la Taille; Jacques Irani; Markus Graefen; Felix Chun; Theo de Reijke; Paul Kil; Paolo Gontero; Alain Mottaz; Alexander Haese
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2011-04-15       Impact factor: 7.450

2.  Inter-reader agreement of the ESUR score for prostate MRI using in-bore MRI-guided biopsies as the reference standard.

Authors:  L Schimmöller; M Quentin; C Arsov; R S Lanzman; A Hiester; R Rabenalt; G Antoch; P Albers; D Blondin
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-06-12       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  The roles of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, PCA3 and prostate health index-which is the best predictor of prostate cancer after a negative biopsy?

Authors:  Francesco Porpiglia; Filippo Russo; Matteo Manfredi; Fabrizio Mele; Cristian Fiori; Enrico Bollito; Mauro Papotti; Ivan Molineris; Roberto Passera; Daniele Regge
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2014-02-08       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  Reducing unnecessary biopsy during prostate cancer screening using a four-kallikrein panel: an independent replication.

Authors:  Andrew Vickers; Angel Cronin; Monique Roobol; Caroline Savage; Mari Peltola; Kim Pettersson; Peter T Scardino; Fritz Schröder; Hans Lilja
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-04-26       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 5.  Advances in magnetic resonance imaging: how they are changing the management of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Alessandro Sciarra; Jelle Barentsz; Anders Bjartell; James Eastham; Hedvig Hricak; Valeria Panebianco; J Alfred Witjes
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2011-02-23       Impact factor: 20.096

6.  PCA3 molecular urine test as a predictor of repeat prostate biopsy outcome in men with previous negative biopsies: a prospective multicenter clinical study.

Authors:  Marc C Gittelman; Bernard Hertzman; James Bailen; Thomas Williams; Isaac Koziol; Ralph Jonathan Henderson; Mitchell Efros; Mohamed Bidair; John F Ward
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2013-02-14       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  When serial prostate biopsy is recommended: most cancers detected are clinically insignificant.

Authors:  Osama M Zaytoun; Andrew J Stephenson; Khaled Fareed; Ahmed El-Shafei; Tianming Gao; David Levy; J Stephen Jones
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2012-03-15       Impact factor: 5.588

8.  DD3: a new prostate-specific gene, highly overexpressed in prostate cancer.

Authors:  M J Bussemakers; A van Bokhoven; G W Verhaegh; F P Smit; H F Karthaus; J A Schalken; F M Debruyne; N Ru; W B Isaacs
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  1999-12-01       Impact factor: 12.701

9.  Ultrasound imaging for external-beam prostate treatment setup and dosimetric verification.

Authors:  T Falco; G Shenouda; C Kaufmann; I Belanger; C Procaccini; C Charrois; M Evans
Journal:  Med Dosim       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 1.482

10.  ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012.

Authors:  Jelle O Barentsz; Jonathan Richenberg; Richard Clements; Peter Choyke; Sadhna Verma; Geert Villeirs; Olivier Rouviere; Vibeke Logager; Jurgen J Fütterer
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-02-10       Impact factor: 5.315

View more
  12 in total

Review 1.  Prostate MRI and transperineal TRUS/MRI fusion biopsy for prostate cancer detection: clinical practice updates.

Authors:  Eugenio Martorana; Giacomo Maria Pirola; Maria Cristina Aisa; Pietro Scialpi; Aldo Di Blasi; Giovanni Saredi; Alfredo D'Andrea; Stefano Signore; Riccardo Grisanti; Michele Scialpi
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2019-07-01

Review 2.  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

3.  First report of robot-assisted transperineal fusion versus off-target biopsy in patients undergoing repeat prostate biopsy.

Authors:  S Kaufmann; J Mischinger; B Amend; S Rausch; M Adam; M Scharpf; F Fend; U Kramer; M Notohamiprodjo; K Nikolaou; A Stenzl; J Bedke; S Kruck
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-11-15       Impact factor: 4.226

4.  How do endoscopic bladder tumor resection techniques affect pathology practice? EAU Section of Uro-Technology (ESUT) and Uropathology (ESUP) survey.

Authors:  Selcuk Guven; Maurizio Colecchia; Pembe Oltulu; Giulia Bonfante; Dmitry Enikeev; Hasan Esen; Thomas Herrmann; Lukas Lusuardi; Salvatore Micali; Bashkar Somani; Andreas Skolarikos; Alberto Breda; Evangelos Liatsikos; Joan Palou Redorta; Ali Serdar Gozen
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2022-05-14       Impact factor: 4.226

5.  T2 mapping for the characterization of prostate lesions.

Authors:  Tobias Hepp; Laura Kalmbach; Manuel Kolb; Petros Martirosian; Tom Hilbert; Wolfgang M Thaiss; Mike Notohamiprodjo; Jens Bedke; Konstantin Nikolaou; Arnulf Stenzl; Stephan Kruck; Sascha Kaufmann
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2022-03-31       Impact factor: 3.661

Review 6.  MRI in early prostate cancer detection: how to manage indeterminate or equivocal PI-RADS 3 lesions?

Authors:  Ivo G Schoots
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2018-02

7.  Using the prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 (PI-RIDS v2) to detect prostate cancer can prevent unnecessary biopsies and invasive treatment.

Authors:  Chang Liu; Shi-Liang Liu; Zhi-Xian Wang; Kai Yu; Chun-Xiang Feng; Zan Ke; Liang Wang; Xiao-Yong Zeng
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2018 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.285

Review 8.  Genetic Landscape of Prostate Cancer Conspicuity on Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Systematic Review and Bioinformatic Analysis.

Authors:  Joseph M Norris; Benjamin S Simpson; Marina A Parry; Clare Allen; Rhys Ball; Alex Freeman; Daniel Kelly; Hyung L Kim; Alex Kirkham; Sungyong You; Veeru Kasivisvanathan; Hayley C Whitaker; Mark Emberton
Journal:  Eur Urol Open Sci       Date:  2020-07

Review 9.  The Use of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Prostate Cancer Primary Diagnostic Pathway: Is It Ready for Primetime?

Authors:  Niranjan J Sathianathen; Christopher A Warlick
Journal:  World J Mens Health       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 5.400

10.  Using clinical parameters to predict prostate cancer and reduce the unnecessary biopsy among patients with PSA in the gray zone.

Authors:  Junxiao Liu; Biao Dong; Wugong Qu; Jiange Wang; Yue Xu; Shuanbao Yu; Xuepei Zhang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-03-20       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.