Literature DB >> 26335497

Prebiopsy MRI and MRI-ultrasound Fusion-targeted Prostate Biopsy in Men With Previous Negative Biopsies: Impact on Repeat Biopsy Strategies.

Neil Mendhiratta1, Xiaosong Meng2, Andrew B Rosenkrantz3, James S Wysock2, Michael Fenstermaker1, Richard Huang2, Fang-Ming Deng4, Jonathan Melamed4, Ming Zhou4, William C Huang2, Herbert Lepor2, Samir S Taneja5.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To report outcomes of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-ultrasound fusion-targeted biopsy (MRF-TB) and 12-core systematic biopsy (SB) over a 26-month period in men with prior negative prostate biopsy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between June 2012 and August 2014, 210 men presenting to our institution for prostate biopsy with ≥1 prior negative biopsy underwent multiparametric MRI followed by MRF-TB and SB and were entered into a prospective database. Clinical characteristics, maximum mpMRI suspicion scores (mSS), and biopsy results were queried from the database, and the detection rates of Gleason ≥7 prostate cancer (PCa) and overall PCa were compared between biopsy techniques using McNemar's test.
RESULTS: Forty seven (29%) of 161 men meeting inclusion criteria (mean age, 65 ± 8 years; mean prostate-specific antigen, 8.9 ± 8.9) were found to have PCa. MRF-TB and SB had overall cancer detection rates (CDRs) of 21.7% and 18.6% (P = .36), respectively, and CDR for Gleason score (GS) ≥7 disease of 14.9% and 9.3% (P = .02), respectively. Of 26 men with GS ≥7 disease, MRF-TB detected 24 (92.3%) whereas SB detected 15 (57.7%; P < .01). Using UCSF-CAPRA criteria, only 1 man was restratified from low risk to higher risk based on SB results compared to MRF-TB alone. Among men with mSS <4, 72% of detected cancers were low risk by UCSF-CAPRA criteria.
CONCLUSION: In men with previous negative biopsies and persistent suspicion of PCa, SB contributes little to the detection of GS ≥7 disease by MRF-TB, and avoidance of SB bears consideration. Based on the low likelihood of detecting GS ≥7 cancer and overall low-risk features of PCa in men with mSS <4, limiting biopsy to men with mSS ≥4 warrants further investigation.
Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26335497      PMCID: PMC4726647          DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2015.07.038

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  23 in total

1.  Validation of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology scoring system for prostate cancer diagnosis on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in a cohort of repeat biopsy patients.

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

2.  Magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy in men with previously negative prostate biopsy results.

Authors:  Seung Hwan Lee; Mun Su Chung; Joo Hee Kim; Young Taik Oh; Koon Ho Rha; Byung Ha Chung
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2012-05-08       Impact factor: 2.942

3.  Magnetic resonance imaging for predicting prostate biopsy findings in patients considered for active surveillance of clinically low risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Hebert Alberto Vargas; Oguz Akin; Asim Afaq; Debra Goldman; Junting Zheng; Chaya S Moskowitz; Amita Shukla-Dave; James Eastham; Peter Scardino; Hedvig Hricak
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-09-25       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  Are repeat prostate biopsies safe? A cohort analysis from the SEARCH database.

Authors:  Ryan P Kopp; Sean P Stroup; Florian R Schroeck; Stephen J Freedland; Frederick Millard; Martha K Terris; William J Aronson; Joseph C Presti; Christopher L Amling; Christopher J Kane
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-04-11       Impact factor: 7.450

5.  The University of California, San Francisco Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment score: a straightforward and reliable preoperative predictor of disease recurrence after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Matthew R Cooperberg; David J Pasta; Eric P Elkin; Mark S Litwin; David M Latini; Janeen Du Chane; Peter R Carroll
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  Magnetic resonance imaging guided prostate biopsy in men with repeat negative biopsies and increased prostate specific antigen.

Authors:  Thomas Hambrock; Diederik M Somford; Caroline Hoeks; Stefan A W Bouwense; Henkjan Huisman; Derya Yakar; Inge M van Oort; J Alfred Witjes; Jurgen J Fütterer; Jelle O Barentsz
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2009-12-14       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  Value of targeted prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion in men with prior negative biopsy and elevated prostate-specific antigen.

Authors:  Geoffrey A Sonn; Edward Chang; Shyam Natarajan; Daniel J Margolis; Malu Macairan; Patricia Lieu; Jiaoti Huang; Frederick J Dorey; Robert E Reiter; Leonard S Marks
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2013-03-17       Impact factor: 20.096

8.  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

9.  Prostate cancer diagnosed after repeat biopsies have a favorable pathological outcome but similar recurrence rate.

Authors:  Ernesto Lopez-Corona; Makoto Ohori; Thomas M Wheeler; Victor E Reuter; Peter T Scardino; Michael W Kattan; James A Eastham
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  Detection of prostate cancer via biopsy in the Medicare-SEER population during the PSA era.

Authors:  H Gilbert Welch; Elliott S Fisher; Daniel J Gottlieb; Michael J Barry
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2007-09-11       Impact factor: 13.506

View more
  21 in total

1.  Interobserver Reproducibility of the PI-RADS Version 2 Lexicon: A Multicenter Study of Six Experienced Prostate Radiologists.

Authors:  Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Luke A Ginocchio; Daniel Cornfeld; Adam T Froemming; Rajan T Gupta; Baris Turkbey; Antonio C Westphalen; James S Babb; Daniel J Margolis
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2016-04-01       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Omission of systematic transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy from the MRI targeted approach in men with previous negative prostate biopsy might still be premature.

Authors:  Ivo G Schoots
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2016-05

3.  Missing the Mark: Prostate Cancer Upgrading by Systematic Biopsy over Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy.

Authors:  Akhil Muthigi; Arvin K George; Abhinav Sidana; Michael Kongnyuy; Richard Simon; Vanessa Moreno; Maria J Merino; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2016-08-28       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  Current beliefs and practice patterns among urologists regarding prostate magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance-targeted biopsy.

Authors:  Akhil Muthigi; Abhinav Sidana; Arvin K George; Michael Kongnyuy; Mahir Maruf; Subin Valayil; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2016-10-12       Impact factor: 3.498

5.  Validation of Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System Version 2: A Retrospective Analysis.

Authors:  Michael Nguyentat; Alexander Ushinsky; Alessandra Miranda-Aguirre; Edward Uchio; Chandana Lall; Layla Shirkhoda; Thomas Lee; Christopher Green; Roozbeh Houshyar
Journal:  Curr Probl Diagn Radiol       Date:  2017-10-12

6.  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

7.  68Ga-PSMA PET/CT Combined with PET/Ultrasound-Guided Prostate Biopsy Can Diagnose Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in Men with Previous Negative Biopsy Results.

Authors:  Chen Liu; Teli Liu; Zhongyi Zhang; Ning Zhang; Peng Du; Yong Yang; Yiqiang Liu; Wei Yu; Nan Li; Michael A Gorin; Steven P Rowe; Hua Zhu; Kun Yan; Zhi Yang
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2020-02-07       Impact factor: 10.057

8.  Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of the prostate: An intraindividual assessment of the effect of temporal resolution on qualitative detection and quantitative analysis of histopathologically proven prostate cancer.

Authors:  Justin M Ream; Ankur M Doshi; Diane Dunst; Nainesh Parikh; Max X Kong; James S Babb; Samir S Taneja; Andrew B Rosenkrantz
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2016-09-20       Impact factor: 4.813

9.  Diagnostic Value of Guided Biopsies: Fusion and Cognitive-registration Magnetic Resonance Imaging Versus Conventional Ultrasound Biopsy of the Prostate.

Authors:  Daniel T Oberlin; David D Casalino; Frank H Miller; Richard S Matulewicz; Kent T Perry; Robert B Nadler; Shilajit Kundu; William J Catalona; Joshua J Meeks
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2016-03-07       Impact factor: 2.649

10.  Fusion prostate biopsy outperforms 12-core systematic prostate biopsy in patients with prior negative systematic biopsy: A multi-institutional analysis.

Authors:  Abhinav Sidana; Matthew J Watson; Arvin K George; Ardeshir R Rastinehad; Srinivas Vourganti; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Akhil Muthigi; Mahir Maruf; Jennifer B Gordetsky; Jeffrey W Nix; Maria J Merino; Baris Turkbey; Peter L Choyke; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2018-05-10       Impact factor: 3.498

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.