Literature DB >> 26545849

Presence of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Suspicious Lesion Predicts Gleason 7 or Greater Prostate Cancer in Biopsy-Naive Patients.

John K Weaver1, Eric H Kim1, Joel M Vetter1, Kathryn J Fowler2, Cary L Siegel2, Gerald L Andriole3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the relative value of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in biopsy-naive patients to those with previous negative biopsy. Although MRI-targeted biopsy has been studied in several major prostate cancer (PCa) cohorts (biopsy naive, previous negative biopsy, and active surveillance), the relative benefit in these cohorts has not been established.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed biopsy-naive (n = 45) and previous negative biopsy (n = 55) patients who underwent prostate MRI prior to biopsy at our institution. Patients with an MRI suspicious region (MSR) underwent MRI-targeted biopsy as well as a systematic template biopsy, whereas those without MSR underwent only the template biopsy. All biopsies were performed with the TargetScan (Envisioneering, Pittsburgh, PA) biopsy system. MRI targeting was performed with cognitive guidance.
RESULTS: On multivariate logistic regression, the presence of an MSR was the only statistically significant and independent predictor of Gleason ≥ 7 PCa on biopsy for biopsy-naive men (odds ratio [OR] 40.2, P = .01). For men with previous negative biopsy, the presence of MSR was not a predictor of Gleason ≥ 7 PCa on biopsy (OR 4.35, P = .16), whereas PSA density > 0.15 ng/mL(2) was a significant and independent predictor (OR 66.2, P < .01).
CONCLUSION: Prostate MRI should be considered prior to biopsy in all patients presenting with clinical suspicion for PCa, as presence of a MSR will help guide prebiopsy counseling and provide an opportunity for MRI targeting during biopsy.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26545849     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2015.10.023

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


  6 in total

1.  Prostate MRI, with or without MRI-targeted biopsy, and systematic biopsy for detecting prostate cancer.

Authors:  Frank-Jan H Drost; Daniël F Osses; Daan Nieboer; Ewout W Steyerberg; Chris H Bangma; Monique J Roobol; Ivo G Schoots
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-04-25

2.  MRI/US fusion-guided prostate biopsy allows for equivalent cancer detection with significantly fewer needle cores in biopsy-naive men.

Authors:  Vidhush K Yarlagadda; Win Shun Lai; Jennifer B Gordetsky; Kristin K Porter; Jeffrey W Nix; John V Thomas; Soroush Rais-Bahrami
Journal:  Diagn Interv Radiol       Date:  2018 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.630

3.  Comparison between multiparametric MRI with and without post - contrast sequences for clinically significant prostate cancer detection.

Authors:  Thais Caldara Mussi; Tatiana Martins; George Caldas Dantas; Rodrigo Gobbo Garcia; Renee Zon Filippi; Gustavo Caserta Lemos; Ronaldo Hueb Baroni
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2018 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.541

Review 4.  Selection of patients for nerve sparing surgery in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  André N Vis; Roderick C N van den Bergh; Henk G van der Poel; Alexander Mottrie; Philip D Stricker; Marcus Graefen; Vipul Patel; Bernardo Rocco; Birgit Lissenberg-Witte; Pim J van Leeuwen
Journal:  BJUI Compass       Date:  2021-11-09

Review 5.  Role of mpMRI of the prostate in screening for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Christopher J D Wallis; Masoom A Haider; Robert K Nam
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2017-06

Review 6.  MRI findings guiding selection of active surveillance for prostate cancer: a review of emerging evidence.

Authors:  Zachary A Glaser; Kristin K Porter; John V Thomas; Jennifer B Gordetsky; Soroush Rais-Bahrami
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2018-09
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.