William A Sterling1, Joseph Weiner2,3, David Schreiber2,3, Komal Mehta4, Jeffrey P Weiss5,4. 1. Department of Urology, SUNY Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, NY, 11203, USA. w.andrewsterling@gmail.com. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, SUNY Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, NY, 11203, USA. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, VA New York Harbor Healthcare System, Brooklyn, NY, 11209, USA. 4. Department of Urology, VA New York Harbor Healthcare System, Brooklyn, NY, 11209, USA. 5. Department of Urology, SUNY Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, NY, 11203, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Racial differences in the incidence of prostate cancer on initial biopsy are well established, but the predictive value of African American race on the probability of prostate cancer detection on repeat biopsy is unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: At a single institution between January 2007 and June 2014, we reviewed 277 men who first underwent a negative transrectal ultrasound guided needle biopsy of the prostate, and who then subsequently underwent a second biopsy. Detection rates were compared via Chi-square analysis. Race, age, PSA, presence of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia, presence of atypical small acinar proliferation, prostate volume, PSA velocity and PSA density were compared via a multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: 496 AA men and 352 Caucasian men underwent initial biopsy, and AA men had a 49 % cancer detection rate, compared to 34 % in Caucasians (p < 0.0001). AA men also had a greater incidence of Gleason 7 cancers (p = 0.00018) and a smaller mean TRUS volume (p = 0.006) compared to Caucasians. On repeat biopsy, AA men no longer had a higher cancer detection rate (p = 0.227), nor difference in Gleason 7 detection or TRUS volume (p = 0.0992). On initial biopsy, AA race and increasing PSA were both associated with an increased likelihood for cancer detection (p < 0.001 for both). After an initial negative biopsy, AA race no longer predicted for future malignancy detection (p = 0.57), nor did PSA (p = 0.36). CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of men with high pre-test probability of prostate cancer and an initial negative biopsy, African American race in a veteran population fails to predict the detection of future prostate cancer.
PURPOSE: Racial differences in the incidence of prostate cancer on initial biopsy are well established, but the predictive value of African American race on the probability of prostate cancer detection on repeat biopsy is unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: At a single institution between January 2007 and June 2014, we reviewed 277 men who first underwent a negative transrectal ultrasound guided needle biopsy of the prostate, and who then subsequently underwent a second biopsy. Detection rates were compared via Chi-square analysis. Race, age, PSA, presence of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia, presence of atypical small acinar proliferation, prostate volume, PSA velocity and PSA density were compared via a multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: 496 AA men and 352 Caucasian men underwent initial biopsy, and AA men had a 49 % cancer detection rate, compared to 34 % in Caucasians (p < 0.0001). AA men also had a greater incidence of Gleason 7 cancers (p = 0.00018) and a smaller mean TRUS volume (p = 0.006) compared to Caucasians. On repeat biopsy, AA men no longer had a higher cancer detection rate (p = 0.227), nor difference in Gleason 7 detection or TRUS volume (p = 0.0992). On initial biopsy, AA race and increasing PSA were both associated with an increased likelihood for cancer detection (p < 0.001 for both). After an initial negative biopsy, AA race no longer predicted for future malignancy detection (p = 0.57), nor did PSA (p = 0.36). CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of men with high pre-test probability of prostate cancer and an initial negative biopsy, African American race in a veteran population fails to predict the detection of future prostate cancer.
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
Authors: Ernesto Lopez-Corona; Makoto Ohori; Peter T Scardino; Victor E Reuter; Mithat Gonen; Michael W Kattan Journal: J Urol Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Moamen M Amin; Suganthiny Jeyaganth; Nader Fahmy; Louis Bégin; Samuel Aronson; Stephen Jacobson; Simon Tanguay; Armen G Aprikian Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2007-09 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Alexis R Gaines; Elizabeth L Turner; Patricia G Moorman; Stephen J Freedland; Christopher J Keto; Megan E McPhail; Delores J Grant; Adriana C Vidal; Cathrine Hoyo Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2014-05-31 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Brett S Carver; Caleb B Bozeman; Walter J Simoneaux; Dennis D Venable; Michael W Kattan; James A Eastham Journal: J Urol Date: 2004-11 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: A V Taira; G S Merrick; R W Galbreath; H Andreini; W Taubenslag; R Curtis; W M Butler; E Adamovich; K E Wallner Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2009-09-29 Impact factor: 5.554
Authors: Oluwarotimi S Nettey; Austin J Walker; Mary Kate Keeter; Ashima Singal; Aishwarya Nugooru; Iman K Martin; Maria Ruden; Pooja Gogana; Michael A Dixon; Tijani Osuma; Courtney M P Hollowell; Roohollah Sharifi; Marin Sekosan; Ximing Yang; William J Catalona; Andre Kajdacsy-Balla; Virgilia Macias; Rick A Kittles; Adam B Murphy Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2018-09-17 Impact factor: 3.498