Daniel N Costa1, Fernando U Kay2, Ivan Pedrosa3, Lauren Kolski2, Yair Lotan4, Claus G Roehrborn4, Brad Hornberger4, Yin Xi2, Franto Francis5, Neil M Rofsky3. 1. Department of Radiology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX; Advanced Imaging Research Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX. Electronic address: Daniel.Costa@UTSouthwestern.edu. 2. Department of Radiology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX. 3. Department of Radiology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX; Advanced Imaging Research Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX. 4. Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX. 5. Department of Pathology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Targeted prostate biopsies are changing the landscape of prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis with the degree of suspicion on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) being a strong predictor of targeted biopsy outcome. Data regarding the rate and potential causes of false-negative magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound (MRI-TRUS) fusion-targeted biopsy in patients with highly suspicious mpMRI findings are lacking. OBJECTIVES: To determine the rate of clinically significant PCa detection in repeat targeted biopsy or surgery in patients with highly suspicious mpMRI findings and in an initial negative MRI-TRUS fusion-targeted biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this single-center, retrospective study of prospectively generated data, men with highly suspicious lesions (Likert 5 score) on mpMRI and an initial negative MRI-TRUS fusion-targeted biopsy were reviewed. The rate of PCa detection in a subsequent MRI-TRUS fusion-targeted biopsy or radical prostatectomy was determined. Tumors in the intermediate- and high-risk groups according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria were considered clinically significant. RESULTS: A total of 32 men with 38 Likert 5 lesions were identified. Repeat targeted biopsy or surgery detected cancer in 42% (16/38) of the Likert 5 lesions with initial negative targeted biopsy. Most of these cancers were intermediate- (69%; 11/16) or high-risk (25%; 4/16) tumors. CONCLUSION: A negative round of targeted biopsies does not exclude clinically significant PCa in men with highly suspicious mpMRI findings. Patients with imaging-pathology disagreement should be carefully reviewed and considered for repeat biopsy or for strict surveillance.
BACKGROUND: Targeted prostate biopsies are changing the landscape of prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis with the degree of suspicion on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) being a strong predictor of targeted biopsy outcome. Data regarding the rate and potential causes of false-negative magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound (MRI-TRUS) fusion-targeted biopsy in patients with highly suspicious mpMRI findings are lacking. OBJECTIVES: To determine the rate of clinically significant PCa detection in repeat targeted biopsy or surgery in patients with highly suspicious mpMRI findings and in an initial negative MRI-TRUS fusion-targeted biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this single-center, retrospective study of prospectively generated data, men with highly suspicious lesions (Likert 5 score) on mpMRI and an initial negative MRI-TRUS fusion-targeted biopsy were reviewed. The rate of PCa detection in a subsequent MRI-TRUS fusion-targeted biopsy or radical prostatectomy was determined. Tumors in the intermediate- and high-risk groups according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria were considered clinically significant. RESULTS: A total of 32 men with 38 Likert 5 lesions were identified. Repeat targeted biopsy or surgery detected cancer in 42% (16/38) of the Likert 5 lesions with initial negative targeted biopsy. Most of these cancers were intermediate- (69%; 11/16) or high-risk (25%; 4/16) tumors. CONCLUSION: A negative round of targeted biopsies does not exclude clinically significant PCa in men with highly suspicious mpMRI findings. Patients with imaging-pathology disagreement should be carefully reviewed and considered for repeat biopsy or for strict surveillance.
Authors: Francesca V Mertan; Matthew D Greer; Joanna H Shih; Arvin K George; Michael Kongnyuy; Akhil Muthigi; Maria J Merino; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey Journal: J Urol Date: 2016-04-18 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: M Minhaj Siddiqui; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Baris Turkbey; Arvin K George; Jason Rothwax; Nabeel Shakir; Chinonyerem Okoro; Dima Raskolnikov; Howard L Parnes; W Marston Linehan; Maria J Merino; Richard M Simon; Peter L Choyke; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto Journal: JAMA Date: 2015-01-27 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Jennifer E Mihalik; Lisa Krupka; Roxanne Davenport; Lee Tucker; Christine Toevs; R Stephen Smith Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: James L Mohler; Philip W Kantoff; Andrew J Armstrong; Robert R Bahnson; Michael Cohen; Anthony Victor D'Amico; James A Eastham; Charles A Enke; Thomas A Farrington; Celestia S Higano; Eric Mark Horwitz; Christopher J Kane; Mark H Kawachi; Michael Kuettel; Timothy M Kuzel; Richard J Lee; Arnold W Malcolm; David Miller; Elizabeth R Plimack; Julio M Pow-Sang; David Raben; Sylvia Richey; Mack Roach; Eric Rohren; Stan Rosenfeld; Edward Schaeffer; Eric J Small; Guru Sonpavde; Sandy Srinivas; Cy Stein; Seth A Strope; Jonathan Tward; Dorothy A Shead; Maria Ho Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2014-05 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: James E Thompson; Daniel Moses; Ron Shnier; Phillip Brenner; Warick Delprado; Lee Ponsky; Marley Pulbrook; Maret Böhm; Anne-Maree Haynes; Andrew Hayen; Phillip D Stricker Journal: J Urol Date: 2014-02-08 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Raju Chelluri; Amichai Kilchevsky; Arvin K George; Abhinav Sidana; Thomas P Frye; Daniel Su; Michele Fascelli; Richard Ho; Steven F Abboud; Baris Turkbey; Maria J Merino; Peter L Choyke; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto Journal: J Urol Date: 2016-02-13 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: James Sorace; Denise R Aberle; Dena Elimam; Silvana Lawvere; Ossama Tawfik; W Dean Wallace Journal: BMC Med Date: 2012-09-05 Impact factor: 8.775
Authors: Susan John; Steven Cooper; Rodney H Breau; Trevor A Flood; Ilias Cagiannos; Luke T Lavallee; Christopher Morash; Joseph O'sullivan; Nicola Schieda Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2018-06-19 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Emanuel Darius Cata; Iulia Andras; Teodora Telecan; Attila Tamas-Szora; Radu-Tudor Coman; Dan-Vasile Stanca; Ioan Coman; Nicolae Crisan Journal: Med Pharm Rep Date: 2021-04-29
Authors: Marinus J Hagens; Mar Fernandez Salamanca; Anwar R Padhani; Pim J van Leeuwen; Henk G van der Poel; Ivo G Schoots Journal: Eur Urol Open Sci Date: 2022-05-02