Literature DB >> 29438586

Progression and treatment rates using an active surveillance protocol incorporating image-guided baseline biopsies and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging monitoring for men with favourable-risk prostate cancer.

David Thurtle1,2, Tristan Barrett3,4, Vineetha Thankappan-Nair2,4, Brendan Koo3,4, Anne Warren4,5, Christof Kastner2,4, Kasra Saeb-Parsy2,4, Jenna Kimberley-Duffell6, Vincent J Gnanapragasam1,2,4,6.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess early outcomes since the introduction of an active surveillance (AS) protocol incorporating multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-guided baseline biopsies and image-based surveillance. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A new AS protocol mandating image-guided baseline biopsies, annual mpMRI and 3-monthly prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing, but which retained protocol re-biopsies, was tested. Pathological progression, treatment conversion and triggers for non-protocol biopsy were recorded prospectively.
RESULTS: Data from 157 men enrolled in the AS protocol (median age 64 years, PSA 6.8 ng/mL, follow-up 39 months) were interrogated. A total of 12 men (7.6%) left the AS programme by choice. Of the 145 men who remained, 104 had re-biopsies either triggered by a rise in PSA level, change in mpMRI findings or by protocol. Overall, 23 men (15.9%) experienced disease progression; pathological changes were observed in 20 men and changes in imaging results were observed in three men. Of these 23 men, 17 switched to treatment, giving a conversion rate of 11.7% (<4% per year). Of the 20 men with pathological progression, this was detected in four of them after a PSA increase triggered a re-biopsy, while in 10 men progression was detected after an mpMRI change. Progression was detected in six men, however, solely after a protocol re-biopsy without prior PSA or mpMRI changes. Using PSA and mpMRI changes alone to detect progression was found to have a sensitivity and specificity of 70.0% and 81.7%, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Our AS protocol, with thorough baseline assessment and imaging-based surveillance, showed low rates of progression and treatment conversion. Changes in mpMRI findings were the principle trigger for detecting progression by imaging alone or pathologically; however, per protocol re-biopsy still detected a significant number of pathological progressions without mpMRI or PSA changes.
© 2018 The Authors BJU International © 2018 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  #PCSM; #ProstateCancer; active surveillance; localized prostate cancer; low-risk prostate cancer; mpMRI

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29438586     DOI: 10.1111/bju.14166

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  20 in total

1.  Best of the 2018 AUA Annual Meeting.

Authors:  Zeyad R Schwen; Alan W Partin
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2018

2.  Serial prostate magnetic resonance imaging fails to predict pathological progression in patients on active surveillance.

Authors:  Danly Omil-Lima; Albert Kim; Ilon Weinstein; Karishma Gupta; David Sheyn; Lee Ponsky
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2022-07       Impact factor: 2.052

Review 3.  The current role of MRI for guiding active surveillance in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Guillaume Ploussard; Olivier Rouvière; Morgan Rouprêt; Roderick van den Bergh; Raphaële Renard-Penna
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2022-04-07       Impact factor: 16.430

4.  Feasibility of aspirin and/or vitamin D3 for men with prostate cancer on active surveillance with Prolaris® testing.

Authors:  Eoin Dinneen; Gregory L Shaw; Roseann Kealy; Panos Alexandris; Kier Finnegan; Kimberley Chu; Nadia Haidar; Sara Santos-Vidal; Sakunthala Kudahetti; Caroline M Moore; Alistair D R Grey; Daniel M Berney; Anju Sahdev; Paul J Cathcart; R Timothy D Oliver; Prabhakar Rajan; Jack Cuzick; Jack Cuzick; Sanjeev Madaan; Jhumur Pati; Abdul M Chowdhury; Brian R P Birch; Timothy J Dudderidge; Caroline M Moore; Alistair D R Grey; Gregory L Shaw; Kieran P Jefferson; Howard G Kynaston; Prabhakar Rajan; James S A Green; Paul J Cathcart; Daniel M Berney; Thomas Powles; R Timothy D Oliver; Anju Sahdev; Roseann Kealy; Victoria Kemp; Panos Alexandris; Kier Finnegan; Kimberly Chu
Journal:  BJUI Compass       Date:  2022-06-11

5.  The effect of capped biparametric magnetic resonance imaging slots on weekly prostate cancer imaging workload.

Authors:  Nikita Sushentsev; Iztok Caglic; Evis Sala; Nadeem Shaida; Rhys A Slough; Bruno Carmo; Vasily Kozlov; Vincent J Gnanapragasam; Tristan Barrett
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2020-02-03       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 6.  Multiparametric MRI in Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer: An Overview and a Practical Approach.

Authors:  Chau Hung Lee; Teck Wei Tan; Cher Heng Tan
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 3.500

7.  Four-year outcomes from a multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based active surveillance programme: PSA dynamics and serial MRI scans allow omission of protocol biopsies.

Authors:  Kevin Michael Gallagher; Edward Christopher; Andrew James Cameron; Scott Little; Alasdair Innes; Gill Davis; Julian Keanie; Prasad Bollina; Alan McNeill
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2018-10-09       Impact factor: 5.588

8.  Clinical utility of MRI in the decision-making process before radical prostatectomy: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Mieszko Kozikowski; Wojciech Malewski; Wojciech Michalak; Jakub Dobruch
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-01-07       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Low-risk prostate cancer selected for active surveillance with negative MRI at entry: can repeat biopsies at 1 year be avoided? A pilot study.

Authors:  Jonathan Olivier; Veeru Kasivisvanathan; Elodie Drumez; Jean-Christophe Fantoni; Xavier Leroy; Philippe Puech; Arnauld Villers
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-07-23       Impact factor: 4.226

10.  MRI-derived radiomics model for baseline prediction of prostate cancer progression on active surveillance.

Authors:  Nikita Sushentsev; Leonardo Rundo; Oleg Blyuss; Vincent J Gnanapragasam; Evis Sala; Tristan Barrett
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-06-21       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.