Literature DB >> 29645347

Does the introduction of prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging into the active surveillance protocol for localized prostate cancer improve patient re-classification?

Richard J Bryant1,2, Bob Yang1, Yiannis Philippou1, Karla Lam1, Maureen Obiakor1, Jennifer Ayers1, Virginia Chiocchia2,3, Fergus Gleeson4, Ruth MacPherson4, Clare Verrill2,5, Prasanna Sooriakumaran2,6, Freddie C Hamdy1,2, Simon F Brewster1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether replacement of protocol-driven repeat prostate biopsy (PB) with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) ± repeat targeted prostate biopsy (TB) when evaluating men on active surveillance (AS) for low-volume, low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa) altered the likelihood of or time to treatment, or reduced the number of repeat biopsies required to trigger treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 445 patients underwent AS in the period 2010-2016 at our institution, with a median (interquartile range [IQR]) follow-up of 2.4 (1.2-3.7) years. Up to 2014, patients followed a 'pre-2014' AS protocol, which incorporated PB, and subsequently, according to the 2014 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines, patients followed a '2014-present' AS protocol that included mpMRI. We identified four groups of patients within the cohort: 'no mpMRI and no PB'; 'PB alone'; 'mpMRI ± TB'; and 'PB and mpMRI ± TB'. Kaplan-Meier plots and log-rank tests were used to compare groups.
RESULTS: Of 445 patients, 132 (30%) discontinued AS and underwent treatment intervention, with a median (IQR) time to treatment of 1.55 (0.71-2.4) years. The commonest trigger for treatment was PCa upgrading after mpMRI and TB (43/132 patients, 29%). No significant difference was observed in the time at which patients receiving a PB alone or receiving mpMRI ± TB discontinued AS to undergo treatment (median 1.9 vs 1.33 years; P = 0.747). Considering only those patients who underwent repeat biopsy, a greater proportion of patients receiving TB after mpMRI discontinued AS compared with those receiving PB alone (29/66 [44%] vs 32/87 [37%]; P = 0.003). On average, a single set of repeat biopsies was needed to trigger treatment regardless of whether this was a PB or TB.
CONCLUSIONS: Replacing a systematic PB with mpMRI ±TB as part of an AS protocol increased the likelihood of re-classifying patients on AS and identifying men with clinically significant disease requiring treatment. mpMRI ±TB as part of AS thereby represents a significant advance in the oncological safety of the AS protocol.
© 2018 The Authors BJU International © 2018 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  active surveillance; mpMRI; prostate cancer; repeat biopsy

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29645347     DOI: 10.1111/bju.14248

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


  7 in total

1.  Identification of a serum biomarker signature associated with metastatic prostate cancer.

Authors:  Venera Kuci Emruli; Leena Liljedahl; Ulrika Axelsson; Corinna Richter; Lisa Theorin; Anders Bjartell; Hans Lilja; Jenny Donovan; David Neal; Freddie C Hamdy; Carl A K Borrebaeck
Journal:  Proteomics Clin Appl       Date:  2021-05-04       Impact factor: 3.603

2.  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

3.  Five-year Outcomes of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-based Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: A Large Cohort Study.

Authors:  Vasilis Stavrinides; Francesco Giganti; Bruce Trock; Shonit Punwani; Clare Allen; Alex Kirkham; Alex Freeman; Aiman Haider; Rhys Ball; Neil McCartan; Hayley Whitaker; Clement Orczyk; Mark Emberton; Caroline M Moore
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2020-04-30       Impact factor: 20.096

4.  Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging can exclude prostate cancer progression in patients on active surveillance: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  T Ullrich; C Arsov; M Quentin; F Mones; A C Westphalen; D Mally; A Hiester; P Albers; G Antoch; L Schimmöller
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2020-06-26       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Association between previous negative biopsies and lower rates of progression during active surveillance for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Mattia Luca Piccinelli; Stefano Luzzago; Giulia Marvaso; Ekaterina Laukhtina; Noriyoshi Miura; Victor M Schuettfort; Keiichiro Mori; Alberto Colombo; Matteo Ferro; Francesco A Mistretta; Nicola Fusco; Giuseppe Petralia; Barbara A Jereczek-Fossa; Shahrokh F Shariat; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Ottavio de Cobelli; Gennaro Musi
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2022-03-26       Impact factor: 3.661

6.  PI-RADS® Category as a Predictor of Progression to Unfavorable Risk Prostate Cancer in Men on Active Surveillance.

Authors:  Alex Z Wang; Luke P O’Conno; Nitin K Yerram; Lori Long; Johnathan Zeng; Sherif Mehralivand; Stephanie A Harmon; Amir H Lebastchi; Michael Ahdoot; Patrick T Gomella; Sandeep Gurram; Peter L Choyke; Maria J Merino; Joanna H Shih; Bradford J Wood; Baris Turkbey; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2020-07-27       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  Disparities in magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate for traditionally underserved patients with prostate cancer.

Authors:  Timothy P Quinn; Martin G Sanda; David H Howard; Dattatraya Patil; Christopher P Filson
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2021-06-17       Impact factor: 6.921

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.