Literature DB >> 31492650

Concordance Between Biopsy and Radical Prostatectomy Pathology in the Era of Targeted Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Shokhi Goel1, Jonathan E Shoag1, Michael D Gross1, Bashir Al Hussein Al Awamlh1, Brian Robinson1, Francesca Khani1, Becky Baltich Nelson2, Daniel J Margolis1, Jim C Hu3.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-targeted transrectal prostate biopsy (TBx) may better predict pathology at radical prostatectomy than systematic transrectal prostate biopsy (SBx).
OBJECTIVE: To assess concordance between biopsy and radical prostatectomy pathology in men undergoing a TBx as compared with those undergoing an SBx. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Four electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, the Cochrane Library [Wiley], and EBSCHOHost) were searched from inception until July 2018. Studies were included if they were published after 2012, conducted both SBx and TBx, and compared the biopsy results with final pathology after radical prostatectomy for ≥50 patients. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were utilized. Bias was appraised using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Our search yielded 10 studies including 1215 men. However, our inclusion criteria applied only to a proportion of men included in these studies. The median age was 65 yr and the median prostate-specific antigen level was 7.2 ng/ml. In the eight studies examining upgrading at prostatectomy, pathology from SBx was significantly more likely to be upgraded relative to TBx (odds ratio [OR] 2.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.48-4.14, p =  0.001). We found no significant difference in downgrading (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.48-2.67, p =  0.783) between TBx and SBx. For both biopsy-naïve men and men with a prior negative biopsy, results from SBx were more likely to be upgraded than TBx at prostatectomy (OR 1.6 [95% CI 1.02-2.27, p <  0.001] and OR 4.23 [95% CI 1.68-8.48, p =  0.003], respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Pathologic upgrading at prostatectomy was less likely with mpMRI-targeted biopsy versus systematic biopsy alone, without concurrent increase in downgrading. This increased accuracy should improve confidence in management decisions based on MRI-targeted biopsy pathology. PATIENT
SUMMARY: We reviewed the ability of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging -targeted biopsy to predict cancer grade at radical prostatectomy. We found that targeted biopsy provides more accurate assessment of Gleason score at prostatectomy than systematic biopsy.
Copyright © 2019 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Magnetic resonance imaging–targeted Biopsy; Meta-analysis; Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System; Prostate cancer; Systematic review

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31492650     DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2019.08.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol Oncol        ISSN: 2588-9311


  14 in total

1.  Gleason Grade Group Concordance between Preoperative Targeted Biopsy and Radical Prostatectomy Histopathologic Analysis: A Comparison Between In-Bore MRI-guided and MRI-Transrectal US Fusion Prostate Biopsies.

Authors:  Daniel N Costa; Qi Cai; Yin Xi; Debora Z Recchimuzzi; Naveen Subramanian; Aditya Bagrodia; Neil M Rofsky; Claus G Roehrborn; Brad Hornberger; Rajal B Shah; Kenneth Goldberg; Alberto Diaz de Leon; Ivan Pedrosa
Journal:  Radiol Imaging Cancer       Date:  2021-03-05

2.  The prognostic value of high-grade prostate cancer pattern on MRI-targeted biopsies: predictors for downgrading and importance of concomitant systematic biopsies.

Authors:  Cécile Manceau; Gaëlle Fromont-Hankard; Jean-Baptiste Beauval; Marine Lesourd; Christophe Almeras; Anne-Sophie Bajeot; Jean-Romain Gautier; Michel Soulié; Guillaume Loison; Ambroise Salin; Christophe Tollon; Bernard Malavaud; Mathieu Roumiguié; Guillaume Ploussard
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2021-02-20       Impact factor: 4.226

3.  The Impact of Prostate Cancer Upgrading and Upstaging on Biochemical Recurrence and Cancer-Specific Survival.

Authors:  Arnas Bakavičius; Mingailė Drevinskaitė; Kristina Daniūnaitė; Marija Barisienė; Sonata Jarmalaitė; Feliksas Jankevičius
Journal:  Medicina (Kaunas)       Date:  2020-02-04       Impact factor: 2.430

4.  Identification of drug combinations on the basis of machine learning to maximize anti-aging effects.

Authors:  Sun Kyung Kim; Peter C Goughnour; Eui Jin Lee; Myeong Hyun Kim; Hee Jin Chae; Gwang Yeul Yun; Yi Rang Kim; Jin Woo Choi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-01-28       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Clinical significance and risk factors of International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade upgrading in prostate cancer patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Yuta Takeshima; Yuta Yamada; Taro Teshima; Tetsuya Fujimura; Shigenori Kakutani; Yuji Hakozaki; Naoki Kimura; Yoshiyuki Akiyama; Yusuke Sato; Taketo Kawai; Daisuke Yamada; Haruki Kume
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2021-05-04       Impact factor: 4.430

6.  Machine Learning-Based Prediction of Pathological Upgrade From Combined Transperineal Systematic and MRI-Targeted Prostate Biopsy to Final Pathology: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.

Authors:  Junlong Zhuang; Yansheng Kan; Yuwen Wang; Alessandro Marquis; Xuefeng Qiu; Marco Oderda; Haifeng Huang; Marco Gatti; Fan Zhang; Paolo Gontero; Linfeng Xu; Giorgio Calleris; Yao Fu; Bing Zhang; Giancarlo Marra; Hongqian Guo
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-04-07       Impact factor: 5.738

7.  Correlation of MRI-Lesion Targeted Biopsy vs. Systematic Biopsy Gleason Score with Final Pathological Gleason Score after Radical Prostatectomy.

Authors:  Mike Wenzel; Felix Preisser; Clarissa Wittler; Benedikt Hoeh; Peter J Wild; Alexandra Tschäbunin; Boris Bodelle; Christoph Würnschimmel; Derya Tilki; Markus Graefen; Andreas Becker; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Felix K H Chun; Luis A Kluth; Jens Köllermann; Philipp Mandel
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-15

8.  The 2019 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma.

Authors:  Geert J L H van Leenders; Theodorus H van der Kwast; David J Grignon; Andrew J Evans; Glen Kristiansen; Charlotte F Kweldam; Geert Litjens; Jesse K McKenney; Jonathan Melamed; Nicholas Mottet; Gladell P Paner; Hemamali Samaratunga; Ivo G Schoots; Jeffry P Simko; Toyonori Tsuzuki; Murali Varma; Anne Y Warren; Thomas M Wheeler; Sean R Williamson; Kenneth A Iczkowski
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2020-08       Impact factor: 6.298

9.  Radiologist-like artificial intelligence for grade group prediction of radical prostatectomy for reducing upgrading and downgrading from biopsy.

Authors:  Lizhi Shao; Ye Yan; Zhenyu Liu; Xiongjun Ye; Haizhui Xia; Xuehua Zhu; Yuting Zhang; Zhiying Zhang; Huiying Chen; Wei He; Cheng Liu; Min Lu; Yi Huang; Lulin Ma; Kai Sun; Xuezhi Zhou; Guanyu Yang; Jian Lu; Jie Tian
Journal:  Theranostics       Date:  2020-09-02       Impact factor: 11.556

Review 10.  Current Understanding and Management of Intraductal Carcinoma of the Prostate.

Authors:  Bryden Considine; Adebowale Adeniran; Michael E Hurwitz
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2021-07-16       Impact factor: 5.075

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.