Literature DB >> 31882504

Multiparametric MRI Versus SelectMDx Accuracy in the Diagnosis of Clinically Significant PCa in Men Enrolled in Active Surveillance.

Pietro Pepe1, Giuseppe Dibenedetto2, Ludovica Pepe2, Michele Pennisi2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND/AIM: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the urinary SelectMDx test in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in men enrolled in an active surveillance (AS) protocol. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From July 2015 to July 2018, 125 men with very low-risk PCa were enrolled in the AS protocol; all patients underwent confirmatory transperineal saturation biopsy (SPBx). In the presence of PI-RADS score ≥3, a targeted MRI/TRUS fusion-guided biopsy was added to SPBx. Post-digital rectal examination urine was collected in 45/125 (36%) patients before SPBx; the genetic urine analysis was performed using a biomarker-based risk score model, the SelectMDx, that measured mRNA levels of distal-less homeobox 1 (DLX1) and homeobox C6 (HOXC6).
RESULTS: A total of 9/45 (20%) patients were reclassified as csPCa (7 cases=Grade Group 2; 2 cases=Grade Group 3); sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and diagnostic accuracy of mpMRI vs. SelectMDx in the diagnosis of csPCa were equal to 66.6 vs. 55.6%, 87.7 vs. 65.8%, 54.5 vs. 27.8%, 92.3 vs. 87%, 84.9 vs. 70.3%, respectively.
CONCLUSION: SPBx combined with MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy significantly outperformed the diagnostic accuracy of SelectMDx (70.3%) in the diagnosis of csPCa in men enrolled in AS. Copyright
© 2020, International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  MRI; Prostate cancer; SelectMDx; active surveillance

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 31882504      PMCID: PMC6984119          DOI: 10.21873/invivo.11786

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  In Vivo        ISSN: 0258-851X            Impact factor:   2.155


  30 in total

1.  The role of HOXC6 in prostate cancer development.

Authors:  Agus Rizal A H Hamid; A Marije Hoogland; Frank Smit; Sander Jannink; Cindy van Rijt-van de Westerlo; Cornelius F J Jansen; Geert J L H van Leenders; Gerald W Verhaegh; Jack A Schalken
Journal:  Prostate       Date:  2015-08-27       Impact factor: 4.104

2.  Multicenter Optimization and Validation of a 2-Gene mRNA Urine Test for Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer before Initial Prostate Biopsy.

Authors:  Alexander Haese; Geert Trooskens; Sandra Steyaert; Daphne Hessels; Michael Brawer; Virginie Vlaeminck-Guillem; Alain Ruffion; Derya Tilki; Jack Schalken; Jack Groskopf; Wim Van Criekinge
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2019-07-08       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Management Across Twenty Years of Clinical Practice: A Single-center Experience on 2,500 Cases.

Authors:  Pietro Pepe; Michele Pennisi
Journal:  Anticancer Res       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 2.480

Review 4.  Smarter screening for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Guan Hee Tan; Gregory Nason; Khaled Ajib; Dixon Teck Sing Woon; Jaime Herrera-Caceres; Omar Alhunaidi; Nathan Perlis
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2019-03-11       Impact factor: 4.226

5.  Can MRI/TRUS fusion targeted biopsy replace saturation prostate biopsy in the re-evaluation of men in active surveillance?

Authors:  Pietro Pepe; Antonio Garufi; Giandomenico Priolo; Michele Pennisi
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-12-23       Impact factor: 4.226

6.  Predicting Biopsy Outcomes During Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: External Validation of the Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study Risk Calculators in Five Large Active Surveillance Cohorts.

Authors:  Frank-Jan H Drost; Daan Nieboer; Todd M Morgan; Peter R Carroll; Monique J Roobol
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2019-08-24       Impact factor: 20.096

7.  Rational basis for the combination of PCA3 and TMPRSS2:ERG gene fusion for prostate cancer diagnosis.

Authors:  Grégoire Robert; Sander Jannink; Frank Smit; Tilly Aalders; Daphne Hessels; Ruben Cremers; Peter F Mulders; Jack A Schalken
Journal:  Prostate       Date:  2012-06-05       Impact factor: 4.104

8.  Prostate cancer detection at repeat biopsy: can pelvic phased-array multiparametric MRI replace saturation biopsy?

Authors:  Pietro Pepe; Antonio Garufi; Giandomenico Priolo; Giuseppe Candiano; Francesco Pietropaolo; Michele Pennisi; Filippo Fraggetta; Francesco Aragona
Journal:  Anticancer Res       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 2.480

9.  Prospective multicentre evaluation of PCA3 and TMPRSS2-ERG gene fusions as diagnostic and prognostic urinary biomarkers for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Gisele H J M Leyten; Daphne Hessels; Sander A Jannink; Frank P Smit; Hans de Jong; Erik B Cornel; Theo M de Reijke; Henk Vergunst; Paul Kil; Ben C Knipscheer; Inge M van Oort; Peter F A Mulders; Christina A Hulsbergen-van de Kaa; Jack A Schalken
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2012-11-15       Impact factor: 20.096

10.  Prediction of High-grade Prostate Cancer Following Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Improving the Rotterdam European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer Risk Calculators.

Authors:  Arnout R Alberts; Monique J Roobol; Jan F M Verbeek; Ivo G Schoots; Peter K Chiu; Daniël F Osses; Jasper D Tijsterman; Harrie P Beerlage; Christophe K Mannaerts; Lars Schimmöller; Peter Albers; Christian Arsov
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2018-08-03       Impact factor: 20.096

View more
  7 in total

Review 1.  Role of multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging fusion biopsy in active surveillance of prostate cancer: a systematic review.

Authors:  Elizabeth E Ellis; Thomas P Frye
Journal:  Ther Adv Urol       Date:  2022-07-18

Review 2.  Biomarkers in Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: From Current Knowledge to the Role of Metabolomics and Exosomes.

Authors:  Stefano Salciccia; Anna Laura Capriotti; Aldo Laganà; Stefano Fais; Mariantonia Logozzi; Ettore De Berardinis; Gian Maria Busetto; Giovanni Battista Di Pierro; Gian Piero Ricciuti; Francesco Del Giudice; Alessandro Sciarra; Peter R Carroll; Matthew R Cooperberg; Beatrice Sciarra; Martina Maggi
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2021-04-22       Impact factor: 5.923

3.  Role of Multiparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging before Confirmatory Biopsy in Assessing the Risk of Prostate Cancer Progression during Active Surveillance.

Authors:  Joseba Salguero; Enrique Gómez-Gómez; José Valero-Rosa; Julia Carrasco-Valiente; Juan Mesa; Cristina Martin; Juan Pablo Campos-Hernández; Juan Manuel Rubio; Daniel López; María José Requena
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2020-11-26       Impact factor: 3.500

4.  A risk model for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer based on bi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging in a Japanese cohort.

Authors:  Kazushige Sakaguchi; Michikata Hayashida; Naoto Tanaka; Suguru Oka; Shinji Urakami
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-09-22       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 5.  The utility of prostate MRI within active surveillance: description of the evidence.

Authors:  Georgina Dominique; Wayne G Brisbane; Robert E Reiter
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2021-12-03       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 6.  Active Surveillance in Prostate Cancer: Role of Available Biomarkers in Daily Practice.

Authors:  Belén Pastor-Navarro; José Rubio-Briones; Ángel Borque-Fernando; Luis M Esteban; Jose Luis Dominguez-Escrig; José Antonio López-Guerrero
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2021-06-10       Impact factor: 5.923

7.  Can the predictive value of multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer be improved by a liquid biopsy with SelectMDx?

Authors:  Mohammad Sajjad Rahnama'i; Christian Bach; Maximilian Schulze-Hagen; Christiane K Kuhl; Thomas Alexander Vögeli
Journal:  Cancer Rep (Hoboken)       Date:  2021-05-01
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.