Luke P O'Connor1, Alex Z Wang1, Nitin K Yerram1, Lori Long2, Michael Ahdoot1, Amir H Lebastchi1, Sandeep Gurram1, Johnathan Zeng3, Stephanie A Harmon4, Sherif Mehralivand5, Maria J Merino6, Howard L Parnes7, Peter L Choyke5, Joanna H Shih2, Bradford J Wood3, Baris Turkbey5, Peter A Pinto8. 1. Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. 2. Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. 3. Center for Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. 4. Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA. 5. Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. 6. Laboratory of Pathology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. 7. Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institutes, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. 8. Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. Electronic address: pintop@mail.nih.gov.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The ability of serial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to capture pathologic progression during active surveillance (AS) remains in question. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether changes in MRI are associated with pathologic progression for patients on AS. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: From July 2007 through January 2020, we identified all patients evaluated for AS at our institution. Following confirmatory biopsy, a total of 391 patients who underwent surveillance MRI and biopsy at least once were identified (median follow-up of 35.6 mo, interquartile range 19.7-60.6). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: All MRI intervals were scored using the "Prostate Cancer Radiologic Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation" (PRECISE) criteria, with PRECISE scores =4 considered a positive change in MRI. A generalized estimating equation-based logistic regression analysis was conducted for all intervals with a PRECISE score of <4 to determine the predictors of Gleason grade group (GG) progression despite stable MRI. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 621 MRI intervals were scored by PRECISE and validated by biopsy. The negative predictive value of stable MRI (PRECISE score <4) was greatest for detecting GG1 to?=?GG3 disease (0.94 [0.91-0.97]). If 2-yr surveillance biopsy were performed exclusively for a positive change in MRI, 3.7% (4/109) of avoided biopsies would have resulted in missed progression from GG1 to?=?GG3 disease. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density (odds ratio 1.95 [1.17-3.25], p?=? 0.01) was a risk factor for progression from GG1 to =GG3 disease despite stable MRI. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with GG1 disease and stable MRI (PRECISE score <4) on surveillance, grade progression to?=?GG3 disease is not common. In patients with grade progression detected on biopsy despite stable MRI, elevated PSA density appeared to be a risk factor for progression to?=?GG3 disease. PATIENT SUMMARY: For patients with low-risk prostate cancer on active surveillance, the risk of progressing to grade group 3 disease is low with a stable magnetic resonance image (MRI) after 2?yr. Having higher prostate-specific antigen density increases the risk of progression, despite having a stable MRI.
BACKGROUND: The ability of serial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to capture pathologic progression during active surveillance (AS) remains in question. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether changes in MRI are associated with pathologic progression for patients on AS. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: From July 2007 through January 2020, we identified all patients evaluated for AS at our institution. Following confirmatory biopsy, a total of 391 patients who underwent surveillance MRI and biopsy at least once were identified (median follow-up of 35.6 mo, interquartile range 19.7-60.6). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: All MRI intervals were scored using the "Prostate Cancer Radiologic Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation" (PRECISE) criteria, with PRECISE scores =4 considered a positive change in MRI. A generalized estimating equation-based logistic regression analysis was conducted for all intervals with a PRECISE score of <4 to determine the predictors of Gleason grade group (GG) progression despite stable MRI. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 621 MRI intervals were scored by PRECISE and validated by biopsy. The negative predictive value of stable MRI (PRECISE score <4) was greatest for detecting GG1 to?=?GG3 disease (0.94 [0.91-0.97]). If 2-yr surveillance biopsy were performed exclusively for a positive change in MRI, 3.7% (4/109) of avoided biopsies would have resulted in missed progression from GG1 to?=?GG3 disease. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density (odds ratio 1.95 [1.17-3.25], p?=? 0.01) was a risk factor for progression from GG1 to =GG3 disease despite stable MRI. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with GG1 disease and stable MRI (PRECISE score <4) on surveillance, grade progression to?=?GG3 disease is not common. In patients with grade progression detected on biopsy despite stable MRI, elevated PSA density appeared to be a risk factor for progression to?=?GG3 disease. PATIENT SUMMARY: For patients with low-risk prostate cancer on active surveillance, the risk of progressing to grade group 3 disease is low with a stable magnetic resonance image (MRI) after 2?yr. Having higher prostate-specific antigen density increases the risk of progression, despite having a stable MRI.
Keywords:
Active surveillance; Fusion biopsy; Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging; Prostate Cancer Radiologic Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation; Prostate cancer
Authors: Annerleim Walton Diaz; Nabeel Ahmad Shakir; Arvin K George; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Baris Turkbey; Jason T Rothwax; Lambros Stamatakis; Cheng William Hong; Mohummad Minhaj Siddiqui; Chinonyerem Okoro; Dima Raskolnikov; Daniel Su; Joanna Shih; Hui Han; Howard L Parnes; Maria J Merino; Richard M Simon; Bradford J Wood; Peter L Choyke; Peter A Pinto Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2015-03-06 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: James L Mohler; Emmanuel S Antonarakis; Andrew J Armstrong; Anthony V D'Amico; Brian J Davis; Tanya Dorff; James A Eastham; Charles A Enke; Thomas A Farrington; Celestia S Higano; Eric Mark Horwitz; Michael Hurwitz; Joseph E Ippolito; Christopher J Kane; Michael R Kuettel; Joshua M Lang; Jesse McKenney; George Netto; David F Penson; Elizabeth R Plimack; Julio M Pow-Sang; Thomas J Pugh; Sylvia Richey; Mack Roach; Stan Rosenfeld; Edward Schaeffer; Ahmad Shabsigh; Eric J Small; Daniel E Spratt; Sandy Srinivas; Jonathan Tward; Dorothy A Shead; Deborah A Freedman-Cass Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2019-05-01 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Thomas P Frye; Arvin K George; Amichai Kilchevsky; Mahir Maruf; M Minhaj Siddiqui; Michael Kongnyuy; Akhil Muthigi; Hui Han; Howard L Parnes; Maria Merino; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey; Brad Wood; Peter A Pinto Journal: J Urol Date: 2016-09-06 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Svenja Dieffenbacher; Joanne Nyarangi-Dix; Francesco Giganti; David Bonekamp; Claudia Kesch; Maya B Müller-Wolf; Viktoria Schütz; Claudia Gasch; Gencay Hatiboglu; Marcus Hauffe; Albrecht Stenzinger; Stefan Duensing; Heinz-Peter Schlemmer; Caroline M Moore; Markus Hohenfellner; Jan Philipp Radtke Journal: Eur Urol Focus Date: 2019-03-13
Authors: Michael Ahdoot; Andrew R Wilbur; Sarah E Reese; Amir H Lebastchi; Sherif Mehralivand; Patrick T Gomella; Jonathan Bloom; Sandeep Gurram; Minhaj Siddiqui; Paul Pinsky; Howard Parnes; W Marston Linehan; Maria Merino; Peter L Choyke; Joanna H Shih; Baris Turkbey; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2020-03-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Daniël F Osses; Frank-Jan H Drost; Jan F M Verbeek; Henk B Luiting; Geert J L H van Leenders; Chris H Bangma; Gabriel P Krestin; Monique J Roobol; Ivo G Schoots Journal: BJU Int Date: 2020-04-22 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Rajiv Jayadevan; Ely R Felker; Lorna Kwan; Danielle E Barsa; Haoyue Zhang; Anthony E Sisk; Merdie Delfin; Leonard S Marks Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2019-09-04
Authors: Francesco Barletta; Elio Mazzone; Armando Stabile; Simone Scuderi; Giorgio Brembilla; Mario de Angelis; Giuseppe Ottone Cirulli; Vito Cucchiara; Giorgio Gandaglia; R Jeffrey Karnes; Morgan Roupret; Francesco De Cobelli; Francesco Montorsi; Alberto Briganti Journal: World J Urol Date: 2022-09-23 Impact factor: 3.661