Literature DB >> 34294510

Effects of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Targeting on Overdiagnosis and Overtreatment of Prostate Cancer.

Andrew J Vickers1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that targeting prostate lesions identified on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) will improve the sensitivity of prostate biopsy for high-grade disease. The clinical significance of high-grade tumors found on MRI but missed on systematic biopsy is open to question.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the risk of mortality for high-grade cancers identified by MRI targeting in men who had benign systematic biopsy findings. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We used data from 999 men with negative systematic biopsy and concurrent MRI-targeted biopsy in the National Cancer Institute MRI study. The comparison group consisted of 3056 men followed for 11 yr after negative sextant biopsy in the European Randomized Trial of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: We calculated the number of patients needed to be diagnosed (NND) and treated (NNT) following targeted biopsy in order to prevent one prostate cancer death at 11 yr. We used a simple modeling approach that involved several assumptions, such as the proportion of the deaths in ERSPC preventable by earlier detection with MRI-guided biopsy. We then varied these assumptions to assess the effects on the results. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: NND and NNT were 89 and 57 for the scenario involving assumptions favorable to MRI, and 169 and 127 for a more neutral set of assumptions, respectively. Results were only more encouraging for MRI targeting under unlikely scenarios, such as 100% sensitivity for MRI and a cure rate of 100% for treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: Although MRI may be of benefit overall, considering the decrease in overdiagnosis among men with negative MRI findings, targeting biopsy needles to MRI-detected lesions results in a large number of men diagnosed and treated per death prevented. Consideration should be given to changing guidelines on grading of MRI cores and those regarding treatment of MRI-detected high-grade prostate cancer. PATIENT
SUMMARY: We carried out a modeling study to assess how magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan results used to target prostate cancer lesions during biopsy can affect outcomes. The model results show that if MRI-visible tumors are targeted during prostate biopsy, a large number of men need to be diagnosed and treated for prostate cancer in order to avoid just one prostate cancer death.
Copyright © 2021 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  MRI; Prostate cancer; overdiagnoses

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34294510      PMCID: PMC8530856          DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.06.026

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol        ISSN: 0302-2838            Impact factor:   24.267


  13 in total

1.  Risk of prostate cancer diagnosis and mortality in men with a benign initial transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy set: a population-based study.

Authors:  Nina Klemann; M Andreas Røder; J Thomas Helgstrand; Klaus Brasso; Birgitte G Toft; Ben Vainer; Peter Iversen
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2017-01-14       Impact factor: 41.316

2.  Negative Predictive Value of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Era: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Niranjan J Sathianathen; Altan Omer; Eli Harriss; Lucy Davies; Veeru Kasivisvanathan; Shonit Punwani; Caroline M Moore; Christof Kastner; Tristan Barrett; Roderick Cn Van Den Bergh; Ben A Eddy; Fergus Gleeson; Ruth Macpherson; Richard J Bryant; James W F Catto; Declan G Murphy; Freddie C Hamdy; Hashim U Ahmed; Alastair D Lamb
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2020-05-20       Impact factor: 20.096

3.  Long-term Outcomes for Men in a Prostate Screening Trial with an Initial Benign Prostate Biopsy: A Population-based Cohort.

Authors:  Emmeli Palmstedt; Marianne Månsson; Maria Frånlund; Johan Stranne; Carl-Gustaf Pihl; Jonas Hugosson; Rebecka Arnsrud Godtman
Journal:  Eur Urol Oncol       Date:  2019-02-14

4.  Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study.

Authors:  Fritz H Schröder; Jonas Hugosson; Monique J Roobol; Teuvo L J Tammela; Stefano Ciatto; Vera Nelen; Maciej Kwiatkowski; Marcos Lujan; Hans Lilja; Marco Zappa; Louis J Denis; Franz Recker; Antonio Berenguer; Liisa Määttänen; Chris H Bangma; Gunnar Aus; Arnauld Villers; Xavier Rebillard; Theodorus van der Kwast; Bert G Blijenberg; Sue M Moss; Harry J de Koning; Anssi Auvinen
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2009-03-18       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting in early prostate cancer.

Authors:  Anna Bill-Axelson; Lars Holmberg; Hans Garmo; Jennifer R Rider; Kimmo Taari; Christer Busch; Stig Nordling; Michael Häggman; Swen-Olof Andersson; Anders Spångberg; Ove Andrén; Juni Palmgren; Gunnar Steineck; Hans-Olov Adami; Jan-Erik Johansson
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2014-03-06       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Eleven-year outcome of patients with prostate cancers diagnosed during screening after initial negative sextant biopsies.

Authors:  Fritz H Schröder; Roderick C N van den Bergh; Tineke Wolters; Pim J van Leeuwen; Chris H Bangma; Theo H van der Kwast; Monique J Roobol
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2009-11-06       Impact factor: 20.096

7.  Radical Prostatectomy or Observation for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: Extended Follow-up of the Prostate Cancer Intervention Versus Observation Trial (PIVOT).

Authors:  Timothy J Wilt; Tien N Vo; Lisa Langsetmo; Philipp Dahm; Thomas Wheeler; William J Aronson; Matthew R Cooperberg; Brent C Taylor; Michael K Brawer
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2020-02-21       Impact factor: 20.096

8.  Risk of Metastasis in Men with Grade Group 2 Prostate Cancer Managed with Active Surveillance at a Tertiary Cancer Center.

Authors:  Sigrid Carlsson; Nicole Benfante; Ricardo Alvim; Daniel D Sjoberg; Andrew Vickers; Victor E Reuter; Samson W Fine; Hebert Alberto Vargas; Michal Wiseman; Maha Mamoor; Behfar Ehdaie; Vincent Laudone; Peter Scardino; James Eastham; Karim Touijer
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2020-01-07       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Heterogeneity in Genomic Risk Assessment from Tissue Based Prognostic Signatures Used in the Biopsy Setting and the Impact of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Targeted Biopsy.

Authors:  Sanoj Punnen; Radka Stoyanova; Deukwoo Kwon; Isildinha M Reis; Nachiketh Soodana-Prakash; Chad R Ritch; Bruno Nahar; Mark L Gonzalgo; Bruce Kava; Yang Liu; Himanshu Arora; Sandra M Gaston; Rosa P Castillo Acosta; Alan Dal Pra; Matthew Abramowitz; Oleksandr N Kryvenko; Elai Davicioni; Alan Pollack; Dipen J Parekh
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2020-12-24       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  MRI-Targeted, Systematic, and Combined Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis.

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

View more
  4 in total

1.  Towards a judicious use of perilesional biopsy in the era of MRI-targeting, parting of the ways from systematic prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Anwar R Padhani; Steven S Raman; Ivo G Schoots
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2022-09-08       Impact factor: 7.034

Review 2.  Integrating mechanism-based modeling with biomedical imaging to build practical digital twins for clinical oncology.

Authors:  Chengyue Wu; Guillermo Lorenzo; David A Hormuth; Ernesto A B F Lima; Kalina P Slavkova; Julie C DiCarlo; John Virostko; Caleb M Phillips; Debra Patt; Caroline Chung; Thomas E Yankeelov
Journal:  Biophys Rev (Melville)       Date:  2022-05-17

3.  Assessing the impact of MRI based diagnostics on pre-treatment disease classification and prognostic model performance in men diagnosed with new prostate cancer from an unscreened population.

Authors:  Artitaya Lophatananon; Matthew H V Byrne; Tristan Barrett; Anne Warren; Kenneth Muir; Ibifuro Dokubo; Fanos Georgiades; Mostafa Sheba; Lisa Bibby; Vincent J Gnanapragasam
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2022-08-11       Impact factor: 4.638

4.  Predicting Grade group 2 or higher cancer at prostate biopsy by 4Kscore in blood and uCaP microRNA model in urine.

Authors:  Jacob Fredsøe; Martin Rasmussen; Amy L Tin; Andrew J Vickers; Michael Borre; Karina D Sørensen; Hans Lilja
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-09-07       Impact factor: 4.996

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.