Background: In patients with multiparameter magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) low-possibility but highly clinical suspicion of prostate cancer, the biopsy core is unclear. Our study aims to introduce the biopsy density (BD; the ratio of biopsy cores to prostate volume) and investigates the BD-predictive value of prostate cancer and clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in PI-RADS<3 patients. Methods: Patients underwent transperineal template-guided prostate biopsy from 2012 to 2022. The inclusion criteria were PI-RADS<3 with a positive digital rectal examination or persistent PSA abnormalities. BD was defined as the ratio of the biopsy core to the prostate volume. Clinical data were collected, and we grouped the patients according to pathology results. Kruskal-Wallis test and chi-square test were used in measurement and enumeration data, respectively. Logistics regression was used to choose the factor associated with positive biospy and csPCa. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to evaluate the ability to predict csPCa. Results: A total of 115 patients were included in our study. Biopsy was positive in 14 of 115 and the International Society of Urological Pathology grade groups 2-5 were in 7 of all the PCa patients. The BD was 0.38 (0.24-0.63) needles per milliliter. Binary logistics analysis suggested that PSAD and BD were correlated with positive biopsy. Meanwhile, BD and PSAD were associated with csPCa. The ROC curve illustrated that BD was a good parameter to predict csPCa (AUC=0.80, 95% CI: 0.69-0.91, p<0.05). The biopsy density combined with PSAD increased the prediction of csPCa (AUC=0.90, 95% CI: 0.85-0.97, p<0.05). The cut-off value of the BD was 0.42 according to the Youden index. Conclusion: In PI-RADS<3 patients, BD and PSAD are related to csPCa. A biopsy density of more than 0.42 needles per millimeter can increase the csPCa detection rate, which should be considered as an alternative biopsy method when we perform prostate biopsy in patients with PI-RADS<3.
Background: In patients with multiparameter magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) low-possibility but highly clinical suspicion of prostate cancer, the biopsy core is unclear. Our study aims to introduce the biopsy density (BD; the ratio of biopsy cores to prostate volume) and investigates the BD-predictive value of prostate cancer and clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in PI-RADS<3 patients. Methods: Patients underwent transperineal template-guided prostate biopsy from 2012 to 2022. The inclusion criteria were PI-RADS<3 with a positive digital rectal examination or persistent PSA abnormalities. BD was defined as the ratio of the biopsy core to the prostate volume. Clinical data were collected, and we grouped the patients according to pathology results. Kruskal-Wallis test and chi-square test were used in measurement and enumeration data, respectively. Logistics regression was used to choose the factor associated with positive biospy and csPCa. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to evaluate the ability to predict csPCa. Results: A total of 115 patients were included in our study. Biopsy was positive in 14 of 115 and the International Society of Urological Pathology grade groups 2-5 were in 7 of all the PCa patients. The BD was 0.38 (0.24-0.63) needles per milliliter. Binary logistics analysis suggested that PSAD and BD were correlated with positive biopsy. Meanwhile, BD and PSAD were associated with csPCa. The ROC curve illustrated that BD was a good parameter to predict csPCa (AUC=0.80, 95% CI: 0.69-0.91, p<0.05). The biopsy density combined with PSAD increased the prediction of csPCa (AUC=0.90, 95% CI: 0.85-0.97, p<0.05). The cut-off value of the BD was 0.42 according to the Youden index. Conclusion: In PI-RADS<3 patients, BD and PSAD are related to csPCa. A biopsy density of more than 0.42 needles per millimeter can increase the csPCa detection rate, which should be considered as an alternative biopsy method when we perform prostate biopsy in patients with PI-RADS<3.
Authors: David C Johnson; Steven S Raman; Sohrab A Mirak; Lorna Kwan; Amirhossein M Bajgiran; William Hsu; Cleo K Maehara; Preeti Ahuja; Izak Faiena; Aydin Pooli; Amirali Salmasi; Anthony Sisk; Ely R Felker; David S K Lu; Robert E Reiter Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2018-12-01 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Nelson N Stone; E David Crawford; Vassilios M Skouteris; Paul Arangua; Panagiotis-Marios Metsinis; M Scott Lucia; Francisco G La Rosa; Priya N Werahera Journal: J Urol Date: 2019-07-08 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Gian Maria Busetto; Riccardo Giovannone; Gabriele Antonini; Antonella Rossi; Francesco Del Giudice; Stefano Tricarico; Giulia Ragonesi; Vincenzo Gentile; Ettore De Berardinis Journal: BJU Int Date: 2015-01-21 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Martina Maggi; Valeria Panebianco; Augusto Mosca; Stefano Salciccia; Alessandro Gentilucci; Giovanni Di Pierro; Gian Maria Busetto; Giovanni Barchetti; Riccardo Campa; Isabella Sperduti; Francesco Del Giudice; Alessandro Sciarra Journal: Eur Urol Focus Date: 2019-07-04
Authors: Jonathan I Epstein; Lars Egevad; Mahul B Amin; Brett Delahunt; John R Srigley; Peter A Humphrey Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 2016-02 Impact factor: 6.394
Authors: Petra J van Houdt; Ghazaleh Ghobadi; Ivo G Schoots; Stijn W T P J Heijmink; Jeroen de Jong; Henk G van der Poel; Floris J Pos; Susanne Rylander; Lise Bentzen; Karin Haustermans; Uulke A van der Heide Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2019-10-06 Impact factor: 4.813