Cargando…

Do Concomitant Systematic Biopsies Add to Fusion Targeted Biopsies in the Diagnosis and Management of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer?

OBJECTIVE: Magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy clearly detects more clinically significant prostate cancer than systematic biopsy. Whether concomitant systematic biopsy adds to targeted biopsy in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer remains uncertain. The primary outcome me...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Thompson, Alice, Eguru, Venkat, Moosa, Sohail, Ng, Yeung
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Turkish Association of Urology 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10346108/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37877866
http://dx.doi.org/10.5152/tud.2023.22221
_version_ 1785073236895072256
author Thompson, Alice
Eguru, Venkat
Moosa, Sohail
Ng, Yeung
author_facet Thompson, Alice
Eguru, Venkat
Moosa, Sohail
Ng, Yeung
author_sort Thompson, Alice
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy clearly detects more clinically significant prostate cancer than systematic biopsy. Whether concomitant systematic biopsy adds to targeted biopsy in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer remains uncertain. The primary outcome measure of this study was to ascertain the percentage of clinically significant prostate cancer on systematic biopsy missed by targeted biopsy. Furthermore, we sought to determine whether systematic biopsy results influenced the clinical management of patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective observational study included all men undergoing Fusion targeted biopsy in our Health Board. All men had PI-RADS scores of 3-5 on magnetic resonance imaging. Histology from targeted biopsy and systematic biopsy was reviewed to determine any additional benefit of performing systematic biopsy. Clinical outcomes were also reviewed. Clinically significant prostate cancer was defined by (i) International Society of Urological Pathology ≥ 2 and (ii) UCL criteria of any primary Gleason 4 or core length ≥ 6 mm. RESULTS: A total of 104 men were included in the study of whom 18 patients were biopsy naïve, 65 had at least 1 previous negative biopsy, and 20 had previous biopsies that showed clinically insignificant cancer. The percentage of clinically significant prostate cancer missed on targeted biopsy was between 9.1% and 11.1%. Moreover, 17.1% of patients with clinically significant prostate cancer would not have proceeded to radical treatment if the systematic biopsy had not been performed. CONCLUSION: Our data support a growing field of evidence that although magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy is more sensitive than systematic biopsy at detecting clinically significant prostate cancer, systematic biopsy adds to the number of patients diagnosed with clinically significant prostate cancer in those already undergoing prostate biopsy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10346108
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Turkish Association of Urology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103461082023-07-15 Do Concomitant Systematic Biopsies Add to Fusion Targeted Biopsies in the Diagnosis and Management of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer? Thompson, Alice Eguru, Venkat Moosa, Sohail Ng, Yeung Urol Res Pract Original Article OBJECTIVE: Magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy clearly detects more clinically significant prostate cancer than systematic biopsy. Whether concomitant systematic biopsy adds to targeted biopsy in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer remains uncertain. The primary outcome measure of this study was to ascertain the percentage of clinically significant prostate cancer on systematic biopsy missed by targeted biopsy. Furthermore, we sought to determine whether systematic biopsy results influenced the clinical management of patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective observational study included all men undergoing Fusion targeted biopsy in our Health Board. All men had PI-RADS scores of 3-5 on magnetic resonance imaging. Histology from targeted biopsy and systematic biopsy was reviewed to determine any additional benefit of performing systematic biopsy. Clinical outcomes were also reviewed. Clinically significant prostate cancer was defined by (i) International Society of Urological Pathology ≥ 2 and (ii) UCL criteria of any primary Gleason 4 or core length ≥ 6 mm. RESULTS: A total of 104 men were included in the study of whom 18 patients were biopsy naïve, 65 had at least 1 previous negative biopsy, and 20 had previous biopsies that showed clinically insignificant cancer. The percentage of clinically significant prostate cancer missed on targeted biopsy was between 9.1% and 11.1%. Moreover, 17.1% of patients with clinically significant prostate cancer would not have proceeded to radical treatment if the systematic biopsy had not been performed. CONCLUSION: Our data support a growing field of evidence that although magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy is more sensitive than systematic biopsy at detecting clinically significant prostate cancer, systematic biopsy adds to the number of patients diagnosed with clinically significant prostate cancer in those already undergoing prostate biopsy. Turkish Association of Urology 2023-05-01 /pmc/articles/PMC10346108/ /pubmed/37877866 http://dx.doi.org/10.5152/tud.2023.22221 Text en © 2023 authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Content of this journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
spellingShingle Original Article
Thompson, Alice
Eguru, Venkat
Moosa, Sohail
Ng, Yeung
Do Concomitant Systematic Biopsies Add to Fusion Targeted Biopsies in the Diagnosis and Management of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer?
title Do Concomitant Systematic Biopsies Add to Fusion Targeted Biopsies in the Diagnosis and Management of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer?
title_full Do Concomitant Systematic Biopsies Add to Fusion Targeted Biopsies in the Diagnosis and Management of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer?
title_fullStr Do Concomitant Systematic Biopsies Add to Fusion Targeted Biopsies in the Diagnosis and Management of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer?
title_full_unstemmed Do Concomitant Systematic Biopsies Add to Fusion Targeted Biopsies in the Diagnosis and Management of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer?
title_short Do Concomitant Systematic Biopsies Add to Fusion Targeted Biopsies in the Diagnosis and Management of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer?
title_sort do concomitant systematic biopsies add to fusion targeted biopsies in the diagnosis and management of clinically significant prostate cancer?
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10346108/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37877866
http://dx.doi.org/10.5152/tud.2023.22221
work_keys_str_mv AT thompsonalice doconcomitantsystematicbiopsiesaddtofusiontargetedbiopsiesinthediagnosisandmanagementofclinicallysignificantprostatecancer
AT eguruvenkat doconcomitantsystematicbiopsiesaddtofusiontargetedbiopsiesinthediagnosisandmanagementofclinicallysignificantprostatecancer
AT moosasohail doconcomitantsystematicbiopsiesaddtofusiontargetedbiopsiesinthediagnosisandmanagementofclinicallysignificantprostatecancer
AT ngyeung doconcomitantsystematicbiopsiesaddtofusiontargetedbiopsiesinthediagnosisandmanagementofclinicallysignificantprostatecancer