Cargando…

Comparison of Gleason upgrading rates in transrectal ultrasound systematic random biopsies versus US-MRI fusion biopsies for prostate cancer

PURPOSE: Ultrasound-magnetic resonance imaging (US-MRI) fusion biopsy (FB) improves the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa). We aimed to compare the Gleason upgrading (GU) rates and the concordance of the Gleason scores in the biopsy versus final pathology after surgery in pati...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kayano, Paulo Priante, Carneiro, Arie, Castilho, Tiago Mendonça Lopez, Sivaraman, Arjun, Claros, Oliver Rojas, Baroni, Ronaldo Hueb, Garcia, Rodrigo Gobbo, Mariotti, Guilherme Cayres, Smaletz, Oren, Filippi, Renne Zon, Lemos, Gustavo Caserta
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6442175/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30325600
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2017.0552
_version_ 1783407663708635136
author Kayano, Paulo Priante
Carneiro, Arie
Castilho, Tiago Mendonça Lopez
Sivaraman, Arjun
Claros, Oliver Rojas
Baroni, Ronaldo Hueb
Garcia, Rodrigo Gobbo
Mariotti, Guilherme Cayres
Smaletz, Oren
Filippi, Renne Zon
Lemos, Gustavo Caserta
author_facet Kayano, Paulo Priante
Carneiro, Arie
Castilho, Tiago Mendonça Lopez
Sivaraman, Arjun
Claros, Oliver Rojas
Baroni, Ronaldo Hueb
Garcia, Rodrigo Gobbo
Mariotti, Guilherme Cayres
Smaletz, Oren
Filippi, Renne Zon
Lemos, Gustavo Caserta
author_sort Kayano, Paulo Priante
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Ultrasound-magnetic resonance imaging (US-MRI) fusion biopsy (FB) improves the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa). We aimed to compare the Gleason upgrading (GU) rates and the concordance of the Gleason scores in the biopsy versus final pathology after surgery in patients who underwent transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) systematic random biopsies (SRB) versus US-MRI FB for PCa. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of data that were collected prospectively from January 2011 to June 2016 from patients who underwent prostate biopsy and subsequent radical prostatectomy. The study cohort was divided into two groups: US-MRI FB (Group A) and TRUS SRB (Group B). US-MRI FB was performed in patients with a previous MRI with a focal lesion with a Likert score ≥3; otherwise, a TRUS SRB was performed. RESULTS: In total, 73 men underwent US-MRI FB, and 89 underwent TRUS SRB. The GU rate was higher in Group B (31.5% vs. 16.4%; p=0.027). According to the Gleason grade pattern, GU was higher in Group B than in Group A (40.4% vs. 23.3%; p=0.020). Analyses of the Gleason grading patterns showed that Gleason scores 3+4 presented less GU in Group A (24.1% vs. 52.6%; p=0.043). The Bland-Altman plot analysis showed a higher bias in Group B than in Group A (-0.27 [-1.40 to 0.86] vs. −0.01 [-1.42 to 1.39]). In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, the only independent predictor of GU was the use of TRUS SRB (2.64 [1.11 – 6.28]; p=0.024). CONCLUSIONS: US-MRI FB appears to be related to a decrease in GU rate and an increase in concordance between biopsy and final pathology compared to TRUS SRB, suggesting that performing US-MRI FB leads to greater accuracy of diagnosis and better treatment decisions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6442175
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64421752019-04-05 Comparison of Gleason upgrading rates in transrectal ultrasound systematic random biopsies versus US-MRI fusion biopsies for prostate cancer Kayano, Paulo Priante Carneiro, Arie Castilho, Tiago Mendonça Lopez Sivaraman, Arjun Claros, Oliver Rojas Baroni, Ronaldo Hueb Garcia, Rodrigo Gobbo Mariotti, Guilherme Cayres Smaletz, Oren Filippi, Renne Zon Lemos, Gustavo Caserta Int Braz J Urol Original Article PURPOSE: Ultrasound-magnetic resonance imaging (US-MRI) fusion biopsy (FB) improves the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa). We aimed to compare the Gleason upgrading (GU) rates and the concordance of the Gleason scores in the biopsy versus final pathology after surgery in patients who underwent transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) systematic random biopsies (SRB) versus US-MRI FB for PCa. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of data that were collected prospectively from January 2011 to June 2016 from patients who underwent prostate biopsy and subsequent radical prostatectomy. The study cohort was divided into two groups: US-MRI FB (Group A) and TRUS SRB (Group B). US-MRI FB was performed in patients with a previous MRI with a focal lesion with a Likert score ≥3; otherwise, a TRUS SRB was performed. RESULTS: In total, 73 men underwent US-MRI FB, and 89 underwent TRUS SRB. The GU rate was higher in Group B (31.5% vs. 16.4%; p=0.027). According to the Gleason grade pattern, GU was higher in Group B than in Group A (40.4% vs. 23.3%; p=0.020). Analyses of the Gleason grading patterns showed that Gleason scores 3+4 presented less GU in Group A (24.1% vs. 52.6%; p=0.043). The Bland-Altman plot analysis showed a higher bias in Group B than in Group A (-0.27 [-1.40 to 0.86] vs. −0.01 [-1.42 to 1.39]). In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, the only independent predictor of GU was the use of TRUS SRB (2.64 [1.11 – 6.28]; p=0.024). CONCLUSIONS: US-MRI FB appears to be related to a decrease in GU rate and an increase in concordance between biopsy and final pathology compared to TRUS SRB, suggesting that performing US-MRI FB leads to greater accuracy of diagnosis and better treatment decisions. Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC6442175/ /pubmed/30325600 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2017.0552 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Kayano, Paulo Priante
Carneiro, Arie
Castilho, Tiago Mendonça Lopez
Sivaraman, Arjun
Claros, Oliver Rojas
Baroni, Ronaldo Hueb
Garcia, Rodrigo Gobbo
Mariotti, Guilherme Cayres
Smaletz, Oren
Filippi, Renne Zon
Lemos, Gustavo Caserta
Comparison of Gleason upgrading rates in transrectal ultrasound systematic random biopsies versus US-MRI fusion biopsies for prostate cancer
title Comparison of Gleason upgrading rates in transrectal ultrasound systematic random biopsies versus US-MRI fusion biopsies for prostate cancer
title_full Comparison of Gleason upgrading rates in transrectal ultrasound systematic random biopsies versus US-MRI fusion biopsies for prostate cancer
title_fullStr Comparison of Gleason upgrading rates in transrectal ultrasound systematic random biopsies versus US-MRI fusion biopsies for prostate cancer
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Gleason upgrading rates in transrectal ultrasound systematic random biopsies versus US-MRI fusion biopsies for prostate cancer
title_short Comparison of Gleason upgrading rates in transrectal ultrasound systematic random biopsies versus US-MRI fusion biopsies for prostate cancer
title_sort comparison of gleason upgrading rates in transrectal ultrasound systematic random biopsies versus us-mri fusion biopsies for prostate cancer
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6442175/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30325600
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2017.0552
work_keys_str_mv AT kayanopaulopriante comparisonofgleasonupgradingratesintransrectalultrasoundsystematicrandombiopsiesversususmrifusionbiopsiesforprostatecancer
AT carneiroarie comparisonofgleasonupgradingratesintransrectalultrasoundsystematicrandombiopsiesversususmrifusionbiopsiesforprostatecancer
AT castilhotiagomendoncalopez comparisonofgleasonupgradingratesintransrectalultrasoundsystematicrandombiopsiesversususmrifusionbiopsiesforprostatecancer
AT sivaramanarjun comparisonofgleasonupgradingratesintransrectalultrasoundsystematicrandombiopsiesversususmrifusionbiopsiesforprostatecancer
AT clarosoliverrojas comparisonofgleasonupgradingratesintransrectalultrasoundsystematicrandombiopsiesversususmrifusionbiopsiesforprostatecancer
AT baronironaldohueb comparisonofgleasonupgradingratesintransrectalultrasoundsystematicrandombiopsiesversususmrifusionbiopsiesforprostatecancer
AT garciarodrigogobbo comparisonofgleasonupgradingratesintransrectalultrasoundsystematicrandombiopsiesversususmrifusionbiopsiesforprostatecancer
AT mariottiguilhermecayres comparisonofgleasonupgradingratesintransrectalultrasoundsystematicrandombiopsiesversususmrifusionbiopsiesforprostatecancer
AT smaletzoren comparisonofgleasonupgradingratesintransrectalultrasoundsystematicrandombiopsiesversususmrifusionbiopsiesforprostatecancer
AT filippirennezon comparisonofgleasonupgradingratesintransrectalultrasoundsystematicrandombiopsiesversususmrifusionbiopsiesforprostatecancer
AT lemosgustavocaserta comparisonofgleasonupgradingratesintransrectalultrasoundsystematicrandombiopsiesversususmrifusionbiopsiesforprostatecancer