Cargando…

Evaluation of PSA and PSA Density in a Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Directed Diagnostic Pathway for Suspected Prostate Cancer: The INNOVATE Trial

SIMPLE SUMMARY: As we start to see the increased, routine, use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) to inform prostate cancer diagnosis and image-guided biopsy, data collected from University College London Hospital describes the expected diagnostic outcomes of PSA and PSA Density i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pye, Hayley, Singh, Saurabh, Norris, Joseph M., Carmona Echeverria, Lina M., Stavrinides, Vasilis, Grey, Alistair, Dinneen, Eoin, Pilavachi, Elly, Clemente, Joey, Heavey, Susan, Stopka-Farooqui, Urszula, Simpson, Benjamin S., Bonet-Carne, Elisenda, Patel, Dominic, Barker, Peter, Burling, Keith, Stevens, Nicola, Ng, Tony, Panagiotaki, Eleftheria, Hawkes, David, Alexander, Daniel C., Rodriguez-Justo, Manuel, Haider, Aiman, Freeman, Alex, Kirkham, Alex, Atkinson, David, Allen, Clare, Shaw, Greg, Beeston, Teresita, Brizmohun Appayya, Mrishta, Latifoltojar, Arash, Johnston, Edward W., Emberton, Mark, Moore, Caroline M., Ahmed, Hashim U., Punwani, Shonit, Whitaker, Hayley C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8074769/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33924255
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers13081985
_version_ 1783684416368803840
author Pye, Hayley
Singh, Saurabh
Norris, Joseph M.
Carmona Echeverria, Lina M.
Stavrinides, Vasilis
Grey, Alistair
Dinneen, Eoin
Pilavachi, Elly
Clemente, Joey
Heavey, Susan
Stopka-Farooqui, Urszula
Simpson, Benjamin S.
Bonet-Carne, Elisenda
Patel, Dominic
Barker, Peter
Burling, Keith
Stevens, Nicola
Ng, Tony
Panagiotaki, Eleftheria
Hawkes, David
Alexander, Daniel C.
Rodriguez-Justo, Manuel
Haider, Aiman
Freeman, Alex
Kirkham, Alex
Atkinson, David
Allen, Clare
Shaw, Greg
Beeston, Teresita
Brizmohun Appayya, Mrishta
Latifoltojar, Arash
Johnston, Edward W.
Emberton, Mark
Moore, Caroline M.
Ahmed, Hashim U.
Punwani, Shonit
Whitaker, Hayley C.
author_facet Pye, Hayley
Singh, Saurabh
Norris, Joseph M.
Carmona Echeverria, Lina M.
Stavrinides, Vasilis
Grey, Alistair
Dinneen, Eoin
Pilavachi, Elly
Clemente, Joey
Heavey, Susan
Stopka-Farooqui, Urszula
Simpson, Benjamin S.
Bonet-Carne, Elisenda
Patel, Dominic
Barker, Peter
Burling, Keith
Stevens, Nicola
Ng, Tony
Panagiotaki, Eleftheria
Hawkes, David
Alexander, Daniel C.
Rodriguez-Justo, Manuel
Haider, Aiman
Freeman, Alex
Kirkham, Alex
Atkinson, David
Allen, Clare
Shaw, Greg
Beeston, Teresita
Brizmohun Appayya, Mrishta
Latifoltojar, Arash
Johnston, Edward W.
Emberton, Mark
Moore, Caroline M.
Ahmed, Hashim U.
Punwani, Shonit
Whitaker, Hayley C.
author_sort Pye, Hayley
collection PubMed
description SIMPLE SUMMARY: As we start to see the increased, routine, use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) to inform prostate cancer diagnosis and image-guided biopsy, data collected from University College London Hospital describes the expected diagnostic outcomes of PSA and PSA Density in this pathway as well as the potential space remaining for novel biomarkers to further improve the pathway. ABSTRACT: Objectives: To assess the clinical outcomes of mpMRI before biopsy and evaluate the space remaining for novel biomarkers. Methods: The INNOVATE study was set up to evaluate the validity of novel fluidic biomarkers in men with suspected prostate cancer who undergo pre-biopsy mpMRI. We report the characteristics of this clinical cohort, the distribution of clinical serum biomarkers, PSA and PSA density (PSAD), and compare the mpMRI Likert scoring system to the Prostate Imaging–Reporting and Data System v2.1 (PI-RADS) in men undergoing biopsy. Results: 340 men underwent mpMRI to evaluate suspected prostate cancer. 193/340 (57%) men had subsequent MRI-targeted prostate biopsy. Clinically significant prostate cancer (csigPCa), i.e., overall Gleason ≥ 3 + 4 of any length OR maximum cancer core length (MCCL) ≥4 mm of any grade including any 3 + 3, was found in 96/195 (49%) of biopsied patients. Median PSA (and PSAD) was 4.7 (0.20), 8.0 (0.17), and 9.7 (0.31) ng/mL (ng/mL/mL) in mpMRI scored Likert 3,4,5 respectively for men with csigPCa on biopsy. The space for novel biomarkers was shown to be within the group of men with mpMRI scored Likert3 (178/340) and 4 (70/350), in whom an additional of 40% (70/178) men with mpMRI-scored Likert3, and 37% (26/70) Likert4 could have been spared biopsy. PSAD is already considered clinically in this cohort to risk stratify patients for biopsy, despite this 67% (55/82) of men with mpMRI-scored Likert3, and 55% (36/65) Likert4, who underwent prostate biopsy had a PSAD below a clinical threshold of 0.15 (or 0.12 for men aged <50 years). Different thresholds of PSA and PSAD were assessed in mpMRI-scored Likert4 to predict csigPCa on biopsy, to achieve false negative levels of ≤5% the proportion of patients whom who test as above the threshold were unsuitably high at 86 and 92% of patients for PSAD and PSA respectively. When PSA was re tested in a sub cohort of men repeated PSAD showed its poor reproducibility with 43% (41/95) of patients being reclassified. After PI-RADS rescoring of the biopsied lesions, 66% (54/82) of the Likert3 lesions received a different PI-RADS score. Conclusions: The addition of simple biochemical and radiological markers (Likert and PSAD) facilitate the streamlining of the mpMRI-diagnostic pathway for suspected prostate cancer but there remains scope for improvement, in the introduction of novel biomarkers for risk assessment in Likert3 and 4 patients, future application of novel biomarkers tested in a Likert cohort would also require re-optimization around Likert3/PI-RADS2, as well as reproducibility testing.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8074769
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80747692021-04-27 Evaluation of PSA and PSA Density in a Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Directed Diagnostic Pathway for Suspected Prostate Cancer: The INNOVATE Trial Pye, Hayley Singh, Saurabh Norris, Joseph M. Carmona Echeverria, Lina M. Stavrinides, Vasilis Grey, Alistair Dinneen, Eoin Pilavachi, Elly Clemente, Joey Heavey, Susan Stopka-Farooqui, Urszula Simpson, Benjamin S. Bonet-Carne, Elisenda Patel, Dominic Barker, Peter Burling, Keith Stevens, Nicola Ng, Tony Panagiotaki, Eleftheria Hawkes, David Alexander, Daniel C. Rodriguez-Justo, Manuel Haider, Aiman Freeman, Alex Kirkham, Alex Atkinson, David Allen, Clare Shaw, Greg Beeston, Teresita Brizmohun Appayya, Mrishta Latifoltojar, Arash Johnston, Edward W. Emberton, Mark Moore, Caroline M. Ahmed, Hashim U. Punwani, Shonit Whitaker, Hayley C. Cancers (Basel) Article SIMPLE SUMMARY: As we start to see the increased, routine, use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) to inform prostate cancer diagnosis and image-guided biopsy, data collected from University College London Hospital describes the expected diagnostic outcomes of PSA and PSA Density in this pathway as well as the potential space remaining for novel biomarkers to further improve the pathway. ABSTRACT: Objectives: To assess the clinical outcomes of mpMRI before biopsy and evaluate the space remaining for novel biomarkers. Methods: The INNOVATE study was set up to evaluate the validity of novel fluidic biomarkers in men with suspected prostate cancer who undergo pre-biopsy mpMRI. We report the characteristics of this clinical cohort, the distribution of clinical serum biomarkers, PSA and PSA density (PSAD), and compare the mpMRI Likert scoring system to the Prostate Imaging–Reporting and Data System v2.1 (PI-RADS) in men undergoing biopsy. Results: 340 men underwent mpMRI to evaluate suspected prostate cancer. 193/340 (57%) men had subsequent MRI-targeted prostate biopsy. Clinically significant prostate cancer (csigPCa), i.e., overall Gleason ≥ 3 + 4 of any length OR maximum cancer core length (MCCL) ≥4 mm of any grade including any 3 + 3, was found in 96/195 (49%) of biopsied patients. Median PSA (and PSAD) was 4.7 (0.20), 8.0 (0.17), and 9.7 (0.31) ng/mL (ng/mL/mL) in mpMRI scored Likert 3,4,5 respectively for men with csigPCa on biopsy. The space for novel biomarkers was shown to be within the group of men with mpMRI scored Likert3 (178/340) and 4 (70/350), in whom an additional of 40% (70/178) men with mpMRI-scored Likert3, and 37% (26/70) Likert4 could have been spared biopsy. PSAD is already considered clinically in this cohort to risk stratify patients for biopsy, despite this 67% (55/82) of men with mpMRI-scored Likert3, and 55% (36/65) Likert4, who underwent prostate biopsy had a PSAD below a clinical threshold of 0.15 (or 0.12 for men aged <50 years). Different thresholds of PSA and PSAD were assessed in mpMRI-scored Likert4 to predict csigPCa on biopsy, to achieve false negative levels of ≤5% the proportion of patients whom who test as above the threshold were unsuitably high at 86 and 92% of patients for PSAD and PSA respectively. When PSA was re tested in a sub cohort of men repeated PSAD showed its poor reproducibility with 43% (41/95) of patients being reclassified. After PI-RADS rescoring of the biopsied lesions, 66% (54/82) of the Likert3 lesions received a different PI-RADS score. Conclusions: The addition of simple biochemical and radiological markers (Likert and PSAD) facilitate the streamlining of the mpMRI-diagnostic pathway for suspected prostate cancer but there remains scope for improvement, in the introduction of novel biomarkers for risk assessment in Likert3 and 4 patients, future application of novel biomarkers tested in a Likert cohort would also require re-optimization around Likert3/PI-RADS2, as well as reproducibility testing. MDPI 2021-04-20 /pmc/articles/PMC8074769/ /pubmed/33924255 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers13081985 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Pye, Hayley
Singh, Saurabh
Norris, Joseph M.
Carmona Echeverria, Lina M.
Stavrinides, Vasilis
Grey, Alistair
Dinneen, Eoin
Pilavachi, Elly
Clemente, Joey
Heavey, Susan
Stopka-Farooqui, Urszula
Simpson, Benjamin S.
Bonet-Carne, Elisenda
Patel, Dominic
Barker, Peter
Burling, Keith
Stevens, Nicola
Ng, Tony
Panagiotaki, Eleftheria
Hawkes, David
Alexander, Daniel C.
Rodriguez-Justo, Manuel
Haider, Aiman
Freeman, Alex
Kirkham, Alex
Atkinson, David
Allen, Clare
Shaw, Greg
Beeston, Teresita
Brizmohun Appayya, Mrishta
Latifoltojar, Arash
Johnston, Edward W.
Emberton, Mark
Moore, Caroline M.
Ahmed, Hashim U.
Punwani, Shonit
Whitaker, Hayley C.
Evaluation of PSA and PSA Density in a Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Directed Diagnostic Pathway for Suspected Prostate Cancer: The INNOVATE Trial
title Evaluation of PSA and PSA Density in a Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Directed Diagnostic Pathway for Suspected Prostate Cancer: The INNOVATE Trial
title_full Evaluation of PSA and PSA Density in a Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Directed Diagnostic Pathway for Suspected Prostate Cancer: The INNOVATE Trial
title_fullStr Evaluation of PSA and PSA Density in a Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Directed Diagnostic Pathway for Suspected Prostate Cancer: The INNOVATE Trial
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of PSA and PSA Density in a Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Directed Diagnostic Pathway for Suspected Prostate Cancer: The INNOVATE Trial
title_short Evaluation of PSA and PSA Density in a Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Directed Diagnostic Pathway for Suspected Prostate Cancer: The INNOVATE Trial
title_sort evaluation of psa and psa density in a multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-directed diagnostic pathway for suspected prostate cancer: the innovate trial
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8074769/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33924255
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers13081985
work_keys_str_mv AT pyehayley evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT singhsaurabh evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT norrisjosephm evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT carmonaecheverrialinam evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT stavrinidesvasilis evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT greyalistair evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT dinneeneoin evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT pilavachielly evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT clementejoey evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT heaveysusan evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT stopkafarooquiurszula evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT simpsonbenjamins evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT bonetcarneelisenda evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT pateldominic evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT barkerpeter evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT burlingkeith evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT stevensnicola evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT ngtony evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT panagiotakieleftheria evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT hawkesdavid evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT alexanderdanielc evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT rodriguezjustomanuel evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT haideraiman evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT freemanalex evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT kirkhamalex evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT atkinsondavid evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT allenclare evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT shawgreg evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT beestonteresita evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT brizmohunappayyamrishta evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT latifoltojararash evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT johnstonedwardw evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT embertonmark evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT moorecarolinem evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT ahmedhashimu evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT punwanishonit evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial
AT whitakerhayleyc evaluationofpsaandpsadensityinamultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingdirecteddiagnosticpathwayforsuspectedprostatecancertheinnovatetrial