Cargando…
TRUS-Guided Target Biopsy for a PI-RADS 3–5 Index Lesion to Reduce Gleason Score Underestimation: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis
BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided cognitive or image fusion biopsy is performed to target a prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) 3–5 lesion. Biopsy Gleason score (GS) is frequently underestimated compared to prostatectomy GS. Howeve...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8818749/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35141158 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.824204 |
_version_ | 1784645898053091328 |
---|---|
author | Chung, Jae Hoon Park, Byung Kwan Song, Wan Kang, Minyong Sung, Hyun Hwan Jeon, Hwang Gyun Jeong, Byong Chang Seo, Seong Il Jeon, Seong Soo Lee, Hyun Moo |
author_facet | Chung, Jae Hoon Park, Byung Kwan Song, Wan Kang, Minyong Sung, Hyun Hwan Jeon, Hwang Gyun Jeong, Byong Chang Seo, Seong Il Jeon, Seong Soo Lee, Hyun Moo |
author_sort | Chung, Jae Hoon |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided cognitive or image fusion biopsy is performed to target a prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) 3–5 lesion. Biopsy Gleason score (GS) is frequently underestimated compared to prostatectomy GS. However, it is still unclear about how many cores on target are necessary to reduce undergrading and if additional cores around the target may improve grade prediction on surgical specimen. PURPOSE: To determine the number of target cores and targeting strategy to reduce GS underestimation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between May 2017 and April 2020, a total of 385 patients undergoing target cognitive or image fusion biopsy of PI-RADS 3–5 index lesions and radical prostatectomies (RP) were 2:1 matched with propensity score using multiple variables and divided into the 1–4 core (n = 242) and 5–6 core (n = 143) groups, which were obtained with multiple logistic regression with restricted cubic spline curve. Target cores of 1–3 and 4–6 were sampled from central and peripheral areas, respectively. Pathologic outcomes and target cores were retrospectively assessed to analyze the GS difference or changes between biopsy and RP with Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: The median of target cores was 3 and 6 in the 1–4 core and 5–6 core groups, respectively (p < 0.001). Restricted cubic spline curve showed that GS upgrade was significantly reduced from the 5th core and there was no difference between 5th and 6th cores. Among the matched patients, 35.4% (136/385; 95% confidence interval, 0.305–0.403) had a GS upgrade after RP. The GS upgrades in the 1–4 core and 5–6 core groups were observed in 40.6% (98/242, 0.343–0.470) and 26.6% (38/143, 0.195–0.346), respectively (p = 0.023). Although there was no statistical difference between the matched groups in terms of RP GS (p = 0.092), the 5–6 core group had significantly higher biopsy GS (p = 0.006) and lower GS change from biopsy to RP (p = 0.027). CONCLUSION: Five or more target cores sampling from both periphery and center of an index tumor contribute to reduce GS upgrade. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8818749 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-88187492022-02-08 TRUS-Guided Target Biopsy for a PI-RADS 3–5 Index Lesion to Reduce Gleason Score Underestimation: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis Chung, Jae Hoon Park, Byung Kwan Song, Wan Kang, Minyong Sung, Hyun Hwan Jeon, Hwang Gyun Jeong, Byong Chang Seo, Seong Il Jeon, Seong Soo Lee, Hyun Moo Front Oncol Oncology BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided cognitive or image fusion biopsy is performed to target a prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) 3–5 lesion. Biopsy Gleason score (GS) is frequently underestimated compared to prostatectomy GS. However, it is still unclear about how many cores on target are necessary to reduce undergrading and if additional cores around the target may improve grade prediction on surgical specimen. PURPOSE: To determine the number of target cores and targeting strategy to reduce GS underestimation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between May 2017 and April 2020, a total of 385 patients undergoing target cognitive or image fusion biopsy of PI-RADS 3–5 index lesions and radical prostatectomies (RP) were 2:1 matched with propensity score using multiple variables and divided into the 1–4 core (n = 242) and 5–6 core (n = 143) groups, which were obtained with multiple logistic regression with restricted cubic spline curve. Target cores of 1–3 and 4–6 were sampled from central and peripheral areas, respectively. Pathologic outcomes and target cores were retrospectively assessed to analyze the GS difference or changes between biopsy and RP with Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: The median of target cores was 3 and 6 in the 1–4 core and 5–6 core groups, respectively (p < 0.001). Restricted cubic spline curve showed that GS upgrade was significantly reduced from the 5th core and there was no difference between 5th and 6th cores. Among the matched patients, 35.4% (136/385; 95% confidence interval, 0.305–0.403) had a GS upgrade after RP. The GS upgrades in the 1–4 core and 5–6 core groups were observed in 40.6% (98/242, 0.343–0.470) and 26.6% (38/143, 0.195–0.346), respectively (p = 0.023). Although there was no statistical difference between the matched groups in terms of RP GS (p = 0.092), the 5–6 core group had significantly higher biopsy GS (p = 0.006) and lower GS change from biopsy to RP (p = 0.027). CONCLUSION: Five or more target cores sampling from both periphery and center of an index tumor contribute to reduce GS upgrade. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-01-24 /pmc/articles/PMC8818749/ /pubmed/35141158 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.824204 Text en Copyright © 2022 Chung, Park, Song, Kang, Sung, Jeon, Jeong, Seo, Jeon and Lee https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Oncology Chung, Jae Hoon Park, Byung Kwan Song, Wan Kang, Minyong Sung, Hyun Hwan Jeon, Hwang Gyun Jeong, Byong Chang Seo, Seong Il Jeon, Seong Soo Lee, Hyun Moo TRUS-Guided Target Biopsy for a PI-RADS 3–5 Index Lesion to Reduce Gleason Score Underestimation: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis |
title | TRUS-Guided Target Biopsy for a PI-RADS 3–5 Index Lesion to Reduce Gleason Score Underestimation: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis |
title_full | TRUS-Guided Target Biopsy for a PI-RADS 3–5 Index Lesion to Reduce Gleason Score Underestimation: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis |
title_fullStr | TRUS-Guided Target Biopsy for a PI-RADS 3–5 Index Lesion to Reduce Gleason Score Underestimation: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | TRUS-Guided Target Biopsy for a PI-RADS 3–5 Index Lesion to Reduce Gleason Score Underestimation: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis |
title_short | TRUS-Guided Target Biopsy for a PI-RADS 3–5 Index Lesion to Reduce Gleason Score Underestimation: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis |
title_sort | trus-guided target biopsy for a pi-rads 3–5 index lesion to reduce gleason score underestimation: a propensity score matching analysis |
topic | Oncology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8818749/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35141158 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.824204 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chungjaehoon trusguidedtargetbiopsyforapirads35indexlesiontoreducegleasonscoreunderestimationapropensityscorematchinganalysis AT parkbyungkwan trusguidedtargetbiopsyforapirads35indexlesiontoreducegleasonscoreunderestimationapropensityscorematchinganalysis AT songwan trusguidedtargetbiopsyforapirads35indexlesiontoreducegleasonscoreunderestimationapropensityscorematchinganalysis AT kangminyong trusguidedtargetbiopsyforapirads35indexlesiontoreducegleasonscoreunderestimationapropensityscorematchinganalysis AT sunghyunhwan trusguidedtargetbiopsyforapirads35indexlesiontoreducegleasonscoreunderestimationapropensityscorematchinganalysis AT jeonhwanggyun trusguidedtargetbiopsyforapirads35indexlesiontoreducegleasonscoreunderestimationapropensityscorematchinganalysis AT jeongbyongchang trusguidedtargetbiopsyforapirads35indexlesiontoreducegleasonscoreunderestimationapropensityscorematchinganalysis AT seoseongil trusguidedtargetbiopsyforapirads35indexlesiontoreducegleasonscoreunderestimationapropensityscorematchinganalysis AT jeonseongsoo trusguidedtargetbiopsyforapirads35indexlesiontoreducegleasonscoreunderestimationapropensityscorematchinganalysis AT leehyunmoo trusguidedtargetbiopsyforapirads35indexlesiontoreducegleasonscoreunderestimationapropensityscorematchinganalysis |