Cargando…
Current role of systematic biopsy in diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer in primary combined MRI-targeted biopsy: a high-volume single-center study
PURPOSE: Additive systematic biopsy (SB) contributes to prostate cancer (PCA) detection in MRI-targeted biopsy (TB). However, the reasons for this are not yet clear. We compared the performance of TB, SB and the combined approach (CB) in biopsy-naive men to determine the added value of SB for tumor...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9849165/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36477403 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00345-022-04230-w |
_version_ | 1784871883304337408 |
---|---|
author | Krausewitz, Philipp Fostitsch, Dorothea Weiten, Richard Kluemper, Niklas Stein, Johannes Luetkens, Julian Kristiansen, Glen Ellinger, Jörg Ritter, Manuel |
author_facet | Krausewitz, Philipp Fostitsch, Dorothea Weiten, Richard Kluemper, Niklas Stein, Johannes Luetkens, Julian Kristiansen, Glen Ellinger, Jörg Ritter, Manuel |
author_sort | Krausewitz, Philipp |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: Additive systematic biopsy (SB) contributes to prostate cancer (PCA) detection in MRI-targeted biopsy (TB). However, the reasons for this are not yet clear. We compared the performance of TB, SB and the combined approach (CB) in biopsy-naive men to determine the added value of SB for tumor grading and spatial tumor distribution. METHODS: Two hundred and fifty-nine men with PI-RADS 3–5 graded lesions who underwent CB were enrolled. Data were prospectively collected, and cancer detection rates (CDR) were compared at patient and lesion level. Gleason grade up- and down-grading from biopsy to prostatectomy specimens (n = 56; 21.6%) were determined. Clinically significant cancer (csPCA) was defined as Gleason grade ≥ 2. RESULTS: CDR by CB based on PI-RADS categories 3, 4 and 5 for PCA were 24%, 72% and 98% and 17%, 64% and 96% for csPCA. CB detected more PCA and csPCA than TB (p < 0.001). However, TB showed higher efficiency, defined as CDR per biopsy core, for PCA and csPCA in PI-RADS 4–5 rated patients (p < 0.001). Concordance between biopsy and prostatectomy grading was highest in CB with misdiagnosis of csPCA in 25% of men. TB missed cancer attributed to the index lesion in 10.2% and underestimated csPCA in 7%. In these cases, 76% of csPCA were detected and 85% were upgraded to csPCA by SB in adjacent sectors. CONCLUSION: SB cannot be safely abundant without increased diagnostic uncertainty. When TB missed csPCA, SB detected it close to the MRI-target lesion. Therefore, perifocal biopsies could potentially replace 12-core SB with increased efficiency in taking manageable risks. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00345-022-04230-w. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9849165 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98491652023-01-20 Current role of systematic biopsy in diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer in primary combined MRI-targeted biopsy: a high-volume single-center study Krausewitz, Philipp Fostitsch, Dorothea Weiten, Richard Kluemper, Niklas Stein, Johannes Luetkens, Julian Kristiansen, Glen Ellinger, Jörg Ritter, Manuel World J Urol Original Article PURPOSE: Additive systematic biopsy (SB) contributes to prostate cancer (PCA) detection in MRI-targeted biopsy (TB). However, the reasons for this are not yet clear. We compared the performance of TB, SB and the combined approach (CB) in biopsy-naive men to determine the added value of SB for tumor grading and spatial tumor distribution. METHODS: Two hundred and fifty-nine men with PI-RADS 3–5 graded lesions who underwent CB were enrolled. Data were prospectively collected, and cancer detection rates (CDR) were compared at patient and lesion level. Gleason grade up- and down-grading from biopsy to prostatectomy specimens (n = 56; 21.6%) were determined. Clinically significant cancer (csPCA) was defined as Gleason grade ≥ 2. RESULTS: CDR by CB based on PI-RADS categories 3, 4 and 5 for PCA were 24%, 72% and 98% and 17%, 64% and 96% for csPCA. CB detected more PCA and csPCA than TB (p < 0.001). However, TB showed higher efficiency, defined as CDR per biopsy core, for PCA and csPCA in PI-RADS 4–5 rated patients (p < 0.001). Concordance between biopsy and prostatectomy grading was highest in CB with misdiagnosis of csPCA in 25% of men. TB missed cancer attributed to the index lesion in 10.2% and underestimated csPCA in 7%. In these cases, 76% of csPCA were detected and 85% were upgraded to csPCA by SB in adjacent sectors. CONCLUSION: SB cannot be safely abundant without increased diagnostic uncertainty. When TB missed csPCA, SB detected it close to the MRI-target lesion. Therefore, perifocal biopsies could potentially replace 12-core SB with increased efficiency in taking manageable risks. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00345-022-04230-w. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022-12-07 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC9849165/ /pubmed/36477403 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00345-022-04230-w Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Article Krausewitz, Philipp Fostitsch, Dorothea Weiten, Richard Kluemper, Niklas Stein, Johannes Luetkens, Julian Kristiansen, Glen Ellinger, Jörg Ritter, Manuel Current role of systematic biopsy in diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer in primary combined MRI-targeted biopsy: a high-volume single-center study |
title | Current role of systematic biopsy in diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer in primary combined MRI-targeted biopsy: a high-volume single-center study |
title_full | Current role of systematic biopsy in diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer in primary combined MRI-targeted biopsy: a high-volume single-center study |
title_fullStr | Current role of systematic biopsy in diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer in primary combined MRI-targeted biopsy: a high-volume single-center study |
title_full_unstemmed | Current role of systematic biopsy in diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer in primary combined MRI-targeted biopsy: a high-volume single-center study |
title_short | Current role of systematic biopsy in diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer in primary combined MRI-targeted biopsy: a high-volume single-center study |
title_sort | current role of systematic biopsy in diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer in primary combined mri-targeted biopsy: a high-volume single-center study |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9849165/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36477403 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00345-022-04230-w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT krausewitzphilipp currentroleofsystematicbiopsyindiagnosisofclinicallysignificantprostatecancerinprimarycombinedmritargetedbiopsyahighvolumesinglecenterstudy AT fostitschdorothea currentroleofsystematicbiopsyindiagnosisofclinicallysignificantprostatecancerinprimarycombinedmritargetedbiopsyahighvolumesinglecenterstudy AT weitenrichard currentroleofsystematicbiopsyindiagnosisofclinicallysignificantprostatecancerinprimarycombinedmritargetedbiopsyahighvolumesinglecenterstudy AT kluemperniklas currentroleofsystematicbiopsyindiagnosisofclinicallysignificantprostatecancerinprimarycombinedmritargetedbiopsyahighvolumesinglecenterstudy AT steinjohannes currentroleofsystematicbiopsyindiagnosisofclinicallysignificantprostatecancerinprimarycombinedmritargetedbiopsyahighvolumesinglecenterstudy AT luetkensjulian currentroleofsystematicbiopsyindiagnosisofclinicallysignificantprostatecancerinprimarycombinedmritargetedbiopsyahighvolumesinglecenterstudy AT kristiansenglen currentroleofsystematicbiopsyindiagnosisofclinicallysignificantprostatecancerinprimarycombinedmritargetedbiopsyahighvolumesinglecenterstudy AT ellingerjorg currentroleofsystematicbiopsyindiagnosisofclinicallysignificantprostatecancerinprimarycombinedmritargetedbiopsyahighvolumesinglecenterstudy AT rittermanuel currentroleofsystematicbiopsyindiagnosisofclinicallysignificantprostatecancerinprimarycombinedmritargetedbiopsyahighvolumesinglecenterstudy |