scholarly journals Analysis of risk factors for determining the need for prostate biopsy in patients with negative MRI

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Linghui Liang ◽  
Feng Qi ◽  
Yifei Cheng ◽  
Lei Zhang ◽  
Dongliang Cao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Detection Efficiency ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Digital Rectal Examination ◽  
Multivariable Logistic Regression Analysis ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Prostate Biopsies ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Medical University

AbstractTo analyze the clinical characteristics of patients with negative biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) who didn’t need prostate biopsies (PBs). A total of 1,012 male patients who underwent PBs in the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University from March 2018 to November 2019, of 225 had prebiopsy negative bpMRI (defined as Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS 2.1) score less than 3). The detection efficiency of clinically significant prostate cancer (CSPCa) was assessed according to age, digital rectal examination (DRE), prostate volume (PV) on bpMRI, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and PSA density (PSAD). The definition of CSPCa for Gleason score > 6. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analysis were used to identify predictive factors of absent CSPCa on PBs. Moreover, absent CSPCa contained clinically insignificant prostate cancer (CIPCa) and benign result. The detection rates of present prostate cancer (PCa) and CSPCa were 27.11% and 16.44%, respectively. Patients who were diagnosed as CSPCa had an older age (P < 0.001), suspicious DRE (P < 0.001), a smaller PV (P < 0.001), higher PSA value (P = 0.008) and higher PSAD (P < 0.001) compared to the CIPCa group and benign result group. PSAD < 0.15 ng/ml/cm3 (P = 0.004) and suspicious DRE (P < 0.001) were independent predictors of absent CSPCa on BPs. The negative forecast value of bpMRI for BP detection of CSPCa increased with decreasing PSAD, mainly in patients with naive PB (P < 0.001) but not in prior negative PB patients. 25.33% of the men had the combination of negative bpMRI, PSAD < 0.15 ng/ml/cm3 and PB naive, and none had CSPCa on repeat PBs. The incidence of PB was determined, CSPCa was 1.59%, 0% and 16.67% in patients with negative bpMRI and PSAD < 0.15 ng/ml/cm3, patients with negative bpMRI, PSAD < 0.15 ng/ml/cm3 and biopsy naive and patients with negative bpMRI, PSAD < 0.15 ng/ml/cm3 and prior negative PB, separately. We found that a part of patients with negative bpMRI, a younger age, no suspicious DRE and PSAD < 0.15 ng/ml/cm3 may securely avoid PBs. Conversely PB should be considered in patients regardless of negative bpMRI, especially who with a greater age, obviously suspicious DRE, significantly increased PSA value, a significantly small PV on MRI and PSAD > 0.15 ng/ml/cm3.

scholarly journals Use of Nomograms for Early Detection in Prostate Cancer

2010 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 271-276 ◽  
Author(s):  
Devon C. Snow ◽  
Eric A. Klein
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Prostate Volume ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Digital Rectal Examination ◽  
Clinical Factors ◽  
Negative Biopsy ◽  
Prostate Biopsies ◽  
Prostate Cancer Prevention ◽  
Clinically Significant

Since the first introduction of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) as a screening tool in the 1980s, the accurate diagnoses of clinically significant prostate cancer remains a challenge. Analysis of a correlation between PSA levels and prostate biopsies of men with PSA 3 ng/mL or less in the placebo group of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial suggested that no “normal” PSA level exists. With the acknowledgement that PSA level is considered a continuum rather than a dichotomous marker, accurately diagnosing clinically significant prostate cancer is even more challenging. Nomograms are increasingly being used as tools in the clinical setting to address this challenge. Through incorporating multiple clinical factors, such as PSA, digital rectal examination, age, race, prostate volume, family history, and previous negative biopsy, risk calculators can improve sensitivity of diagnosis over using a PSA cutoff alone. This article discusses the rational for the use of nomograms and the advantages and limitations for the most commonly used nomograms.

Multiparametric ultrasound and micro-ultrasound in prostate cancer: a comprehensive review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adriano Basso Dias ◽  
Ciara O’Brien ◽  
Jean-Michel Correas ◽  
Sangeet Ghai
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Transrectal Ultrasound ◽  
Digital Rectal Examination ◽  
High Sensitivity ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cognitive Fusion ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
Multiparametric Ultrasound ◽  
Targeted Biopsies

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common non-cutaneous cancer diagnosed in males. Traditional tools for screening and diagnosis, such as prostate-specific antigen, digital rectal examination and conventional transrectal ultrasound (TRUS), present low accuracy for PCa detection. Multiparametric MRI has become a game changer in the PCa diagnosis pathway and MRI-targeted biopsies are currently recommended for males at risk of clinically significant PCa, even in biopsy-naïve patients. Recent advances in ultrasound have also emerged with the goal to provide a readily accessible and cost-effective tool for detection of PCa. These newer techniques include elastography and contrast-enhanced ultrasound, as well as improved B-mode and Doppler techniques. These modalities can be combined to define a novel ultrasound approach, multiparametric ultrasound. High frequency Micro-ultrasound has emerged as a promising imaging technology for PCa diagnosis. Initial results have shown high sensitivity of Micro-ultrasound in detecting PCa in addition to its potential in improving the accuracy of targeted biopsies, based on targeting under real-time visualization, rather than relying on cognitive/fusion software MRI-transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy.

scholarly journals Cancer Detection Rates of Systematic and Targeted Prostate Biopsies after Biparametric MRI

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Maudy C. W. Gayet ◽  
Anouk A. M. A. van der Aa ◽  
Harrie P. Beerlage ◽  
Bart Ph Schrier ◽  
Maaike Gielens ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Detection ◽  
Prostate Biopsy ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Prostate Biopsies ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Significant Pathology ◽  
Study Population ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
Control Study

Objective. To compare prostate cancer detection rates (CDRs) and pathology results with targeted prostate biopsy (TB) and systematic prostate biopsy (SB) in biopsy-naive men. Methods. An in-patient control study of 82 men undergoing SB and subsequent TB in case of positive prostate MRI between 2015 and 2017 in the Jeroen Bosch Hospital, the Netherlands. Results. Prostate cancer (PCa) was detected in 54.9% with 70.7% agreement between TB and SB. Significant PCa (Gleason score ≥7) was detected in 24.4%. The CDR with TB and SB was 35.4% and 48.8%, respectively (p=0.052). The CDR of significant prostate cancer with TB and SB was both 20.7%. Clinically significant pathology upgrading occurred in 7.3% by adding TB to SB and 22.0% by adding SB to TB. Conclusions. There is no statistically significant difference between CDRs of SB and TB. Both SB and TB miss significant PCas. Moreover, pathology upgrading occurred more often by adding SB to TB than vice versa. This indicates that the omission of SB in this study population might not be justified.

scholarly journals Comparison of Likert and PI-RADS version 2 MRI scoring systems for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 93 (1112) ◽  
pp. 20200298 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeries P Zawaideh ◽  
Evis Sala ◽  
Maria Pantelidou ◽  
Nadeem Shaida ◽  
Brendan Koo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Area Under The Curve ◽  
Scoring Systems ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Prostate Imaging ◽  
Prostate Biopsies ◽  
Threshold Score ◽  
Lesion Level ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
Histological Results

Objective: To compare the performance of Likert and Prostate Imaging–Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) multiparametric (mp) MRI scoring systems for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). Methods: 199 biopsy-naïve males undergoing prostate mpMRI were prospectively scored with Likert and PI-RADS systems by four experienced radiologists. A binary cut-off (threshold score ≥3) was used to analyze histological results by three groups: negative, insignificant disease (Gleason 3 + 3; iPCa), and csPCa (Gleason ≥3 +4). Lesion-level results and prostate zonal location were also compared. Results: 129/199 (64.8%) males underwent biopsy, 96 with Likert or PI-RADS score ≥3, and 21 with negative MRI. A further 12 patients were biopsied during follow-up (mean 507 days). Prostate cancer was diagnosed in 87/199 (43.7%) patients, 65 with (33.6%) csPCa. 30/92 (32.6%) patients with negative MRI were biopsied, with an NPV of 83.3% for cancer and 86.7% for csPCa. Likert and PI-RADS score differences were observed in 92 patients (46.2%), but only for 16 patients (8%) at threshold score ≥3. Likert scoring had higher specificity than PI-RADS (0.77 vs 0.66), higher area under the curve (0.92 vs 0.87, p = 0.002) and higher PPV (0.66 vs 0.58); NPV and sensitivity were the same. Likert had more five score results (58%) compared to PI-RADS (36%), but with similar csCPa detection (81.0 and 80.6% respectively). Likert demonstrated lower proportion of false positive in the predominately AFMS-involving lesions. Conclusion: Likert and PI-RADS systems both demonstrate high cancer detection rates. Likert scoring had a higher AUC with moderately higher specificity and lower positive call rate and could potentially help to reduce the number of unnecessary biopsies performed. Advances in knowledge: This paper illustrates that the Likert scoring system has potential to help urologists reduce the number of prostate biopsies performed.

scholarly journals Multiparametric MRI in Biopsy Guidance for Prostate Cancer: Fusion-Guided

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason T. Rothwax ◽  
Arvin K. George ◽  
Bradford J. Wood ◽  
Peter A. Pinto
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Elevated Serum ◽  
Focal Therapy ◽  
Multiparametric Mri ◽  
Solid Organ ◽  
Prostate Biopsies ◽  
Innovative Methods ◽  
Early Phase Trials ◽  
Clinically Significant

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common solid-organ malignancy among American men and the second most deadly. Current guidelines recommend a 12-core systematic biopsy following the finding of an elevated serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA). However, this strategy fails to detect an unacceptably high percentage of clinically significant cancers, leading researchers to develop new, innovative methods to improve the effectiveness of prostate biopsies. Multiparametric-MRI (MP-MRI) has emerged as a promising instrument in identifying suspicious regions within the prostate that require special attention on subsequent biopsy. Fusion platforms, which incorporate the MP-MRI into the biopsy itself and provide active targets within real-time imaging, have shown encouraging results in improving the detection rate of significant cancer. Broader applications of this technology, including MRI-guided focal therapy for prostate cancer, are in early phase trials.

scholarly journals Magnetic resonance/ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy of the prostate can be improved by adding systematic biopsy

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victor Mihail Cauni ◽  
Dan Stanescu ◽  
Florin Tanase ◽  
Bogdan Mihai ◽  
Cristian Persu
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Cancer Detection ◽  
Detection Rate ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Cancer Detection Rate ◽  
Targeted Biopsy ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
Systematic Biopsy

Aim: Magnetic resonance/ ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy (Tbs) is widely used for diagnosing prostate cancer (PCa). The aim of our study was to compare the cancer detection rate (CDR) and the clinically significant prostate cancer detection rate (csPCa) of the magnetic resonance/ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy with those of the standard systematic biopsy (Sbs) and of the combination of both techniques.Material and methods: A total of 182 patients underwent magnetic resonance/ultrasound fusion Tbs on the prostate for PCa suspicion based on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mMRI) detection of lesions with PI-RADSv2 score ≥3. A total of 78 patients had prior negative biopsies. Tb was performed by taking 2-4 cores from each suspected lesion, followed by Sb with 12 cores. We evaluated the overall detection rate of PCa and clinically significant prostate cancer, defined as any PCa with Gleason score ≥3+4.Results: Median prostate specific antigen (PSA) level pre-biopsy was 7.4 ng/ml and median free-PSA/PSA ratio was 10.2%. Patient median age was 62 years old. PIRADSv2 score was 3 in 54 cases, 4 in 96 cases and 5 in 32 cases. PI-RADS-dependent detection rate of Tbs for scores 3, 4 and 5 was 25.9%, 65.6% and 84.4%, respectively, with csPCa detection rates of 24.1%, 54.2%, and 71.9%. Overall detection rate was 57.1% for Tbs, which increased to 60.4% by adding Sbs results. Detection rate for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) was 48.4% and increased to 51.1% by adding Sbs. Overall detection rate for repeated biopsy was 50% and 68.3% for biopsy in naïve patients. Sbs detection rate was 55.5%, 8 patients having a negative biopsy on Tbs.Conclusions: When Tbs is considered due to a PI-RADS ≥3 lesion on mMRI, combined Tbs + Sbs increases the overall CDR and csPCa detection rates.

scholarly journals The use of prostate specific antigen density to predict clinically significant prostate cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Igor Yusim ◽  
Muhammad Krenawi ◽  
Elad Mazor ◽  
Victor Novack ◽  
Nicola J. Mabjeesh
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Prostate Specific Antigen ◽  
Prostate Biopsy ◽  
Prostate Volume ◽  
Characteristic Curve ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Digital Rectal Examination ◽  
Prostate Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Prostate Specific Antigen Density ◽  
Clinically Significant

AbstractThe purpose of this study was to assess the predictive value of prostate specific antigen density (PSAD) for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer in men undergoing systematic transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy. We retrospectively analyzed data of men who underwent TRUS-guided prostate biopsy because of elevated PSA (≤ 20 ng/ml) or abnormal digital rectal examination. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis to compare PSA and PSAD performance and chi-square automatic interaction detector methodologies were used to identify predictors of clinically significant cancer (Gleason score ≥ 7 or international society of urological pathology grade group ≥ 2). Nine-hundred and ninety-two consecutive men with a median age of 66 years (IQR 61–71) were included in the study. Median PSAD was 0.10 ng/ml2 (IQR 0.10–0.22). Prostate adenocarcinoma was diagnosed in 338 men (34%). Clinically significant prostate adenocarcinoma was diagnosed in 167 patients (50% of all cancers and 17% of the whole cohort). The AUC to predict clinically significant prostate cancer was 0.64 for PSA and 0.78 for PSAD (P < 0.001). The highest Youden's index for PSAD was at 0.20 ng/ml2 with 70% sensitivity and 79% specificity for the diagnosis of clinically significant cancer. Men with PSAD < 0.09 ng/ml2 had only 4% chance of having clinically significant disease. The detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer in patients with PSAD between 0.09 and 0.19 ng/ml2 was significantly higher when prostate volume was less than 33 ml. In conclusion, PSAD was a better predictor than PSA alone of clinically significant prostate cancer in patients undergoing TRUS-guided biopsy. Patients with PSAD below 0.09 ng/ml2 were unlikely to harbor clinically significant prostate cancer. Combining PSAD in the gray zone (0.09–0.19) with prostate volume below 33 ml adds diagnostic value of clinically significant prostate cancer.

scholarly journals Profiling of Circulating microRNAs in Prostate Cancer Reveals Diagnostic Biomarker Potential

Diagnostics ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 188 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacob Fredsøe ◽  
Anne K. I. Rasmussen ◽  
Peter Mouritzen ◽  
Marianne T. Bjerre ◽  
Peter Østergren ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Transrectal Ultrasound ◽  
Digital Rectal Examination ◽  
Area Under The Curve ◽  
Diagnostic Tools ◽  
Test Set ◽  
Localized Disease ◽  
Clinically Significant

Early detection of prostate cancer (PC) is paramount as localized disease is generally curable, while metastatic PC is generally incurable. There is a need for improved, minimally invasive biomarkers as current diagnostic tools are inaccurate, leading to extensive overtreatment while still missing some clinically significant cancers. Consequently, we profiled the expression levels of 92 selected microRNAs by RT-qPCR in plasma samples from 753 patients, representing multiple stages of PC and non-cancer controls. First, we compared plasma miRNA levels in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) or localized prostate cancer (LPC), versus advanced prostate cancer (APC). We identified several dysregulated microRNAs with a large overlap of 59 up/down-regulated microRNAs between BPH versus APC and LPC versus APC. Besides identifying several novel PC-associated dysregulated microRNAs in plasma, we confirmed the previously reported upregulation of miR-375 and downregulation of miR-146a-5p. Next, by randomly splitting our dataset into a training and test set, we identified and successfully validated a novel four microRNA diagnostic ratio model, termed bCaP (miR-375*miR-33a-5p/miR-16-5p*miR-409-3p). Combined in a model with prostate specific antigen (PSA), digital rectal examination status, and age, bCaP predicted the outcomes of transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided biopsies (negative vs. positive) with greater accuracy than PSA alone (Training: area under the curve (AUC), model = 0.84; AUC, PSA = 0.63. Test set: AUC, model = 0.67; AUC, PSA = 0.56). It may be possible in the future to use this simple and minimally invasive bCaP test in combination with existing clinical parameters for a more accurate selection of patients for prostate biopsy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document