MRI-guided Biopsy in Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam Kinnaird ◽  
Nitin K. Yerram ◽  
Luke O’Connor ◽  
Wayne Brisbane ◽  
Vidit Sharma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Guided Biopsy ◽  
Mri Guided

scholarly journals Use of MRI-Guided Biopsy for Selection and Follow-up of Men Undergoing Hemi-gland Cryoablation of Prostate Cancer

Urology ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 126 ◽  
pp. 158-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steve R. Zhou ◽  
Demetrios N. Simopoulos ◽  
Rajiv Jayadevan ◽  
Ely R. Felker ◽  
Merdie K. Delfin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Guided Biopsy ◽  
Mri Guided

Performance of MRI-TRUS-guided fusion biopsy to detect progression on active surveillance for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 43-43
Author(s):  
Thomas P. Frye ◽  
Nabeel Ahmad Shakir ◽  
Steven Abboud ◽  
Arvin Koruthu George ◽  
Maria J Merino ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
Targeted Biopsy ◽  
Fusion Biopsy ◽  
Trus Biopsy ◽  
Guided Biopsy ◽  
Risk Prostate Cancer

43 Background: Active surveillance (AS) is an established treatment option for men with low risk prostate cancer. Its role in intermediate prostate cancer is still being investigated. Recent studies have shown that multiparametric-MRI (mp-MRI) along with MRI-TRUS fusion-guided biopsy may better assess risk in patients eligible for AS, compared to 12-core biopsy, due to improved detection of clinically significant cancers. The objective is to determine the performance of MRI-TRUS guided biopsy for men on AS with both low and intermediate risk disease. Methods: Between 2007-2014 men on AS were included if they had complete mp-MRI and pathology data for 2 or more MRI-TRUS biopsy sessions. Fusion guided biopsy procedures consisted of MRI identified targeted biopsies as well as random 12 core biopsies. Men were allowed to participate in AS with low and intermediate risk prostate cancer, Gleason score ≤ 3+4=7. Progression was defined by patients with initial Gleason 3+3=6 to any Gleason 4, and Gleason 3+4=7 disease progressing to a primary Gleason 4 or higher. Results: 89 men met our study criteria with an average age of 62 years old (range 45-79). 75 men had low risk Gleason 3+3=6 at the outset of AS by 1st biopsy session with a median PSA 5.1 ng/ml. The other 14 men had intermediate risk prostate cancer Gleason 3+4=7 at the outset of AS and a median PSA 4.6 ng/ml. During follow-up, 25 (33%) low risk men progressed to 3+4 or above at a median of 20.6 months. Of these, 19 were found by targeted biopsy. 6 (43%) of the intermediate risk men progressed to Gleason 4+3=7 at a median of 36.8 months. 4 of these progressed on targeted fusion biopsy. In the intermediate risk men, 84 random biopsy cores were require to detect 1 progression versus 15 targeted biopsy cores to detect 1 progression. Conclusions: The majority of patients on AS who progressed were identified by MRI-TRUS targeted biopsy. Less biopsy cores are required to detect progression with targeted biopsy. These results are preliminary and a larger cohort with longer follow-up would be beneficial.

Expanded criteria in men on active surveillance monitored by MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. 115-115
Author(s):  
Thomas P Frye ◽  
Steven F. Abboud ◽  
Richard Ho ◽  
Michele Fascelli ◽  
Raju Chelluri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
Guided Biopsy ◽  
Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
Expanded Criteria ◽  
Clinically Significant

115 Background: Active surveillance (AS) is an established option for men with prostate cancer. Studies have shown that multiparametric-MRI along with MRI-TRUS fusion-guided biopsy (FB) may better assess risk in patients eligible for AS, compared to 12-core biopsy, due to improved detection of clinically significant cancers. The objective is to evaluate the performance of expanded criteria eligibility in men on AS being monitored with MRI-TRUS guided biopsy. Methods: Men on AS were included if they had mp-MRI and pathology data for 2 or more FB sessions. FB procedures consisted of targeted biopsies and random 12 core biopsies. Men participated in AS with low and intermediate risk prostate cancer, Gleason score ≤ 3+4=7 with no restriction on percent core involvement or number of cores positive. Progression was defined by patients with initial Gleason 3+3=6 to any Gleason 4, and Gleason 3+4=7 disease progressing to a primary Gleason 4 or higher. Results: 124 men on AS met study criteria. Low risk men had a mean age of 61.3 years versus intermediate risk men with a mean age of 65.5 years (p=0.0062). Mean PSA levels of the low and intermediate risk groups were 5.8 and 5.76 ng/ml (p=0.95), respectively. The mean length of follow-up was 22.56 months (range: 3.6 – 74.4 mo). Rates of pathologic progression in the intermediate and low risk patients were, 38.5% vs. 28.5% (p=0.33). Intermediate risk men had a mean progression-free survival (PFS) of 2.8 years compared to low risk men of 3.9 years (p=0.27). Patients were stratified according to established AS criteria (Epstein, Toronto, PRIAS) and rates of progression are summarized in the Table. 69% of patients met Epstein criteria for AS of which 29.4% (20/68) progressed compared to 28.5% for the low risk cohort overall. Conclusions: Men in our cohort who met strict criteria for AS had the same rate of progression as the entire expaned criteria low risk cohort, 29.4% vs 28.5%, respectively. Our data suggests that with accurate initial Gleason classification other AS criteria such as percent core or number of cores positive have no added benefit in predicting which men may have reclassification or progression of disease. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals Patients’ experience with MRI-guided in-bore biopsy versus TRUS-guided biopsy in prostate cancer: a pilot study

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silvia Francesca Maria Pizzoli ◽  
Giulia Marton ◽  
Paola Pricolo ◽  
Serena Oliveri ◽  
Paul Summers ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Pilot Study ◽  
Guided Biopsy ◽  
Mri Guided ◽  
Patients Experience

scholarly journals MP64-10 MRI-GUIDED BIOPSY TO EVALUATE PROSTATE CANCER SEVERITY IN AFRICAN-AMERICAN MEN

2020 ◽  
Vol 203 ◽  
pp. e966-e967
Author(s):  
Jorge Ballon ◽  
Ryan Chuang* ◽  
Adam Kinnaird ◽  
Rajiv Jayadevan ◽  
Steve Zhou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
African American ◽  
African American Men ◽  
Guided Biopsy ◽  
Mri Guided

In-Bore Transrectal MRI–Guided Biopsy With Robotic Assistance in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer: An Analysis of 57 Patients

2019 ◽  
Vol 213 (4) ◽  
pp. W171-W179
Author(s):  
Matthias Barral ◽  
Arnaud Lefevre ◽  
Philippe Camparo ◽  
Martijn Hoogenboom ◽  
Thibaut Pierre ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Robotic Assistance ◽  
Guided Biopsy ◽  
Mri Guided

Robotic-assisted transrectal MRI-guided biopsy. Technical feasibility and role in the current diagnosis of prostate cancer: an initial single-center experience

2020 ◽  
Vol 45 (12) ◽  
pp. 4150-4159
Author(s):  
Joan C. Vilanova ◽  
Anna Pérez de Tudela ◽  
Josep Puig ◽  
Martijn Hoogenboom ◽  
Joaquim Barceló ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Single Center ◽  
Technical Feasibility ◽  
Robotic Assisted ◽  
Single Center Experience ◽  
Guided Biopsy ◽  
Mri Guided

Value of multimodality MRI and MR-guided biopsy at inclusion in an active surveillance protocol for prostate cancer.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (5_suppl) ◽  
pp. 105-105
Author(s):  
Diederik Meindert Somford ◽  
Caroline M. Hoeks ◽  
Roderick C. van den Bergh ◽  
Henk Vergunst ◽  
Inge M van Oort ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Prostate Carcinoma ◽  
Clinical Stage ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Definitive Treatment ◽  
Guided Biopsy ◽  
Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
Low Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
Surveillance Protocol

105 Background: To prevent overtreatment of insignificant and/or low-risk prostate carcinoma in the PSA screening era, active surveillance is emerging as a treatment strategy for selected patients. In our series we aim to establish whether MRI could aid in correct risk assessment for these patients within the framework of the Prostate Cancer Research International Active Surveillance (PRIAS) study. Methods: We included patients in our protocol based on contemporary criteria for active surveillance: - Diagnosis of prostate cancer by TRUS-guided biopsy. - PSA ≤10 ng/mL, PSA density <0.2 ng/mL/mL - Clinical stage ≤ T2 - Gleason score (GS) ≤3+3=6 - ≤ 2 biopsy cores with cancer All patients underwent multimodality MRI of the prostate, including T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR sequences. When a tumor-suspicious region (TSR) could be identified a targeted MR-guided biopsy (MRGB) was performed to obtain pathology. Patients were referred for definitive treatment in case of GS > 3+3=6 upon MRGB or T3 stage at MRI. Results: In 48 of 49 included patients at least one TSR was identified, with a median of 2 TSRs (range1-4) per patient. MRGB was obtained from every TSR, with a median of 4 MRGBs taken per patient. Five patients had a GS >3+3=6 upon MRGB and were excluded. Three patients were excluded due to suspicion of T3 stage on MRI. Five patient were excluded upon physician’s discretion due to multifocal prostate cancer upon MRGB. Combined multimodality MRI/MRGB in our active surveillance cohort thus excluded 27% (13/49) of patients who were incorrectly stratified as low-risk prostate carcinoma by contemporary criteria. Conclusions: Application of multimodality MRI and MRGB in an active surveillance protocol improves risk stratification, adding onto contemporary PSA and TRUS-guided biopsy criteria for low-risk prostate cancer. This approach might increase safety and reliability of active surveillance for prostate cancer and deserves ongoing prospective evaluation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document