RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: While magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsy (TBx) results in better prostate cancer (PCa) detection relative to systematic biopsy (SBx), the combination of both methods increases clinically significant PCa detection relative to either Bx method alone. However, combined Bx subjects patients to higher number of Bx cores and greater detection of clinically insignificant PCa. OBJECTIVE: To determine if prebiopsy prostate MRI can identify men who could forgo combined Bx without a substantial risk of missing clinically significant PCa (csPC). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Men with MRI-visible prostate lesions underwent combined TBx plus SBx. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary outcomes were detection rates for grade group (GG) ≥2 and GG ≥3 PCa by TBx and SBx, stratified by Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Among PI-RADS 5 cases, nearly all csPCs were detected by TBx, as adding SBx resulted in detection of only 2.5% more GG ≥2 cancers. Among PI-RADS 3-4 cases, however, SBx addition resulted in detection of substantially more csPCs than TBx alone (8% vs 7.5%). Conversely, TBx added little to detection of csPC among men with PI-RADS 2 lesions (2%) relative to SBx (7.8%). CONCLUSIONS: While combined Bx increases the detection of csPC among men with MRI-visible prostate lesions, this benefit was largely restricted to PI-RADS 3-4 lesions. Using a strategy of TBx only for PI-RADS 5 and combined Bx only for PI-RADS 3-4 would avoid excess biopsies for men with PI-RADS 5 lesions while resulting in a low risk of missing csPC (1%). PATIENT SUMMARY: Our study investigated an optimized strategy to diagnose aggressive prostate cancer in men with an abnormal prostate MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) scan while minimizing the risk of excess biopsies. We used a scoring system for MRI scan images called PI-RADS. The results show that MRI-targeted biopsies alone could be used for men with a PI-RADS score of 5, while men with a PI-RADS score of 3 or 4 would benefit from a combination of MRI-targeted biopsy and systematic biopsy. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT00102544.
Asunto(s)
Próstata , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Humanos , Biopsia Guiada por Imagen/métodos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética/métodos , Masculino , Próstata/diagnóstico por imagen , Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Medición de RiesgoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The ability of serial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to capture pathologic progression during active surveillance (AS) remains in question. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether changes in MRI are associated with pathologic progression for patients on AS. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: From July 2007 through January 2020, we identified all patients evaluated for AS at our institution. Following confirmatory biopsy, a total of 391 patients who underwent surveillance MRI and biopsy at least once were identified (median follow-up of 35.6 mo, interquartile range 19.7-60.6). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: All MRI intervals were scored using the "Prostate Cancer Radiologic Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation" (PRECISE) criteria, with PRECISE scores =4 considered a positive change in MRI. A generalized estimating equation-based logistic regression analysis was conducted for all intervals with a PRECISE score of <4 to determine the predictors of Gleason grade group (GG) progression despite stable MRI. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 621 MRI intervals were scored by PRECISE and validated by biopsy. The negative predictive value of stable MRI (PRECISE score <4) was greatest for detecting GG1 to?=?GG3 disease (0.94 [0.91-0.97]). If 2-yr surveillance biopsy were performed exclusively for a positive change in MRI, 3.7% (4/109) of avoided biopsies would have resulted in missed progression from GG1 to?=?GG3 disease. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density (odds ratio 1.95 [1.17-3.25], p?=? 0.01) was a risk factor for progression from GG1 to =GG3 disease despite stable MRI. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with GG1 disease and stable MRI (PRECISE score <4) on surveillance, grade progression to?=?GG3 disease is not common. In patients with grade progression detected on biopsy despite stable MRI, elevated PSA density appeared to be a risk factor for progression to?=?GG3 disease. PATIENT SUMMARY: For patients with low-risk prostate cancer on active surveillance, the risk of progressing to grade group 3 disease is low with a stable magnetic resonance image (MRI) after 2?yr. Having higher prostate-specific antigen density increases the risk of progression, despite having a stable MRI.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Próstata , Espera Vigilante , Humanos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Masculino , Clasificación del Tumor , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico por imagenRESUMEN
Focal therapy is growing as an alternative management options for men with clinically localized prostate cancer. Parallel to the increasing popularity of active surveillance (AS) as a treatment for low-risk disease, there has been an increased interest towards providing focal therapy for patients with intermediate-risk disease. Focal therapy can act as a logical "middle ground" in patients who seek treatment while minimizing potential side effects of definitive whole-gland treatment. The aim of the current review is to define the rationale of focal therapy in patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer and highlight the importance of patient selection in focal therapy candidacy.
Asunto(s)
Técnicas de Ablación , Neoplasias de la Próstata/cirugía , Técnicas de Ablación/métodos , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Humanos , Masculino , Tratamientos Conservadores del Órgano , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Medición de RiesgoRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Active surveillance for patients with low and intermediate risk prostate cancers is becoming a more utilized option in recent years. However, the use of magnetic resonance imaging and imaging-targeted biopsy for monitoring grade progression has been poorly studied in this population. We aim to define the utility of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy and systematic biopsy in an active surveillance population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between July 2007 and January 2020, patients with diagnosed prostate cancer who elected active surveillance were monitored with prostate magnetic resonance imaging, imaging-targeted biopsy and standard systematic biopsy. Patients were eligible for surveillance if diagnosed with any volume Gleason grade 1 disease and select Gleason grade 2 disease. Grade progression (Gleason grade 1 to ≥2 disease and Gleason grade 2 to ≥3 disease) for each biopsy modality was measured at 2 years, 4 years and 6+ years. RESULTS: In total, 369 patients had both magnetic resonance imaging-targeted and systematic biopsy and were surveilled for at least 1 year. At 2 years, systematic biopsy, magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy and combined biopsy (systematic+imaging-targeted) detected grade progression in 44 patients (15.9%), 73 patients (26.4%) and 90 patients (32.5%), respectively. Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy detected more cancer grade progression compared to systematic biopsy in both the low and intermediate risk populations (p <0.001). Of all 90 grade progressions at the 2-year time point 46 (51.1%) were found by magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy alone and missed by systematic biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy detected significantly more grade progressions in our active surveillance cohort compared to systematic biopsy at 2 years. Our results provide compelling evidence that prostate magnetic resonance imaging and imaging-targeted biopsy should be included in contemporary active surveillance protocols.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Espera Vigilante , Anciano , Biopsia , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Humanos , Biopsia Guiada por Imagen , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Clasificación del Tumor , Estudios ProspectivosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of combined MRI-targeted plus systematic 12-core biopsy (Cbx) to aid in the selection of patients for active surveillance (AS). METHODS: From July 2007 to January 2020, patients with Gleason Grade Group (GG) 1 or GG 2 prostate cancer were referred to our center for AS consideration. All patients underwent an MRI and confirmatory combined MRI-targeted plus systematic biopsy (Cbx), and AS outcomes based on Cbx results were compared. Cox regression was used to identify predictors of AS failure, defined as progression to ≥ GG3 disease on follow-up biopsies. RESULTS: Of 579 patients referred for AS, 79.3% (459/579) and 20.7% (120/579) had an initial diagnosis of GG1 and GG2 disease, respectively. Overall, 43.2% of patients (250/579) were upgraded on confirmatory Cbx, with 19.2% (111/579) upgraded to ≥ GG3. For the 226 patients followed on AS, 32.7% (74/226) had benign, 45.6% (103/226) had GG1, and 21.7% (49/226) had GG2 results on confirmatory Cbx. In total, 28.8% (65/226) of patients eventually progressed to ≥ GG3, with a median time to AS failure of 89 months. The median time from confirmatory Cbx to AS failure for the negative, GG1, and GG2 groups were 97, 97, and 32 months, respectively (p < .001). On multivariable regression, only age (hazard ratio 1.06 [1.02-1.11], p < .005) and GG on confirmatory Cbx (hazard ratio 2.75 [1.78-4.26], p < .005) remained as positive predictors of AS failure. CONCLUSION: The confirmatory combined MRI-targeted plus systematic biopsy provides useful information for the risk stratification of patients at the time of AS enrollment.
Asunto(s)
Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/terapia , Espera Vigilante , Anciano , Biopsia con Aguja Gruesa/métodos , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Biopsia Guiada por Imagen/métodos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética Intervencional , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Imagen Multimodal/métodos , Clasificación del Tumor , Selección de Paciente , Estudios Prospectivos , Próstata/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Próstata/mortalidad , Medición de Riesgo/métodos , Ultrasonografía IntervencionalRESUMEN
PURPOSE: We identified baseline imaging and clinical characteristics of patients that may improve risk stratification among patients being evaluated for active surveillance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From July 2007 to January 2020 patients referred to our institution for prostate cancer were evaluated and those who remained on active surveillance were identified. Men underwent multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging upon entry into our active surveillance protocol during which baseline demographic and imaging data were documented. Patients were then followed and outcomes, specifically progression to Gleason Grade Group (GG)3 or greater disease, were recorded. RESULTS: Of the men placed on active surveillance 344 had at least 1 PI-RADS score documented. For those with an index lesion PI-RADS category of 5, 33% (17/51) had progression to GG3 or greater on active surveillance with a median time to progression of 31 months. When comparing the progression-free survival times and progression rates in each category, PI-RADS category was found to be associated with progression to GG3 or greater on active surveillance (p <0.01). On univariable analysis factors associated with progression included an index lesion PI-RADS category of 5, prostate specific antigen density and the size of the largest lesion. On multivariable analysis only PI-RADS category of 5 and prostate specific antigen density were associated with progression on active surveillance. CONCLUSIONS: PI-RADS lesion categories at baseline multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging during active surveillance enrollment can be used to predict cancer progression to GG3 or greater on active surveillance. This information, along with other clinical data, can better assist urologists in identifying and managing patients appropriate for active surveillance.
Asunto(s)
Imagen por Resonancia Magnética Intervencional/estadística & datos numéricos , Imágenes de Resonancia Magnética Multiparamétrica/estadística & datos numéricos , Próstata/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Espera Vigilante/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Biopsia con Aguja Gruesa/estadística & datos numéricos , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Humanos , Biopsia Guiada por Imagen/estadística & datos numéricos , Calicreínas/sangre , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Clasificación del Tumor/estadística & datos numéricos , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Estudios Prospectivos , Próstata/patología , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Próstata/mortalidad , Medición de Riesgo/métodos , Medición de Riesgo/estadística & datos numéricos , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de TiempoRESUMEN
Repeat renal surgery is technically demanding with a high morbidity rate. We describe a novel surgical approach, a salvage robotic transmesenteric off-clamp partial nephrectomy for the management of a renal cell carcinoma in a patient with a history of VHL and multiple prior renal surgeries on the affected kidney. Upon pathological review, the specimen was diagnosed as clear cell RCC, Fuhrman Grade 3, with negative surgical margins. The patient suffered no post-operative complications and had a rapid convalescence. This approach is a feasible and safe alternative in select patients with a significant history of renal surgeries and favorable anatomy.
RESUMEN
Lymph node assessment in prostate cancer is most commonly performed at the time of radical prostatectomy. We present the case of pre-operative pelvic lymph node sampling with the use of MRI/TRUS fusion-guided biopsy at the time of prostate biopsy. Lymph node pathology revealed metastatic, poorly differentiated prostate cancer, concurrent with Gleason 4 + 5 disease showing perineural invasion. The use of MRI fusion guided biopsy for nodal sampling may be an effective method pre-operative staging and treatment planning for prostate adenocarcinoma.