Added Value of Prostate-specific Antigen Density in Selecting Prostate Biopsy Candidates Among Men with Elevated Prostate-specific Antigen and PI-RADS ≥3 Lesions on Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Prostate: A Systematic Assessment by PI-RADS Score.

BACKGROUND: A significant proportion of patients with positive multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI; Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System [PI-RADS] scores of 3-5) have negative biopsy results. OBJECTIVE: To systematically assess all prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) values and identify an appropriate cutoff for identification of patients with positive mpMRI who could potentially avoid biopsy on the basis of their PI-RADS score. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The study included a cohort of 1341 patients with positive mpMRI who underwent combined targeted and systematic biopsies. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Multivariable logistic regression analysis (MVA) was used to assess the association between PSAD and the risk of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa, grade group ≥2) after adjusting for confounders. We used locally weighted scatterplot smoothing to explore csPCa risk according to PSAD and PI-RADS scores. PSAD utility was observed only for patients with PI-RADS 3 lesions, so we plotted the effect of each PSAD value as a cutoff for this subgroup in terms of biopsies saved, csPCa cases missed, and clinically insignificant PCa (ciPCa, grade group 1) cases not detected. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, 667 (50%) csPCa cases were identified. On MVA, PSAD independently predicted csPCa (odds ratio 1.57; p < 0.001). For PI-RADS ≥4 lesions, the csPCa risk was ≥40% regardless of PSAD. Conversely, among patients with PI-RADS 3 lesions, csPCa risk ranged from 0% to 60% according to PSAD values, and a PSAD cutoff of 0.10 ng/ml/cm3 corresponded to a threshold probability of 10% for csPCa. Using this PSAD cutoff for patients with PI-RADS 3 lesions would have saved 32% of biopsies, missed 7% of csPCa cases, and avoided detection of 34% of ciPCa cases. Limitations include selection bias and the high experience of the radiologists and urologists involved. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with PI-RADS ≥4 lesions should undergo prostate biopsy regardless of their PSAD, while PSAD should be used to stratify patients with PI-RADS 3 lesions. Using a threshold probability of 10% for csPCa, our data suggest that the appropriate strategy is to avoid biopsy in patients with PI-RADS 3 lesions and PSAD <0.10 ng/ml/cm3. Our results also provide information to help in tailoring an appropriate strategy for every patient with positive mpMRI findings. PATIENT SUMMARY: We investigated whether a cutoff value for PSAD (prostate-specific antigen density) could identify patients with suspicious prostate lesions on MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) who could avoid biopsy according to the PI-RADS score for their scan. We found that patients with PI-RADS ≥4 should undergo prostate biopsy regardless of their PSAD. A PSAD cutoff of 0.10 should be used to stratify patients with PI-RADS 3.

Development of a New Comorbidity Assessment Tool for Specific Prediction of Perioperative Mortality in Contemporary Patients Treated with Radical Cystectomy.

PURPOSE: The Deyo adaptation of the Charlson comorbidity index (DaCCI), which relies on 17 comorbid condition groupings defined with 200 ICD-9-CM diagnostic codes, lacks specificity in the context of radical cystectomy (RC) for bladder cancer (BCa). We attempted to develop a new comorbidity assessment tool based on individual comorbid conditions and/or BCa manifestations for specific prediction of perioperative mortality after RC. METHODS: We relied on 7076 T1-T4 nonmetastatic BCa patients treated with RC between 2000 and 2009 in the SEER-Medicare linked database. Within the development cohort (n = 6076), simulated annealing (SA) was used to identify (1) individual comorbid conditions, (2) individual BCa manifestations, and (3) the combination of both, that satisfy the criteria of maximal accuracy and parsimony for prediction of 90-day mortality after RC, after adjusting for several confounders. The accuracy of the newly identified groups of individual comorbid conditions and/or BCa manifestations and of the original DaCCI was tested in a 1000-patient external validation cohort. RESULTS: The combination of six individual comorbid conditions and two individual BCa disease manifestations (type II diabetes without complications, anemia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure, aortocoronary bypass, cardiomegaly, urinary tract infection, and hydronephrosis), and seven individual comorbid conditions (type II diabetes without complications, anemia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure, aortocoronary bypass, osteoarthrosis, and cardiomegaly) respectively showed 71.1 and 70.2% accuracy versus 68.0% for the original DaCCI. CONCLUSIONS: These new approaches are specific to contemporary RC patients and represent simpler methods compared with the original DaCCI, without any compromise in accuracy.

Impact of multiparametric MRI and MRI-targeted biopsy on pre-therapeutic risk assessment in prostate cancer patients candidate for radical prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: To assess the current status and future potential of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) and MRI-targeted biopsy (MRI-TBx) on the pretherapeutic risk assessment in prostate cancer patients' candidates for radical prostatectomy. METHODS: A literature search of the MEDLINE/PubMed and Scopus database was performed. English-language original and review articles were analyzed and summarized after an interactive peer-review process of the panel. RESULTS: Pretherapeutic risk assessment tools should be based on target plus systematic biopsies, where the addition of systematic biopsy (TRUS-Bx) to the mpMRI-target cores is associated with a lower rate of upgrading at final pathology. The combination of mpMRI findings with clinical parameters outperforms models based on clinical parameters alone in the prediction of adverse pathological outcomes and oncological results. This is particularly true when a specialized radiologist is present. CONCLUSION: The combination of mpMRI findings and clinical parameters should be considered to improve patient stratification in the pretherapeutic risk assessment. There is an urgent need to develop or include MRI data and MRI-TBx findings in available preoperative risk tools. This will allow improving the pretherapeutic risk assessment, providing important additional information for patient-tailored treatment planning and optimizing outcomes.