Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Más filtros

Bases de datos
País/Región como asunto
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Abdom Radiol (NY) ; 46(9): 4401-4409, 2021 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34047801

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: The aims of the study were (i) to examine the PCa detection rate of 18F-choline (FCH) PET/MRI and (ii) to assess the impact of PET/MRI findings in patients with PCa who develop OMD using PSA response as a biomarker. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed a cohort of 103 patients undergoing FCH PET/MRI for biochemical recurrence of PCa. The inclusion criteria were (1) previous radical prostatectomy (RP) with or without adjuvant radiotherapy (RT); (2) PSA levels available at the time of PET; (3) OMD, defined as a maximum of 5 lesions on PET/MRI; and (4) follow-up data available for at least 6 months after PET. All images were reviewed by two nuclear medicine physicians and interpreted with the support of two radiologists. RESULTS: Seventy patients were eligible for the study: 52 patients had a positive FCH PET/MRI and 18 had a negative scan. The overall PCa detection rates for MRI, PET, and PET/MRI were 65.7%, 37.1%, and 74.3%, respectively. Thirty-five patients were treated with radiotherapy (RT), 16 received hormonal therapy (HT), 3 had a combined therapy (RT + HT), and 16 (23%) underwent PSA surveillance. At follow-up, PSA levels decreased in 51 patients (73%), most of whom had been treated with RT or RT + HT. Therapeutic management was guided by PET/MRI in 74% of patients, which performed better than MRI alone (68% of patients). CONCLUSION: FCH PET/MRI has a higher detection rate than MRI or PET alone for PCa patients with OMD and PSA levels > 0.5 ng/mL, prompting a better choice of treatment.


Asunto(s)
Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Colina/análogos & derivados , Humanos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Masculino , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/diagnóstico por imagen , Tomografía Computarizada por Tomografía de Emisión de Positrones , Tomografía de Emisión de Positrones , Antígeno Prostático Específico , Prostatectomía , Neoplasias de la Próstata/cirugía , Neoplasias de la Próstata/terapia , Estudios Retrospectivos
2.
J Urol ; 199(5): 1188-1195, 2018 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29225057

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Recent NCCN® (National Comprehensive Cancer Network®) Guidelines® show that patients with biopsy Gleason score 3 + 4/Grade Group 2 but otherwise favorable features are active surveillance candidates. However, little is known about the long-term outcomes compared to that in men in the low risk Gleason score 6/Grade Group 1 group. We sought to clarify the risk of adverse features and oncologic outcomes in surgically treated, favorable Grade Group 2 vs 1 cases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We queried our prospectively maintained radical prostatectomy database for all 8,095 patients with biopsy Grade Group 1 or 2 prostate cancer who otherwise fulfilled the NCCN low risk definition of prostate specific antigen less than 10 ng/ml and cT2a or less, and who underwent radical prostatectomy from 1987 to 2014. Multivariable logistic regression and Kaplan-Meier methods were used to compare pathological and oncologic outcomes. RESULTS: Organ confined disease was present in 93.9% and 82.6% of Grade Group 1 and favorable intermediate risk Grade Group 2 cases while seminal vesicle invasion was noted in 1.7% and 4.7%, and nodal disease was noted in 0.3% and 1.8%, respectively (all p <0.0001). On multivariable logistic regression biopsy proven Grade Group 2 disease was associated with a threefold greater risk of nonorgan confined disease (OR 3.1, 95% CI 1.7-5.7, p <0.001). The incidence of late treatment (more than 90 days from surgery) in Grade Group 1 vs 2 was 3.1% vs 8.5% for hormonal therapy and 6.0% vs 12.2% for radiation (p <0.001). In the Grade Group 1 vs 2 cohorts the 10-year biochemical recurrence-free survival rate was 88.9% vs 81.2% and the 10-year systemic progression-free survival rate was 99% vs 96.5% (each p <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Men at favorable risk with Grade Group 2 disease who are considering active surveillance should be informed of the risks of harboring adverse pathological features which impact secondary therapies and an increased risk of cancer progression.


Asunto(s)
Prostatectomía , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Espera Vigilante/normas , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Biopsia , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Humanos , Masculino , Oncología Médica/normas , Persona de Mediana Edad , Clasificación del Tumor , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Estudios Prospectivos , Próstata/patología , Próstata/cirugía , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/mortalidad , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/cirugía , Medición de Riesgo , Vesículas Seminales/patología , Análisis de Supervivencia , Tasa de Supervivencia
3.
Eur Urol ; 72(3): 442-447, 2017 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27574819

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: According to a recent National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines update, patients with Gleason score (GS) 3 + 4 prostate cancer (PCa) and "favorable intermediate-risk" (FIR) characteristics might be offered active surveillance (AS). However, the risk of unfavorable disease features and its prediction in this subset of patients is not completely understood. OBJECTIVE: To identify the risk of unfavorable disease and potential predictors of adverse outcomes among GS 3 + 4 FIR PCa patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The study included patients with biopsy GS 3 + 4 and otherwise fulfilling the NCCN low-risk definition (prostate-specific antigen [PSA] <10 ng/ml, cT2a or lower) undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) from 2006 to 2014 at a single institution. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Complete information on PSA, PSA density (PSAD), clinical stage, percentage of positive cores, percentage of maximum surface specimen involvement, and RP pathology were available. GS upgrade and downgrade, non-organ-confined and non-specimen-confined disease, unfavorable disease (pT3-T4 and/or pN1 and/or a pGS ≥4 + 3) were the outcomes. Statistical analysis included descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 156 patients (13.1%) experienced GS upgrade; 201 (16.9%) were downgraded. Overall, 205 men (17.2%) harbored non-organ-confined disease, and 295 (24.8%) had unfavorable disease. Age (odds ratio [OR]: 1.06), percentage surface involvement (OR: 1.01), and PSAD (OR: 1.83) were the only significant predictors of upgrade. Age (OR: 1.05), clinical stage (OR: 1.74), percentage of positive cores >50% (OR 1.57), percentage of surface area (OR: 1.02), and perineural invasion (OR: 1.89) were significant predictors of unfavorable disease at RP. The retrospective design is a limitation. CONCLUSIONS: AS is a possible option for a subset of men with FIR GS 3 + 4. However, clinical models alone have a limited role in GS upgrade prediction, and alternative tools warrant further investigation. PATIENT SUMMARY: Patients with Gleason score 3 + 4 at biopsy, low prostate-specific antigen, and low stage might consider the option of active surveillance, but the use of clinical information alone might be not adequate for thorough risk-adapted counseling.


Asunto(s)
Prostatectomía , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/cirugía , Espera Vigilante , Adulto , Anciano , Biopsia , Distribución de Chi-Cuadrado , Toma de Decisiones Clínicas , Técnicas de Apoyo para la Decisión , Humanos , Calicreínas/sangre , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Minnesota , Análisis Multivariante , Clasificación del Tumor , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Oportunidad Relativa , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangre , Prostatectomía/efectos adversos , Neoplasias de la Próstata/sangre , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo
4.
Urologia ; 82(2): 118-9, 2015.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24474537

RESUMEN

Prostatic fluid collection is not uncommon in urological practice. Prostatic abscess is the most frequent finding in this clinical setting. Spontaneous prostatic hematoma is rare, and may be related to prostatic cancer. Every case of prostatic collection must be considered with attention, and further evaluation is needed when the diagnosis is not clear. Here we report the case of a spontaneous prostatic hematoma, which was eventually found to be due to prostatic cancer, describing in detail the clinical features, differential diagnosis and treatment options.


Asunto(s)
Adenocarcinoma/complicaciones , Adenocarcinoma/diagnóstico , Hematoma/etiología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/complicaciones , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Adenocarcinoma/terapia , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Antineoplásicos Hormonales/uso terapéutico , Diagnóstico Diferencial , Humanos , Masculino , Prostatectomía/métodos , Hiperplasia Prostática/cirugía , Neoplasias de la Próstata/terapia , Factores de Riesgo , Resección Transuretral de la Próstata , Resultado del Tratamiento , Pamoato de Triptorelina/uso terapéutico
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA