[68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/mpMRI for local detection of primary prostate cancer in men with a negative prior biopsy]. / 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/mpMRT zur Lokaldetektion des primären Prostatakarzinom bei Männern mit negativer Vorbiopsie.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) represents the current gold standard for the detection of primary prostate cancer (PC) after a negative biopsy. PSMA PET imaging has been introduced in the diagnostic work-up of PC with high accuracy, but is currently mainly utilised in the setting of biochemical recurrence. This study aimed to determine the efficacy of combined 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/mpMRI imaging to detect PC in patients with previously negative prostate biopsies. METHODS: A total of 57 patients who had undergone at least one prior negative prostate biopsy were included in this retrospective analysis. All patients underwent 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/mpMRI imaging of the prostate. mpMRI was evaluated according to the PIRADS classification system and 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET was rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1: PC highly unlikely; 2: PC unlikely; 3: presence of PC is equivocal; 4: PC likely; 5: PC highly likely). All patients received a systematic random biopsy as well as a targeted transrectal biopsy of lesions suspicious on imaging. Imaging and histological biopsy outcomes were compared on a per-patient basis. RESULTS: In the histological analysis, 35/57 (61.4 %) patients harboured PC lesions. In patients with biopsy-proven PC, 21/35 (60.0 %) had a PI-RADS 4 or 5 lesion on mpMRI and 28 /35 (80.0 %) had a PET rating of 4 or 5. Combined 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/mpMRI missed only one patient with a Gleason score (GS) 7a tumour (rating of 1 or 2 in both PET and mpMRI). Limitations include the retrospective analysis as well as possible false negative biopsy results even in a fusion biopsy setting. CONCLUSION: In this initial analysis, the combined 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/mpMRI proved to be a valuable imaging tool to guide prostate biopsies for the detection of PC in patients with a negative prior biopsy. In this approach, 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET and mpMRI show partially complementary findings that enhance the detection of PC lesions.

Adherence to pelvic lymph node dissection recommendations according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network pelvic lymph node dissection guideline and the D'Amico lymph node invasion risk stratification.

PURPOSE: To assess adherence rates to pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) according to National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) PLND guideline (2% or higher risk) and D'Amico lymph node invasion (LNI) risk stratification (intermediate/high risk) in contemporary North American patients with prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy (RP). MATERIAL AND METHODS: We relied on 49,358 patients treated with RP and PLND (2010-2013) in SEER database. Adherence rates were quantified and multivariable (MVA) logistic regression analyses tested for independent predictors. RESULTS: According to NCCN PLND guideline and D'Amico LNI classification, PLND was recommended in 63.3% and 64.9% of patients, respectively. Corresponding adherence rates were 68.8% and 69.1%. Adherence rates improved from 67.3% to 71.6% and from 67.6% to 72.0%, respectively, over time. In MVA, more advanced clinical stage, higher biopsy Gleason score and higher number of positive biopsy cores predicted PLNDs that were performed below NCCN LNI nomogram risk threshold. Conversely, lower clinical stage, lower PSA and lower biopsy Gleason score predicted PLND omission in individuals with risk level above NCCN LNI nomogram risk threshold. MVA results for D'Amico classification were virtually identical. CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to NCCN PLND guideline and D'Amico LNI classification for purpose of PLND is suboptimal in SEER population-based patients treated with RP. However, adherence rates have improved over time. Patients, who did not undergo PLND despite elevated LNI risk, had more favorable PCa characteristics than the average. Conversely, patients, who underwent PLND despite low-risk, had worse PCa characteristics than the average.

Comparison of 11 Active Surveillance Protocols in Contemporary European Men Treated With Radical Prostatectomy.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare 11 active surveillance (AS) protocols in contemporary European men treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) at the Martini-Clinic Prostate Cancer Center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Analyzed were 3498 RP patients, from 2005 to 2016, who underwent ≥ 10 core biopsies and fulfilled at least 1 of 11 examined AS entry definitions. We tested proportions of AS eligibility, ineligibility, presence of primary Gleason 4/5, upstage, and combinations thereof at RP, as well as 5-year biochemical recurrence-free survival (BFS). RESULTS: The most and least stringent criteria were very low risk National Comprehensive Cancer Network and Royal Marsden with 18.8% and 96.1% of AS-eligible patients, respectively. Rates of primary Gleason 4/5 at RP, upstaging, or both features, respectively, ranged from 2.3% to 6.7%, 6.1% to 18.2%, and 7.1% to 21.0% for those 2 AS entry definitions. The range of individuals deemed AS-ineligible between the same 2 AS entry definitions, despite not harboring unfavorable pathology (primary Gleason pattern 4/5, upstage, or both), was 80.3% to 3.7%, 78.3% to 3.4%, and 77.8% to 3.4%, respectively. BFS rates showed narrow variability, with a range of 85.9% to 91.8%. CONCLUSION: Use of stringent AS entry definitions reduces the number of AS-eligible patients, which is related to a select range in individual entry parameters. Moreover, rates of unfavorable pathology at RP as much as tripled between most and least stringent AS entry definitions. However, less stringent AS entry definitions result in the lowest AS-ineligibility rates, in men without unfavorable pathology. BFS rates were virtually invariably high. Clinicians should know differences in key parameters underlying each AS entry definition, associated effect on rates of eligibility, and potential misclassification of individuals.

North American Population-Based Validation of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Practice Guideline Recommendation of Pelvic Lymphadenectomy in Contemporary Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommend a pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) in prostate cancer (PCa) patients treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) if a nomogram predicted risk of lymph node invasion (LNI) is ≥2%. We examined this and other thresholds, including nomogram validation. METHODS: We examined records of 26,713 patients treated with RP and PLND between 2010 and 2013, within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Nomogram thresholds of 2-5% were tested and external validation was performed. RESULTS: LNI was recorded in 4.7% of patients. Nomogram accuracy was 80.4% and maintained minimum accuracy of 75.6% in subgroup analyses, according to age, race, and nodal yield >10. With the NCCN recommended 2% nomogram threshold, PLND could be avoided in 22.3% of patients at the expense of missing 3.0% of individuals with LNI. Alternative thresholds of 3%, 4%, and 5% yielded respective PLND avoidance rates of 60.4%, 71.0%, and 79.8% at the expense of missing 17.8%, 27.2%, and 36.6% of patients with LNI. NCCN cut-off recommendation was best satisfied with a threshold of <2.6%, at which PLND could be avoided in 13,234 patients (49.5%) versus missing 141 patients with LNI (11.2%). CONCLUSION: NCCN LNI nomogram remains accurate in contemporary patients. However, the 2% threshold appears to be too strict, since only 22.3% of PLNDs can be avoided, instead of the stipulated 47.7%. The optimal 2.6% threshold allows a higher rate of PLND avoidance (49.5%), at the cost of 11.2% missed instances of LNI, as recommended by NCCN guidelines. PATIENT SUMMARY. External validation in contemporary SEER prostate cancer patients showed that the NCCN nomogram remains accurate for predicting lymph node invasion and seems to be optimal at an alternative 2.6% threshold, with best ratio of avoided pelvic lymph node dissections (49.5%) and missed LNIs (11.2%), as recommended by NCCN guideline. Prostate 77:542-548, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Blood transfusions in radical prostatectomy: a contemporary population-based analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the homologous blood transfusion (HBT), autologous blood transfusion (ABT) and intraoperative blood conservation technique (IOBCT) rates and trends at open (ORP) and minimally invasive radical prostatectomy (MIRP). METHODS: The Nationwide Inpatient Sample was queried. Multivariable logistic regression models focused on all three transfusion types. Covariables consisted of procedure specific annual hospital caseload (AHC), year of surgery, age, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and region. RESULTS: Overall, 119,966 patients underwent radical prostatectomy between 1998 and 2007. The HBT, ABT, and IOBCT rates were 6.2%, 6.0%, and 1.2%, respectively. HBT rates ranged from 5.1-5.1% between 1998 and 2007 (P=.49) vs 9.4-2.7% (P<.001) for ABT vs 1.9-0.9% (P=.003) for IOBCT in the same time period, respectively. In multivariable analyses, ORP patients treated at intermediate (odds ratio [OR] 1.48, P=.003) and low (OR 2.73, P<.001) AHC institutions were more likely to receive an HBT than ORP patients treated at high AHC institutions. Conversely, MIRP patients treated at high (OR 0.46, P=.040), intermediate (OR 0.27, P=.001), and low (OR 0.59, P=.015) AHC institutions were less likely to receive an HBT than ORP patients treated at high AHC institutions. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that the overall transfusion rate at radical prostatectomy decreased within the last decade because of a substantial decline in ABT use. Moreover, MIRP protects from HBT, even when performed at low AHC Centers.

Comparative study of inguinal hernia repair after radical prostatectomy, prostate biopsy, transurethral resection of the prostate or pelvic lymph node dissection.

PURPOSE: Inguinal hernia is considered one of the major morbidities after radical prostatectomy. We compared inguinal hernia repair rates in patients treated with radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer relative to those of 2 nonsurgically treated groups of patients, namely individuals who underwent prostate biopsy or transurethral resection of the prostate, and a surgically treated group of patients who underwent pelvic lymph node dissection, within a large North American database. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the Quebec Health Plan database we identified 5,478 men treated with radical prostatectomy vs 6,933, 7,697 and 532 who underwent prostate biopsy, transurethral resection of the prostate or pelvic lymph node dissection, respectively, between 1990 and 2000. Kaplan-Meier plots graphically explored inguinal hernia repair rates. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses examined variables associated with inguinal hernia repair after either group. Covariates consisted of age, year of treatment and the Charlson comorbidity index. RESULTS: The 1, 2, 5 and 10-year inguinal hernia repair rates after radical prostatectomy were 4.4%, 6.7%, 11.7% and 17.1%, respectively. For the same points after prostate biopsy the rates were 1.7%, 2.9%, 6.1% and 9.8% vs 1.7%, 2.6%, 5.5% and 9.2%, respectively, after transurethral resection of the prostate, and 0.8%, 2.4%, 4.9% and 9.3% after pelvic lymph node dissection (pairwise log rank tests p <0.001). On multivariable Cox regression analyses the rate of inguinal hernia repair was 1.9, 2.1 and 1.7-fold higher for patients who underwent radical prostatectomy vs prostate biopsy, transurethral resection of the prostate and pelvic lymph node dissection, respectively (all p <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Radical prostatectomy predisposes to higher inguinal hernia repair rates than in the 3 examined control groups. A higher rate of inguinal hernia repair after radical prostatectomy warrants consideration in the discussion of radical prostatectomy perioperative complications.