Clinicians are poor raters of life-expectancy before radical prostatectomy or definitive radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To test the accuracy of predicting life-expectancy (LE) among 19 raters, as the accurate prediction of LE in candidates for definitive therapy for localized prostate cancer is crucial, and little is known of the ability of clinicians to predict LE. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We randomly selected the case-vignettes of 50 patients treated with either radical prostatectomy (RP, 25) or external beam radiotherapy (EBRT, 25) for prostate cancer, and who either survived for > 10 years or died earlier with no evidence of disease relapse. The median age at treatment was 67 years and the median Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) was 2. The raters consisted of urology staff (six), urology residents (10) and medical students (three). The case-vignettes included patient age, comorbidities and CCI score, and raters were asked to predict the survival at 10 years (yes vs no), assuming no disease relapse. RESULTS: Of the 50 cases, 20 (40%) did not survive for > 10 years; clinicians estimated a mean (range) of 23 (10-35) deaths before 10 years. The mean (95% confidence interval) overall predictive accuracy (0.5 = chance, 1.0 = perfect prediction) of LE predictions was 0.68 (0.64-0.71). Individual accuracy ranged from 0.52 (staff) to 0.78 (staff). There were no important differences among the rater groups (residents 0.69 vs staff 0.67 vs medical students 0.67). CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians are relatively poor at predicting LE; tools to predict LE might be able to improve clinicians' performance in this important part of decision-making about prostate cancer treatment. It remains to be determined whether this limitation exclusively applies to prostate cancer or also to other malignancies.

Early detection of prostate cancer with ultrasound-guided systematic needle biopsy.

INTRODUCTION: Prostate biopsy strategies have greatly evolved over the past 2 decades. METHODS: We performed a literature review which addressed the initial and repeat biopsy schemes, pathologic risk factors for a positive repeat biopsy, and the ideal timing as well as the number of repeat biopsy sessions. RESULTS: Extended biopsy schemes (11-13 cores) should be used at initial and repeat biopsy. In the era of extended biopsy schemes, high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia no longer represents an independent predictor of prostate cancer on repeat biopsy. Conversely, the risk is appreciably increased with atypical small acinar proliferation, and its presence warrants a repeat biopsy, which may be performed as soon as the pathologic findings of the previous biopsy become available. Second and subsequent repeat biopsies carry a low detection yield. In most instances, the decision regarding the indications and the timing of a third or subsequent biopsy may be made after a 6 to 12 months interval following the repeat biopsy. CONCLUSION: Biopsy strategies and pathologic predictors of an increased risk of prostate cancer have appreciably changed over the past 2 decades.

A prospective randomized trial of 1-day versus 3-day antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy.

PURPOSE: To compare the incidence of infection between a 1 day and a 3 day antibiotic prophylaxis regimen for transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy in a prospective, randomized open-label trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: TRUS examination was performed in the left lateral decubitus position using a Brüel and Kjaer 7 MHz rectal probe. Biopsies were carried out with an 18 gauge Tru-cut needle fired by the hand-held Biopsy gun. An average of eight core biopsies (range 6 to 12) was taken. From May 15, 2000 to May 16, 2001, 363 patients were enrolled in this study. Patients were randomized to receive either 1 day or 3 days of fluroquinolone antibiotic prophylaxis, consisting of either ciprofloxacin or levofloxacin orally. Antibiotics were begun at least 1 hour prior to biopsy. Seven days later, telephone follow-up was obtained. RESULTS: Two (0.55%) of the 363 patients, one in each group, had an episode of sepsis. No urinary tract infection was reported. Traumatic complications were only minor and no significant difference was observed between both groups: hematospermia (p> 0.4), hematuria (p>0.1) and rectorragia (p>0.2) being reported most frequently. CONCLUSION: There is no clinically nor statistically significant difference between a 1 day and 3 day antibiotic prophylaxis regimen for patients undergoing TRUS guided biopsies.