Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
Tipo del documento
Asunto de la revista
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
BJU Int ; 131(6): 694-704, 2023 06.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36695816

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Primary objectives: to determine whether local anaesthetic transperineal prostate (LATP) biopsy improves the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa), defined as International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Grade Group ≥2 disease (i.e., any Gleason pattern 4 disease), compared to transrectal ultrasound-guided (TRUS) prostate biopsy, in biopsy-naïve men undergoing biopsy based on suspicion of csPCa. SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: to compare (i) infection rates, (ii) health-related quality of life, (iii) patient-reported procedure tolerability, (iv) patient-reported biopsy-related complications (including bleeding, bruising, pain, loss of erectile function), (v) number of subsequent prostate biopsy procedures required, (vi) cost-effectiveness, (vii) other histological parameters, and (viii) burden and rate of detection of clinically insignificant PCa (ISUP Grade Group 1 disease) in men undergoing these two types of prostate biopsy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The TRANSLATE trial is a UK-wide, multicentre, randomised clinical trial that meets the criteria for level-one evidence in diagnostic test evaluation. TRANSLATE is investigating whether LATP biopsy leads to a higher rate of detection of csPCa compared to TRUS prostate biopsy. Both biopsies are being performed with an average of 12 systematic cores in six sectors (depending on prostate size), plus three to five target cores per multiparametric/bi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging lesion. LATP biopsy is performed using an ultrasound probe-mounted needle-guidance device (either the 'Precision-Point' or BK UA1232 system). TRUS biopsy is performed according to each hospital's standard practice. The study is 90% powered to detect a 10% difference (LATP biopsy hypothesised at 55% detection rate for csPCa vs 45% for TRUS biopsy). A total of 1042 biopsy-naïve men referred with suspected PCa need to be recruited. CONCLUSIONS: This trial will provide robust prospective data to determine the diagnostic ability of LATP biopsy vs TRUS biopsy in the primary diagnostic setting.


Asunto(s)
Próstata , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Masculino , Humanos , Próstata/patología , Estudios Prospectivos , Calidad de Vida , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Biopsia/efectos adversos , Biopsia Guiada por Imagen/efectos adversos , Biopsia Guiada por Imagen/métodos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética/métodos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Estudios Multicéntricos como Asunto
2.
BMJ Open ; 9(3): e025161, 2019 03 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30852544

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether ETS-related gene (ERG) expression can be used as a biomarker to predict biochemical recurrence and prostate cancer-specific death in patients with high Gleason grade prostate cancer treated with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) as monotherapy. METHODS: A multicentre retrospective cohort study identifying 149 patients treated with primary ADT for metastatic or non-metastatic prostate cancer with Gleason score 8-10 between 1999 and 2006. Patients planned for adjuvant radiotherapy at diagnosis were excluded. Age at diagnosis, ethnicity, prostate-specific antigen and Charlson-comorbidity score were recorded. Prostatic tissue acquired at biopsy or transurethral resection surgery was assessed for immunohistochemical expression of ERG. Failure of ADT defined as prostate specific antigen nadir +2. Vital status and death certification data determined using the UK National Cancer Registry. Primary outcome measures were overall survival (OS) and prostate cancer specific survival (CSS). Secondary outcome was biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS). RESULTS: The median OS of our cohort was 60.2 months (CI 52.0 to 68.3). ERG expression observed in 51/149 cases (34%). Multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis showed no significant association between ERG expression and OS (p=0.41), CSS (p=0.92) and BRFS (p=0.31). Cox regression analysis showed Gleason score (p=0.003) and metastatic status (p<1×10-5) to be the only significant predictors of prostate CSS. CONCLUSIONS: No significant association was found between ERG status and any of our outcome measures. Despite a limited sample size, our results suggest that ERG does not appear to be a useful biomarker in predicting response to ADT in patients with high risk prostate cancer.


Asunto(s)
Antagonistas de Andrógenos/uso terapéutico , Biomarcadores de Tumor/metabolismo , Calicreínas/metabolismo , Antígeno Prostático Específico/metabolismo , Neoplasias de la Próstata/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias de la Próstata/metabolismo , Anciano , Estudios de Cohortes , Estudios de Seguimiento , Regulación Neoplásica de la Expresión Génica , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Pronóstico , Neoplasias de la Próstata/mortalidad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Tasa de Supervivencia
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA