Diagnostic Yield of Incremental Biopsy Cores and Second Lesion Sampling for In-Gantry MRI-Guided Prostate Biopsy.

BACKGROUND. In-gantry MRI-guided biopsy (MRGB) of the prostate has been shown to be more accurate than other targeted prostate biopsy methods. However, the optimal number of cores to obtain during in-gantry MRGB remains undetermined. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to assess the diagnostic yield of obtaining an incremental number of cores from the primary lesion and of second lesion sampling during in-gantry MRGB of the prostate. METHODS. This retrospective study included 128 men with 163 prostate lesions who underwent in-gantry MRGB between 2016 and 2019. The men had a total of 163 lesions sampled with two or more cores, 121 lesions sampled with three or more cores, and 52 lesions sampled with four or more cores. A total of 40 men underwent sampling of a second lesion. Upgrade on a given core was defined as a greater International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade group (GG) relative to the previously obtained cores. Clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) was defined as ISUP GG 2 or greater. RESULTS. The frequency of any upgrade was 12.9% (21/163) on core 2 versus 10.7% (13/121) on core 3 (p = .29 relative to core 2) and 1.9% (1/52) on core 4 (p = .03 relative to core 3). The frequency of upgrade to csPCa was 7.4% (12/163) on core 2 versus 4.1% (5/121) on core 3 (p = .13 relative to core 2) and 0% (0/52) on core 4 (p = .07 relative to core 3). The frequency of upgrade on core 2 was higher for anterior lesions (p < .001) and lesions with a higher PI-RADS score (p = .007); the frequency of upgrade on core 3 was higher for apical lesions (p = .01) and lesions with a higher PI-RADS score (p = .01). Sampling of a second lesion resulted in an upgrade in a single patient (2.5%; 1/40); both lesions were PI-RADS category 4 and showed csPCa. CONCLUSION. When performing in-gantry MRGB of the prostate, obtaining three cores from the primary lesion is warranted to optimize csPCa diagnosis. Obtaining a fourth core from the primary lesion or sampling a second lesion has very low yield in upgrading cancer diagnoses. CLINICAL IMPACT. To reduce patient discomfort and procedure times, operators may refrain from obtaining more than three cores or second lesion sampling.

Variability in Prices for Erectile Dysfunction Medications-Are All Pharmacies the Same?

BACKGROUND: Variability in prices of medications is a well-known phenomenon; however, this variability has not been quantified in the realm of erectile dysfunction (ED) medications. ED medications are ideal for this quantification, because they are often not covered by insurances; therefore, the cost is the most direct reflection of price variability among pharmacies as they affect the patients. AIM: To evaluate the variability in cash prices for phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors (PDEIs) for ED. We also evaluated whether certain types of pharmacies consistently offer better pricing than others, and whether there was any correlation with demographic factors. METHODS: 331 pharmacies were contacted within a 25-mile radius of our institution to obtain the cash price for 4 commonly used ED medications with prespecified doses. After exclusion, 323 pharmacies were categorized as chain, independent, wholesale, or hospital-associated. Cash prices for the specified medications were evaluated. In addition, we identified demographic and socioeconomic factors to determine if these had an impact on median drug pricing within each zip code. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The main outcome was the cost for patients to fill each prescription. RESULTS: Independent pharmacies provided the lowest cost for 3 of 4 of the PDEIs. The largest price difference for 10 tablets of 100 mg sildenafil between all pharmacies was 38,000%. The median cost difference between independent pharmacies and chain pharmacies for sildenafil was >900%, and >1,100% for independent pharmacies vs hospital-associated pharmacies. Demographic and socioeconomic factors had no impact on the cost. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Our goal is to promote patient counseling among practitioners and to empower patients to shop for the best prices for their medications. STRENGTH AND LIMITATIONS: A strength of the study is the large cohort that was surveyed; however, a weakness is that the large majority of the cohort was comprised of chain pharmacies. Mail pharmacies could not be evaluated as they required a valid prescription before offering prices. CONCLUSION: The drastic differences in cash prices for the PDEIs give us an insight into the variability and cost-inflation of medications in the United States. These patterns hold true for other essential medications as well, and improved transparency will allow patients to make informed decisions when choosing where to purchase their medications. It may also encourage certain pharmacies to provide medications at more affordable prices. Mishra K, Bukavina L, Mahran A, et al. Variability in prices for erectile dysfunction medications-Are all pharmacies the same? J Sex Med 2018;15:1785-1791.