RESUMEN
PURPOSE OF THE REPORT: Although multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is commonly used for the primary staging of prostate cancer, it may miss non-enlarged metastatic lymph nodes. Positron emission tomography-computed tomography targeting the prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA PET-CT) is a promising method to detect non-enlarged metastatic lymph nodes, but more data are needed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this single-center, prospective study, we enrolled patients with intermediate-to-high-risk prostate cancer scheduled for radical prostatectomy with pelvic node dissection. Before surgery, prostate imaging with mpMRI and PSMA PET-CT was used to assess lymph node involvement (LNI), extra-prostatic extension (EPE), and seminal vesicle involvement (SVI). Additionally, we used clinical nomograms to estimate the risk of these three outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 74 patients included, 61 (82%) had high-risk prostate cancer, and the rest had intermediate-risk cancer. Histopathology revealed LNI in 20 (27%) patients, SVI in 26 (35%), and EPE in 52 (70%). PSMA PET-CT performed better than mpMRI at detecting LNI (area under the curve (AUC, 95% confidence interval): 0.779 (0.665-0.893) vs. 0.655 (0.529-0.780)), but mpMRI was better at detecting SVI (AUC: 0.775 (0.672-0.878) vs. 0.585 (0.473-0.698)). The MSKCC nomogram performed well at detecting both LNI (AUC: 0.799 (0.680-0.918)) and SVI (0.772 (0.659-0.885)). However, when the nomogram was used to derive binary diagnoses, decision curve analyses showed that the MSKCC nomogram provided less net benefit than mpMRI and PSMA PET-CT for detecting SVI and LNI, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: mpMRI and [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET-CT are complementary techniques to be used in conjunction for the primary T and N staging of prostate cancer.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Data on Gleason pattern 4 (GP4) amount in biopsy tissue is important for prostate cancer (PC) risk assessment. We aim to investigate which GP4 quantification method predicts adverse pathology (AP) at radical prostatectomy (RP) the best in men diagnosed with intermediate-risk (IR) PC at magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided biopsy. METHODS: We retrospectively included 123 patients diagnosed with IR PC (prostate-specific antigen <20 ng/mL, grade group (GG) 2 or 3, no iT3 on MRI) at MRI-guided biopsy, who underwent RP. Twelve GP4 amount-related parameters were developed, based on GP4 quantification method (absolute, relative to core, or cancer length) and site (overall, targeted, systematic biopsy, or worst specimen). Additionally, we calculated PV×GP4 (prostate volume × GP4 relative to core length in overall biopsy), aiming to represent the total GP4 volume in the prostate. The associations of GP4 with AP (GG ≥ 4, ≥pT3a, or pN1) were investigated. RESULTS: AP was reported in 39 (31.7%) of patients. GP4 relative to cancer length was not associated with AP. Of the 12 parameters, the highest ROC AUC value was seen for GP4 relative to core length in overall biopsy (0.65). an even higher AUC value was noted for PV × GP4 (0.67), with a negative predictive value of 82.8% at the optimal threshold. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of an association of GP4 relative to cancer length with AP, contrasted with the better performance of other parameters, indicates directions for future research on PC risk stratification to accurately identify patients who may not require immediate treatment. Incorporating formulas aimed at GP4 volume assessment may lead to obtaining models with the best discrimination ability.
RESUMEN
Combining systematic biopsy (SB) with targeted biopsy (TB) in the case of a positive result from multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is a matter of debate. The Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) score of 5 indicates the highest probability of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPC) detection in TB. Potentially, omitting SB in the case of PIRADS 5 may have a marginal impact on the csPC detection rate. The aim of this study was to determine whether SB can be avoided in the case of PIRADS 5 and to identify potential factors allowing for performing TB only. This cohort study involved n = 225 patients with PIRADS 5 on mpMRI (PIRADS 2.0/2.1) who underwent transperineal or transrectal combined biopsy (CB). CsPC was diagnosed in 51.6% (n = 116/225) of cases. TB and SB resulted in the detection of csPC in 48% (n = 108/225) and 20.4% (n = 46/225) of cases, respectively (TB vs. SB, p < 0.001). When the TB was positive, SB detected csPC in n = 38 of the cases (38/108 = 35%). SB added to TB significantly improved csPC detection in 6.9% of cases in absolute terms (n = 8/116) (TB vs. CB, p = 0.008). The multivariate regression model proved that the significant predictors of csPC detection via SB were the densities of the prostate-specific antigen-PSAD > 0.17 ng/mL2 (OR = 4.038, 95%CI: 1.568-10.398); primary biopsy setting (OR = 2.818, 95%CI: 1.334-5.952); and abnormal digital rectal examination (DRE) (OR = 2.746, 95%CI: 1.328-5.678). In a primary biopsy setting (n = 103), SB detected 10% (n = 6/60) of the additional cases of csPC (p = 0.031), while in a repeat biopsy setting (n = 122), SB detected 3.5% (n = 2/56) of the additional cases of csPC (p = 0.5). In the case of PSAD > 0.17 ng/mL2 (n = 151), SB detected 7.4% (n = 7/95) of additional cases of csPC (p = 0.016), while in the case of PSAD < 0.17 ng/mL2 (n = 74), SB detected 4.8% (n = 1/21) of the additional cases of csPC (p = 1.0). The omission of SB had an impact on the csPC diagnosis rate in patients with PIRADS 5 score lesions. Patients who have already undergone prostate biopsy and those with low PSAD are at a lower risk of missing csPC when SB is avoided. However, performing TB only may result in missing other csPC foci located outside the index lesion, which can alter treatment decisions.
RESUMEN
The presence of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) on prostate cancer cells and its metastases allows its use in diagnostics using PET/CT. The aim of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of delayed phase images in the Ga-68-PSMA-11 PET/CT. Methods: 108 patients with prostate cancer (median age: 68.5 years, range: 49−83) were referred for Ga-68-PSMA-11 PET/CT due to biochemical relapse (PSA (prostate-specific antigen) (3.2 ± 5.4 ng/mL). Examinations were performed at 60 min, with an additional delayed phase of the pelvis region at 120−180 min. Results: The Ga-68-PSMA-11 PET/CT showed lesions in 86/108 (80%) patients; detection rate depending on the PSA level: 0.2 < PSA < 0.5 ng/mL vs. 0.5 ≤ PSA < 1.0 ng/mL vs. 1.0 ≤ PSA < 2.0 ng/mL vs. PSA ≥ 2.0 ng/mL was 56% (standard vs. delay: 56 vs. 56%) vs. 60% (52 vs. 60%) vs. 87% (83 vs. 87%) vs. 82% (77 vs. 82%) of patients, respectively. The delayed phase had an impact on the treatment in 14/86 patients (16%) (p < 0.05): 7 pts increased uptake was seen only after 60 min, which was interpreted as physiological or inflammatory accumulation; the delayed image showed increased accumulation in 7 patients only: 4 in regional lymph nodes, 1 in local recurrence, and 2 patients with local recurrence showed additional foci. Conclusions: Delayed phase of Ga-68-PSMA-11 PET/CT has an impact on treatment management in 16% of patients.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: To investigate the role of mpMRI and high PIRADS score as independent triggers in the qualification of patients with ISUP 1 prostate cancer on biopsy to radical prostatectomy. METHODS: Between January 2017 and June 2019, 494 laparoscopic radical prostatectomies were performed in our institution, including 203 patients (41.1%) with ISUP 1 cT1c-2c PCa on biopsy. Data regarding biopsy results, digital rectal examination, PSA, mpMRI and postoperative pathological report have been retrospectively analysed. RESULTS: In 183 cases (90.1%) mpMRI has been performed at least 6 weeks after biopsy. Final pathology revealed ISUP Gleason Grade Group upgrade in 62.6% of cases. PIRADS 5, PIRADS 4 and PIRADS 3 were associated with Gleason Grade Group upgrade in 70.5%, 62.8%, 48.3% of patients on final pathology, respectively. Within PIRADS 5 group, the number of upgraded cases was statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: PIRADS score correlates with an upgrade on final pathology and may justify shared decision of radical treatment in patients unwilling to repeated biopsies. However, the use of PIRADS 5 score as a sole indicator for prostatectomy may result in nonnegligible overtreatment rate.
