Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted and Systematic Biopsy for Detection of Grade Progression in Patients on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer.
Yerram, Nitin K; Long, Lori; O'Connor, Luke P; Wang, Alex Z; Ahdoot, Michael; Lebastchi, Amir H; Gurram, Sandeep; Zeng, Johnathan; Chalfin, Heather; Harmon, Stephanie A; Mehralivand, Sherif; Merino, Maria J; Parnes, Howard L; Choyke, Peter L; Shih, Joanna; Wood, Bradford J; Turkbey, Baris; Pinto, Peter A.
Afiliação
  • Yerram NK; Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Long L; Center for Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • O'Connor LP; Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Wang AZ; Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Ahdoot M; Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Lebastchi AH; Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Gurram S; Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Zeng J; Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Chalfin H; Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Harmon SA; Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Mehralivand S; Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Merino MJ; Laboratory of Pathology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Parnes HL; Laboratory of Pathology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Choyke PL; Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Shih J; Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institutes, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Wood BJ; Center for Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Turkbey B; Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Pinto PA; Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
J Urol ; 205(5): 1352-1360, 2021 05.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33356479
ABSTRACT

PURPOSE:

Active surveillance for patients with low and intermediate risk prostate cancers is becoming a more utilized option in recent years. However, the use of magnetic resonance imaging and imaging-targeted biopsy for monitoring grade progression has been poorly studied in this population. We aim to define the utility of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy and systematic biopsy in an active surveillance population. MATERIALS AND

METHODS:

Between July 2007 and January 2020, patients with diagnosed prostate cancer who elected active surveillance were monitored with prostate magnetic resonance imaging, imaging-targeted biopsy and standard systematic biopsy. Patients were eligible for surveillance if diagnosed with any volume Gleason grade 1 disease and select Gleason grade 2 disease. Grade progression (Gleason grade 1 to ≥2 disease and Gleason grade 2 to ≥3 disease) for each biopsy modality was measured at 2 years, 4 years and 6+ years.

RESULTS:

In total, 369 patients had both magnetic resonance imaging-targeted and systematic biopsy and were surveilled for at least 1 year. At 2 years, systematic biopsy, magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy and combined biopsy (systematic+imaging-targeted) detected grade progression in 44 patients (15.9%), 73 patients (26.4%) and 90 patients (32.5%), respectively. Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy detected more cancer grade progression compared to systematic biopsy in both the low and intermediate risk populations (p <0.001). Of all 90 grade progressions at the 2-year time point 46 (51.1%) were found by magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy alone and missed by systematic biopsy.

CONCLUSIONS:

Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy detected significantly more grade progressions in our active surveillance cohort compared to systematic biopsy at 2 years. Our results provide compelling evidence that prostate magnetic resonance imaging and imaging-targeted biopsy should be included in contemporary active surveillance protocols.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias da Próstata / Conduta Expectante Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Guideline / Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Screening_studies Limite: Aged / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias da Próstata / Conduta Expectante Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Guideline / Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Screening_studies Limite: Aged / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article