ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: This study evaluated the value of pre-biopsy MRI and target biopsy in detection of significant prostate cancer in a peripheral center. METHODS: A retrospective study included all patients of whom a MRI of the prostate was performed before biopsy, initial and repeated biopsy, between June 2016 and May 2017. Patients underwent transrectal ultrasound guided 8-12 cores prostate biopsy and cognitive fusion target biopsy was performed if a suspicious lesion was seen on MRI. The prostate cancer detection was compared between the MRI cognitive target biopsy and standard random biopsy. RESULTS: In a total of 265 patients a MRI was performed of whom 115 underwent prostate biopsy, 96 patients underwent MRI before initial biopsies and 19 patients had previous negative biopsies. In the initial biopsy group 83 MRI's were abnormal and only 7 (8.4%) target biopsies had an additional value in detecting or upstaging prostate cancer. Prostate cancer was found in 4 of 13 (30.8%) normal MRI's. In the prior negative biopsy group, 4 of 18 abnormal MRI's had an additional value in upstaging or detecting prostate cancer. CONCLUSION: In this study the pre-biopsy MRI had a limited additional value compared to standard biopsy in detecting or upstaging prostate cancer.
Subject(s)
Prostatic Neoplasms , Humans , Image-Guided Biopsy , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Male , Prostate/diagnostic imaging , Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Trials in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) treatment have shown improved outcomes, including survival. However, as trial populations are selected, results may not be representative for the real-world population. The aim of this study was to assess the differences between patients treated in a clinical trial versus standard care during the course of CRPC in a real-world CRPC population. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Registry is a population-based, observational, retrospective registry. CRPC patients from 20 hospitals in the Netherlands have been included from 2010 to 2013. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Baseline characteristics, systemic treatment, and overall survival were the main outcomes. Descriptive statistics, multivariate Cox regression, and multiple imputations with the Monte Carlo Markov Chain method were used. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: In total, 1524 patients were enrolled of which 203 patients had participated in trials at any time. The median follow-up period was 23 mo. Patients in the trial group were significantly younger and had less comorbidities. Docetaxel treatment was more frequently used in trial patients (85% vs 40%). Despite an observed unadjusted median overall survival difference of 35 mo versus 24 mo between the trial and standard care group, this difference was not retained after adjustment for baseline characteristics and treatment effect. CONCLUSIONS: At CRPC diagnosis, the baseline characteristics of the patients who had been enrolled in trials notably differed from patients who received standard treatment options only. The survival difference between the trial and standard care group could be explained by baseline differences and treatment effects. These results indicate that trial results cannot easily be translated to real-world practice. PATIENT SUMMARY: We observed that patients treated in clinical trials differed from patients who were not. We concluded that this may lead to differential treatment and survival. Caution is warranted when real-world outcomes are compared with trial results.
