ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Published results of HistoScanning™ (HS) for prostate cancer (PCa) diagnostics are inconsistent and their value remains unclear. We prospectively analyzed the detection rate and tumor volume concordance in PCa patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two hundred and eighty-two patients with biopsy-proven PCa scheduled for radical prostatectomy (RP) were included. All patients underwent ultrasonographical examination by HS prior to surgery. HS was evaluated compared to RP specimen as to (1) the prediction of overall tumor volume and (2) accuracy of HS in detection of PCa lesions larger than 0.2/0.5 ml, separated for each sextant. For each sextant, receiver operating characteristic (ROC)-analysis and area under the curve were determined. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated and visualized in ROC-curves. RESULTS: HS tends to underestimate volume of cancerous lesions, particularly larger lesions >8 ml. Using a 0.2 ml detection threshold, specificity and sensitivity of HS were between 29-68% and 46-78%. For a 0.5 ml detection threshold, sextant-specific specificity increased to 59-92% and sensitivity decreased to 16-54%. Stratification according to pre-operational PSA values did not improve performance characteristics of HS. CONCLUSIONS: Our results do not support a significant contribution of HS to PCa diagnostics.
Subject(s)
Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Ultrasonography/methods , Adult , Aged , Area Under Curve , Biopsy , Humans , Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted , Male , Middle Aged , Predictive Value of Tests , Prostatectomy , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , Prostatic Neoplasms/surgery , ROC Curve , Reproducibility of Results , Tumor BurdenABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To report our experience with temsirolimus in 2nd-, 3rd- and 4th-line therapy for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In our prospectively maintained tumor registry, we identified 6 mRCC patients with temsirolimus in >1st-line systemic therapy. Patients were followed by weekly clinical and laboratory examination during admission of temsirolimus. Re-staging with chest CT and abdominal MRI was performed every 3 months. RESULTS: We observed excellent response rates. Progression-free survival (PFS) ranged from 6 to 40 months with a median of 15 months. Treatment was generally well tolerated. However, pneumonitis was observed in 4 of 6 patients. Drug-related pneumonitis led to severe dyspnea, with the result that treatment with temsirolimus had to be interrupted for a short period of time in 2 patients and discontinued in 1 patient. CONCLUSIONS: Temsirolimus proved to be a very good treatment option in 2nd- to 4th-line therapy with excellent response rates and manageable side effects. The incidence of pneumonitis must not be underestimated.
