D'Amico risk stratification correlates with degree of suspicion of prostate cancer on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging.

PURPOSE: We determined whether there is a correlation between D'Amico risk stratification and the degree of suspicion of prostate cancer on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging based on targeted biopsies done with our electromagnetically tracked magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion platform. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 101 patients underwent 3 Tesla multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate, consisting of T2, dynamic contrast enhanced, diffusion weighted and spectroscopy images in cases suspicious for or with a diagnosis of prostate cancer. All prostate magnetic resonance imaging lesions were then identified and graded by the number of positive modalities, including low-2 or fewer, moderate-3 and high-4 showing suspicion on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. The biopsy protocol included standard 12-core biopsy, followed by real-time magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion targeted biopsies of the suspicious magnetic resonance lesions. Cases and lesions were stratified by the D'Amico risk stratification. RESULTS: In this screening population 90.1% of men had a negative digital rectal examination. Mean±SD age was 62.7±8.3 years and median prostate specific antigen was 5.8 ng/ml. Of the cases 54.5% were positive for cancer on protocol biopsy. Chi-square analysis revealed a statistically significant correlation between magnetic resonance suspicion and D'Amico risk stratification (p<0.0001). Within cluster resampling demonstrated a statistically significant correlation between magnetic resonance suspicion and D'Amico risk stratification for magnetic resonance targeted core biopsies and magnetic resonance lesions (p<0.01) CONCLUSIONS: Our data support the notion that using multiparametric magnetic resonance prostate imaging one may assess the degree of risk associated with magnetic resonance visible lesions in the prostate.

The impact of a negative (111)indium-capromab pendetide scan before salvage radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: We determined the prognostic role, if any, of the ProstaScint (111)indium-capromab pendetide scan before salvage radiotherapy for biochemical recurrence after RP for localized prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed the records of 649 patients who underwent a ProstaScint scan from 1998 to 2004. A total of 44 patients were identified who had biochemical recurrence after RP and underwent a ProstaScint scan immediately before salvage radiotherapy. All patients received salvage radiotherapy to the prostatic bed unless pelvic lymph node uptake was identified on the scan, resulting in initial whole pelvic radiotherapy with 45 Gy, followed by a conformal boost to the prostate bed in 6. The median salvage radiotherapy dose to the prostate bed was 72 Gy. Patient demographics, pathological information, PSA values and ProstaScint results were collected retrospectively. The majority of ProstaScint scans were digitally fused with noncontrast pelvic computerized tomography images for interpretation. PSA progression after radiotherapy was defined using American Society for Therapeutic Radiation and Oncology criteria. RESULTS: At a mean followup of 22 months 43 of 44 patients (97%) experienced a PSA decrease after salvage radiotherapy with a mean PSA nadir of 0.16 ng/ml compared to a mean pre-radiotherapy PSA of 1.7 ng/ml. Of the 44 patients 15 (34%) showed post-radiotherapy PSA progression. When the entire cohort was analyzed, patients with negative ProstaScint scans had statistically lower post-radiotherapy PSA progression rates than patients with positive scans (1 of 10 or 10% vs 14 of 34 or 41%, p = 0.026). Patients with negative ProstaScint results were also statistically more likely to have a pre-radiotherapy PSA of less than 1.0 ng/ml (p = 0.005), no seminal vesicle involvement (p = 0.006), a greater mean PSA doubling time (p = 0.008) and received no hormone therapy (p = 0.003). When patients with pre-radiotherapy PSA less than 1.0 ng/ml were analyzed, a negative ProstaScint scan suggested but did not provide a statistically significant advantage over pre-radiotherapy PSA alone for predicting post-radiotherapy PSA progression (1 of 9 or 11% for negative vs 5 of 15 or 33% for positive scans, p = 0.20). CONCLUSIONS: Our early experience supports an improved prognosis in patients receiving salvage pelvic radiotherapy for biochemical recurrence after RP who have a negative pre-radiotherapy ProstaScint scan. However, this finding is not necessarily independent of pre-radiotherapy PSA.