ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)/ultrasound fusion biopsy (targeted biopsy or TB) may improve detection of high-grade cancers when compared to systematic biopsy (SB). OBJECTIVE: To assess TB in active surveillance (AS). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We retrospectively evaluated SB (12-core sector) and TB among 103 AS men undergoing surveillance biopsy, 54 men undergoing confirmatory biopsy (CB), and 73 men referred for diagnostic biopsy (DB; comparison group). Regions of interest (ROIs) on mpMRI were assigned a PI-RADS score and targeted if the score was ≥3. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Detection of Gleason score (GS) ≥7 by TB and SB was the outcome of interest, except in a multivariable model, for which any cancer was the outcome. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: GS ≥7was detected by either biopsy method in 25 men (24.3%) in the AS group, 12 men (22.2%) in the CB group, and 55 men (75.3%) in the DB group.GS ≥7 was found in 24.3% by SB + TB versus 20.4% by SB in the AS group (p=0.13); in 22.2% by SB + TB versus 16.7% by SB in the CB group (p=0.25); and in 75.3% by SB + TB versus 58.9% by SB in the DB group (p=0.002). The sensitivity for GS ≥7 detection was lower for TB than for SB (p=0.006) in the AS cohort (relative sensitivity ratio 0.33, 95% confidence interval 0.16-0.71). Higher PI-RADS score (4 vs 3, odds ratio [OR] 2.00, p=0.04; 5 vs 3, OR 4.74, p=0.02), lower MRI-estimated prostate volume (OR 1.20 per 10-cm3 lower volume, p=0.01), larger ROI (OR 1.04 per mm, p=0.02), and right-sided ROI (OR 2.27, p=0.01) were associated with finding cancer on TB. A potential limitation is that not all men who presented for biopsy underwent TB and the urologist was not blinded to MRI results before SB. CONCLUSIONS: Owing to the low relative sensitivity of mpMRI for detection of GS ≥7 disease, SB still needs to be performed for men on AS. PATIENT SUMMARY: This study suggests that image-guided prostate biopsy alone may not be informative for men enrolled in an active surveillance program for prostate cancer.
Subject(s)
Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Interventional , Prostate/pathology , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , Prostatic Neoplasms/therapy , Ultrasonography, Interventional , Watchful Waiting , Aged , Biopsy , Humans , Image-Guided Biopsy/methods , Male , Middle Aged , Multimodal Imaging/methods , Prostate-Specific Antigen/blood , Prostatic Neoplasms/blood , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
The Prostate Health Index (phi) has been FDA approved for decision-making regarding prostate biopsy. Phi has additionally been shown to positively correlate with tumor volume, extraprostatic disease and higher Gleason grade tumors. Here we describe a case in which an elevated phi encouraged biopsy of a gentleman undergoing active surveillance leading to reclassification of his disease as high risk prostate cancer.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To assess long-term outcomes of men with favorable-risk prostate cancer in a prospective, active-surveillance program. METHODS: Curative intervention was recommended for disease reclassification to higher cancer grade or volume on prostate biopsy. Primary outcomes were overall, cancer-specific, and metastasis-free survival. Secondary outcomes were the cumulative incidence of reclassification and curative intervention. Factors associated with grade reclassification and curative intervention were evaluated in a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: A total of 1,298 men (median age, 66 years) with a median follow-up of 5 years (range, 0.01 to 18.00 years) contributed 6,766 person-years of follow-up since 1995. Overall, cancer-specific, and metastasis-free survival rates were 93%, 99.9%, and 99.4%, respectively, at 10 years and 69%, 99.9%, and 99.4%, respectively, at 15 years. The cumulative incidence of grade reclassification was 26% at 10 years and was 31% at 15 years; cumulative incidence of curative intervention was 50% at 10 years and was 57% at 15 years. The median treatment-free survival was 8.5 years (range, 0.01 to 18 years). Factors associated with grade reclassification were older age (hazard ratio [HR], 1.03 for each additional year; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.06), prostate-specific antigen density (HR, 1.21 per 0.1 unit increase; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.46), and greater number of positive biopsy cores (HR, 1.47 for each additional positive core; 95% CI, 1.26 to 1.69). Factors associated with intervention were prostate-specific antigen density (HR, 1.38 per 0.1 unit increase; 95% CI, 1.22 to 1.56) and a greater number of positive biopsy cores (HR, 1.35 for one additional positive core; 95% CI, 1.19 to 1.53). CONCLUSION: Men with favorable-risk prostate cancer should be informed of the low likelihood of harm from their diagnosis and should be encouraged to consider surveillance rather than curative intervention.
