Anterior prostate biopsy at initial and repeat evaluation: is it useful to detect significant prostate cancer?

PURPOSE: Detection rate for anterior prostate cancer (PCa) in men who underwent initial and repeat biopsy has been prospectively evaluated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From January 2013 to March 2014, 400 patients all of Caucasian origin (median age 63.5 years) underwent initial (285 cases) and repeat (115 cases) prostate biopsy; all the men had negative digital rectal examination and the indications to biopsy were: PSA values > 10 ng/mL, PSA between 4.1-10 or 2.6-4 ng/mL with free/total PSA≤ 25% and ≤ 20%, respectively. A median of 22 (initial biopsy) and 31 cores (repeat biopsy) were transperineally performed including 4 cores of the anterior zone (AZ) and 4 cores of the AZ plus 2 cores of the transition zone (TZ), respectively. RESULTS: Median PSA was 7.9 ng/mL; overall, a PCa was found in 180 (45%) patients: in 135 (47.4%) and 45 (36%) of the men who underwent initial and repeat biopsy, respectively. An exclusive PCa of the anterior zone was found in the 8.9 (initial biopsy) vs 13.3% (repeat biopsy) of the men: a single microfocus of cancer was found in the 61.2% of the cases; moreover, in 7 out 18 AZ PCa the biopsy histology was predictive of significant cancer in 2 (28.5%) and 5 (71.5%) men who underwent initial and repeat biopsy, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: However AZ biopsies increased detection rate for PCa (10% of the cases), the majority of AZ PCa with histological findings predictive of clinically significant cancer were found at repeat biopsy (about 70% of the cases).

Anterior prostate biopsy at initial and repeat evaluation: is it useful to detect significant prostate cancer?

ABSTRACT Purpose: Detection rate for anterior prostate cancer (PCa) in men who underwent initial and repeat biopsy has been prospectively evaluated. Materials and Methods: From January 2013 to March 2014, 400 patients all of Caucasian origin (median age 63.5 years) underwent initial (285 cases) and repeat (115 cases) prostate biopsy; all the men had negative digital rectal examination and the indications to biopsy were: PSA values > 10 ng/mL, PSA between 4.1-10 or 2.6-4 ng/mL with free/total PSA≤25% and ≤20%, respectively. A median of 22 (initial biopsy) and 31 cores (repeat biopsy) were transperineally performed including 4 cores of the anterior zone (AZ) and 4 cores of the AZ plus 2 cores of the transition zone (TZ), respectively. Results: Median PSA was 7.9 ng/mL; overall, a PCa was found in 180 (45%) patients: in 135 (47.4%) and 45 (36%) of the men who underwent initial and repeat biopsy, respectively. An exclusive PCa of the anterior zone was found in the 8.9 (initial biopsy) vs 13.3% (repeat biopsy) of the men: a single microfocus of cancer was found in the 61.2% of the cases; moreover, in 7 out 18 AZ PCa the biopsy histology was predictive of significant cancer in 2 (28.5%) and 5 (71.5%) men who underwent initial and repeat biopsy, respectively. Conclusions: However AZ biopsies increased detection rate for PCa (10% of the cases), the majority of AZ PCa with histological findings predictive of clinically significant cancer were found at repeat biopsy (about 70% of the cases).

PCA3 score and prostate cancer diagnosis at repeated saturation biopsy. Which cut-off: 20 or 35?

PURPOSE: To compare PCA3 score cut-off of 35 vs 20 in PCa diagnosis in patients undergoing repeated saturation prostate biopsy (SPBx). MATERIAL AND METHODS: From January 2010 to May 2011, 118 patients (median 62.5 years) with primary negative extended biopsy underwent a transperineal SPBx (median 30 cores) for persistent suspicion of PCa. The indications for repeated biopsy were: persistently high or increasing PSA values; PSA > 10 ng/mL, PSA values between 4.1-10 or 2.6-4 ng/mL with free/total PSA ≤ 25% and ≤ 20 %, respectively; moreover, before performing SPBx urinary PCA3 score was evaluated. RESULTS: All patients had negative DRE and median PSA was 8.5 ng/mL (range: 3.7-24 ng/mL). A T1c PCa was found in 32 patients (27.1 %): PCA3 score was 59 (median; range: 7-201) in the presence of PCa and 35 (median; range: 3-253) in the absence of cancer (p < 0.05). In the presence of ASAP and HGPIN median PCA3 score was 109 (range: 42-253) and 40 (range: 30-140), respectively. Diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of PCA3 score cut-off of 20 vs 35 in PCa diagnosis were 44.9 vs 50 %, 90.6 vs 71.9 %, 27.9 vs 41.8 %, 31.9 vs 31.5 % and 88.9 vs 80 %, respectively. ROC analysis demonstrated an AUC for PCA3 ≥ 20 vs ≥ 35 of 0.678 and 0.634, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that PCA3 is more useful as an exclusion tool; moreover, setting a PCA3 cut-off at 20 vs 35, would have avoided 22.9 vs 38.1 % of biopsies while missing 9.4 % and 28 % diagnosis of PCa.

PCA3 score and prostate cancer diagnosis at repeated saturation biopsy. Which cut-off: 20 or 35?

PURPOSE: To compare PCA3 score cut-off of 35 vs 20 in PCa diagnosis in patients undergoing repeated saturation prostate biopsy (SPBx). MATERIALS AND METHODS: From January 2010 to May 2011, 118 patients (median 62.5 years) with primary negative extended biopsy underwent a transperineal SPBx (median 30 cores) for persistent suspicion of PCa. The indications for repeated biopsy were: persistently high or increasing PSA values; PSA > 10 ng/mL, PSA values between 4.1-10 or 2.6-4 ng/mL with free/total PSA ≤ 25% and ≤ 20%, respectively; moreover, before performing SPBx urinary PCA3 score was evaluated. RESULTS: All patients had negative DRE and median PSA was 8.5 ng/mL (range: 3.7-24 ng/mL). A T1c PCa was found in 32 patients (27.1%): PCA3 score was 59 (median; range: 7-201) in the presence of PCa and 35 (median; range: 3-253) in the absence of cancer (p < 0.05). In the presence of ASAP and HGPIN median PCA3 score was 109 (range: 42-253) and 40 (range: 30-140), respectively. Diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of PCA3 score cut-off of 20 vs 35 in PCa diagnosis were 44.9 vs 50%, 90.6 vs 71.9%, 27.9 vs 41.8%, 31.9 vs 31.5% and 88.9 vs 80%, respectively. ROC analysis demonstrated an AUC for PCA3 ≥ 20 vs ≥ 35 of 0.678 and 0.634, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that PCA3 is more useful as an exclusion tool; moreover, setting a PCA3 cut-off at 20 vs 35, would have avoided 22.9 vs 38.1% of biopsies while missing 9.4% and 28% diagnosis of PCa.