Comparison of Transrectal Ultrasound Biopsy to Transperineal Template Mapping Biopsies Stratified by Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Score in the PROMIS Trial.


Journal

The Journal of urology
ISSN: 1527-3792
Titre abrégé: J Urol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0376374

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 2020
Historique:
pubmed: 25 7 2019
medline: 31 12 2019
entrez: 24 7 2019
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

We evaluated the performance of transrectal ultrasound guided systematic and transperineal template mapping biopsies with a 5 mm sampling frame stratified by the multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging Likert score in the PROMIS (Prostate MR Imaging Study). Biopsy naïve men due to undergo prostate biopsy for elevated prostate specific antigen and/or abnormal digital rectal examination underwent multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, and transperineal template mapping and transrectal ultrasound guided systematic biopsies, which were performed and reported while blinded to other test results. Clinically significant prostate cancer was primarily defined as Gleason 4 + 3 or greater, or a maximum cancer core length of 6 mm or more of any grade. It was secondarily defined as Gleason 3 + 4 or greater, or a maximum cancer core length of 4 mm or more of any grade. In 41 months 740 men were recruited at a total of 11 centers, of whom 576 underwent all 3 tests. Eight of the 150 men (5.1%) with a multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging score of 1-2 had any Gleason 3 + 4 or greater disease on transrectal ultrasound guided systematic biopsy. Of the 75 men in whom transrectal ultrasound guided systematic biopsy showed Gleason 3 + 3 of any maximum cancer core length 61 (81%) had Gleason 3 + 4, 8 (11%) had Gleason 4 + 3 and 0 (0%) had Gleason 4 + 5 or greater disease. For definition 1 (clinically significant prostate cancer) transrectal ultrasound guided systematic biopsy sensitivity remained stable and low across multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging Likert scores of 35% to 52%. For definition 2 (clinically significant prostate cancer and any cancer) sensitivity increased with higher multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging scores. The negative predictive value varied due to varying disease prevalence but for all cancer thresholds it declined with increasing multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging scores. In the setting of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging Likert scores 1-2 transrectal ultrasound guided systematic biopsy revealed Gleason 3 + 4 disease in only 1 of 20 men. Further, for any clinically significant prostate cancer definition transrectal ultrasound guided systematic biopsy had poor sensitivity and variable but a low negative predictive value across multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging scores. Men who undergo transrectal ultrasound guided systematic biopsy without targeting in the setting of a multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging score of 3 to 5 should be advised to undergo repeat (targeted) biopsy.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31335254
doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000000455
doi:

Types de publication

Comparative Study Journal Article Multicenter Study

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

100-107

Subventions

Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MC_UU_12023/20
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MC_UU_12023/28
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MC_UU_12023/6
Pays : United Kingdom

Commentaires et corrections

Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn

Auteurs

Catherine E Lovegrove (CE)

Department of Urology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS (National Health Service) Trust, London, United Kingdom.

Saiful Miah (S)

Department of Urology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS (National Health Service) Trust, London, United Kingdom.

Ahmed El-Shater Bosaily (A)

Department of Urology, University College London NHS Foundation Trust and Imperial Prostate, London, United Kingdom.

Simon Bott (S)

Department of Urology, Frimley Park Hospital, NHS Frimley Health Foundation Trust, Frimley, United Kingdom.

Louise Brown (L)

Department of Urology, Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, London, United Kingdom.

Nick Burns-Cox (N)

Department of Urology, Musgrove Park Hospital and Somerset NHS Foundation Trust, Taunton, United Kingdom.

Tim Dudderidge (T)

Department of Urology, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, Maidstone, United Kingdom.

Alex Freeman (A)

Department of Histopathology, University College London NHS Foundation Trust and Imperial Prostate, London, United Kingdom.

Alastair Henderson (A)

Department of Urology, Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust, Tunbridge Wells, United Kingdom.

Richard Hindley (R)

Department of Urology, Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom.

Richard Kaplan (R)

Department of Urology, Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, London, United Kingdom.

Alex Kirkham (A)

Department of Radiology, University College London NHS Foundation Trust and Imperial Prostate, London, United Kingdom.

Rob Oldroyd (R)

Public and Patient Representative, Nottingham, United Kingdom.

Chris Parker (C)

Department of Academic Urology, Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton, United Kingdom.

Raj Persad (R)

Department of Urology, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom.

Shonit Punwani (S)

Department of Radiology, University College London NHS Foundation Trust and Imperial Prostate, London, United Kingdom.

Derek Rosario (D)

Department of Urology, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, United Kingdom.

Iqbal Shergill (I)

Department of Urology, Wrexham Maelor Hospital NHS Trust, Wrexham, United Kingdom.

Mathias Winkler (M)

Department of Urology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS (National Health Service) Trust, London, United Kingdom.

Mark Emberton (M)

Department of Urology, University College London NHS Foundation Trust and Imperial Prostate, London, United Kingdom.

Hashim U Ahmed (HU)

Department of Urology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS (National Health Service) Trust, London, United Kingdom.
Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH