Expanded criteria in men on active surveillance monitored by MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. 115-115
Author(s):  
Thomas P Frye ◽  
Steven F. Abboud ◽  
Richard Ho ◽  
Michele Fascelli ◽  
Raju Chelluri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
Guided Biopsy ◽  
Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
Expanded Criteria ◽  
Clinically Significant

115 Background: Active surveillance (AS) is an established option for men with prostate cancer. Studies have shown that multiparametric-MRI along with MRI-TRUS fusion-guided biopsy (FB) may better assess risk in patients eligible for AS, compared to 12-core biopsy, due to improved detection of clinically significant cancers. The objective is to evaluate the performance of expanded criteria eligibility in men on AS being monitored with MRI-TRUS guided biopsy. Methods: Men on AS were included if they had mp-MRI and pathology data for 2 or more FB sessions. FB procedures consisted of targeted biopsies and random 12 core biopsies. Men participated in AS with low and intermediate risk prostate cancer, Gleason score ≤ 3+4=7 with no restriction on percent core involvement or number of cores positive. Progression was defined by patients with initial Gleason 3+3=6 to any Gleason 4, and Gleason 3+4=7 disease progressing to a primary Gleason 4 or higher. Results: 124 men on AS met study criteria. Low risk men had a mean age of 61.3 years versus intermediate risk men with a mean age of 65.5 years (p=0.0062). Mean PSA levels of the low and intermediate risk groups were 5.8 and 5.76 ng/ml (p=0.95), respectively. The mean length of follow-up was 22.56 months (range: 3.6 – 74.4 mo). Rates of pathologic progression in the intermediate and low risk patients were, 38.5% vs. 28.5% (p=0.33). Intermediate risk men had a mean progression-free survival (PFS) of 2.8 years compared to low risk men of 3.9 years (p=0.27). Patients were stratified according to established AS criteria (Epstein, Toronto, PRIAS) and rates of progression are summarized in the Table. 69% of patients met Epstein criteria for AS of which 29.4% (20/68) progressed compared to 28.5% for the low risk cohort overall. Conclusions: Men in our cohort who met strict criteria for AS had the same rate of progression as the entire expaned criteria low risk cohort, 29.4% vs 28.5%, respectively. Our data suggests that with accurate initial Gleason classification other AS criteria such as percent core or number of cores positive have no added benefit in predicting which men may have reclassification or progression of disease. [Table: see text]

Performance of MRI-TRUS-guided fusion biopsy to detect progression on active surveillance for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 43-43
Author(s):  
Thomas P. Frye ◽  
Nabeel Ahmad Shakir ◽  
Steven Abboud ◽  
Arvin Koruthu George ◽  
Maria J Merino ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
Targeted Biopsy ◽  
Fusion Biopsy ◽  
Trus Biopsy ◽  
Guided Biopsy ◽  
Risk Prostate Cancer

43 Background: Active surveillance (AS) is an established treatment option for men with low risk prostate cancer. Its role in intermediate prostate cancer is still being investigated. Recent studies have shown that multiparametric-MRI (mp-MRI) along with MRI-TRUS fusion-guided biopsy may better assess risk in patients eligible for AS, compared to 12-core biopsy, due to improved detection of clinically significant cancers. The objective is to determine the performance of MRI-TRUS guided biopsy for men on AS with both low and intermediate risk disease. Methods: Between 2007-2014 men on AS were included if they had complete mp-MRI and pathology data for 2 or more MRI-TRUS biopsy sessions. Fusion guided biopsy procedures consisted of MRI identified targeted biopsies as well as random 12 core biopsies. Men were allowed to participate in AS with low and intermediate risk prostate cancer, Gleason score ≤ 3+4=7. Progression was defined by patients with initial Gleason 3+3=6 to any Gleason 4, and Gleason 3+4=7 disease progressing to a primary Gleason 4 or higher. Results: 89 men met our study criteria with an average age of 62 years old (range 45-79). 75 men had low risk Gleason 3+3=6 at the outset of AS by 1st biopsy session with a median PSA 5.1 ng/ml. The other 14 men had intermediate risk prostate cancer Gleason 3+4=7 at the outset of AS and a median PSA 4.6 ng/ml. During follow-up, 25 (33%) low risk men progressed to 3+4 or above at a median of 20.6 months. Of these, 19 were found by targeted biopsy. 6 (43%) of the intermediate risk men progressed to Gleason 4+3=7 at a median of 36.8 months. 4 of these progressed on targeted fusion biopsy. In the intermediate risk men, 84 random biopsy cores were require to detect 1 progression versus 15 targeted biopsy cores to detect 1 progression. Conclusions: The majority of patients on AS who progressed were identified by MRI-TRUS targeted biopsy. Less biopsy cores are required to detect progression with targeted biopsy. These results are preliminary and a larger cohort with longer follow-up would be beneficial.

scholarly journals Prostate Cancer Grade and Stage Misclassification in Active Surveillance Candidates: Black Versus White Patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (11) ◽  
pp. 1492-1499
Author(s):  
Lara Franziska Stolzenbach ◽  
Giuseppe Rosiello ◽  
Angela Pecoraro ◽  
Carlotta Palumbo ◽  
Stefano Luzzago ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Temporal Trend ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
Multivariate Logistic Regression ◽  
Black Patients ◽  
Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
Misclassification Rates ◽  
White Patients

Background: Misclassification rates defined as upgrading, upstaging, and upgrading and/or upstaging have not been tested in contemporary Black patients relative to White patients who fulfilled criteria for very-low-risk, low-risk, or favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer. This study aimed to address this void. Methods: Within the SEER database (2010–2015), we focused on patients with very low, low, and favorable intermediate risk for prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy and had available stage and grade information. Descriptive analyses, temporal trend analyses, and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used. Results: Overall, 4,704 patients with very low risk (701 Black vs 4,003 White), 17,785 with low risk (2,696 Black vs 15,089 White), and 11,040 with favorable intermediate risk (1,693 Black vs 9,347 White) were identified. Rates of upgrading and/or upstaging in Black versus White patients were respectively 42.1% versus 37.7% (absolute Δ = +4.4%; P<.001) in those with very low risk, 48.6% versus 46.0% (absolute Δ = +2.6%; P<.001) in those with low risk, and 33.8% versus 35.3% (absolute Δ = –1.5%; P=.05) in those with favorable intermediate risk. Conclusions: Rates of misclassification were particularly elevated in patients with very low risk and low risk, regardless of race, and ranged from 33.8% to 48.6%. Recalibration of very-low-, low-, and, to a lesser extent, favorable intermediate-risk active surveillance criteria may be required. Finally, our data indicate that Black patients may be given the same consideration as White patients when active surveillance is an option. However, further validations should ideally follow.

Gleason score upgrade among 10,282 men who underwent surgery as initial treatment in 2010: A population-based study.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 72-72
Author(s):  
Hong Zhang ◽  
Edward M. Messing ◽  
Hamza Ahmed ◽  
Yuhchyau Chen
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Gleason Score ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Categorical Variables ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
Time Of Surgery ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Risk Prostate Cancer

72 Background: Active surveillance is now accepted initial management for men who have localized prostate cancer with low risk of disease progression. Many criteria have been used for patient identification, including Gleason score (GS) obtained from prostate biopsy. Because of concerns of sampling error, some have recommended repeated biopsy before committing to active surveillance. However, there is limited information about the risk of missing high grade disease using the current standard biopsy approach. This study seeks to compare GS difference from biopsy and surgery to provide an estimated rate of GS upgrade. Methods: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program was used to identify men with American Joint Committee on Cancer stage T1-2cN0M0 prostate cancer diagnosed between January 2010 and December 2010. Patients who underwent prostatectomy were selected for further analysis. Based on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels and GS, cases were divided into low (PSA <=10 and GS <=6) and intermediate (10<PSA<=20 or GS=7) risk groups. The rates of GS upgrade were reported for each group. Chi-square tests were used to assess differences in categorical variables (e.g. age and race) between groups of GS upgrade and no change/downgrade. Results: A total of 10,282 men were evaluated, with 9.2% (n=942) having low-risk disease, and 90.8% (n=9340) having intermediate-risk disease. Among men with low-risk prostate cancer, 22.3% (n=210) had GS upgrade and 0.8% (n=8) had GS 8 disease. Among men with intermediate risk disease, 26.2% (n=2446) had GS upgrade and 2.3% (n=214) had GS 8 disease. There was no statistically significant difference in either age or race distribution among men who had GS upgrade versus no change or downgrade at the time of surgery. Conclusions: A substantial number of low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients had GS upgrade at the time of surgery, but few had upgraded to GS 8 high risk disease. These observations suggest that repeat biopsy prior to active surveillance may not be necessary.

OncotypeDx genomic scores independent of disease volume in men with favorable-risk prostate cancer.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 93-93
Author(s):  
Dominic C. Grimberg ◽  
Yaw A. Nyame ◽  
Daniel J. Greene ◽  
Karishma Gupta ◽  
Ryan Kent Berglund ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
Psa Density ◽  
Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
Clinically Significant

93 Background: To determine if disease volume at biopsy correlates with GPS among men with favorable risk prostate cancer. Methods: All men with NCCN very low (VLR) and low risk (LR) and GPS from 2013-2016 were identified. Disease volume was characterized by percent of positive cores, number of cores with >50% involvement, and largest involvement of any single core. Nonparametric equality of medians was performed to compare the median likelihood of favorable pathology between quartiles. Results: 112 (37.8%) with VLR and 184 (62.2%) with LR disease were identified. The likelihood of favorably pathology by quartile are listed in Table 1. 7/105 (6.3%) with VLR were reclassified as LR, and 13/181 (7.2%) with LR were reclassified as intermediate risk (IR). Patients reclassified to IR by GPS had a median likelihood favorable pathology of 63.0% (IQR 62.0-63.0), 20.0% positive cores (IQR 13.0-29.0), 0 cores with > 50% involved (IQR 0-1), largest core involvement of 20.0% (IQR 10.0-20.0), and PSA density of 0.12 ng/ml/cc (IQR 0.10-0.14). Conclusions: Differences in the likelihood of favorable pathology by disease volume were not clinically significant in men with favorable risk disease. [Table: see text]

Value of multimodality MRI and MR-guided biopsy at inclusion in an active surveillance protocol for prostate cancer.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (5_suppl) ◽  
pp. 105-105
Author(s):  
Diederik Meindert Somford ◽  
Caroline M. Hoeks ◽  
Roderick C. van den Bergh ◽  
Henk Vergunst ◽  
Inge M van Oort ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Prostate Carcinoma ◽  
Clinical Stage ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Definitive Treatment ◽  
Guided Biopsy ◽  
Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
Low Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
Surveillance Protocol

105 Background: To prevent overtreatment of insignificant and/or low-risk prostate carcinoma in the PSA screening era, active surveillance is emerging as a treatment strategy for selected patients. In our series we aim to establish whether MRI could aid in correct risk assessment for these patients within the framework of the Prostate Cancer Research International Active Surveillance (PRIAS) study. Methods: We included patients in our protocol based on contemporary criteria for active surveillance: - Diagnosis of prostate cancer by TRUS-guided biopsy. - PSA ≤10 ng/mL, PSA density <0.2 ng/mL/mL - Clinical stage ≤ T2 - Gleason score (GS) ≤3+3=6 - ≤ 2 biopsy cores with cancer All patients underwent multimodality MRI of the prostate, including T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR sequences. When a tumor-suspicious region (TSR) could be identified a targeted MR-guided biopsy (MRGB) was performed to obtain pathology. Patients were referred for definitive treatment in case of GS > 3+3=6 upon MRGB or T3 stage at MRI. Results: In 48 of 49 included patients at least one TSR was identified, with a median of 2 TSRs (range1-4) per patient. MRGB was obtained from every TSR, with a median of 4 MRGBs taken per patient. Five patients had a GS >3+3=6 upon MRGB and were excluded. Three patients were excluded due to suspicion of T3 stage on MRI. Five patient were excluded upon physician’s discretion due to multifocal prostate cancer upon MRGB. Combined multimodality MRI/MRGB in our active surveillance cohort thus excluded 27% (13/49) of patients who were incorrectly stratified as low-risk prostate carcinoma by contemporary criteria. Conclusions: Application of multimodality MRI and MRGB in an active surveillance protocol improves risk stratification, adding onto contemporary PSA and TRUS-guided biopsy criteria for low-risk prostate cancer. This approach might increase safety and reliability of active surveillance for prostate cancer and deserves ongoing prospective evaluation.

Are men with favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer candidates for active surveillance?

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 82-82
Author(s):  
Ann Caroline Raldow ◽  
Danjie Zhang ◽  
Ming-Hui Chen ◽  
Michelle H. Braccioforte ◽  
Brian Joseph Moran ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
P Value ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Risk Prostate Cancer

82 Background: Active surveillance (AS) is considered appropriate for patients with low-risk prostate cancer (PC) and a life expectancy of at least 10 years. However, with grade migration following the 2005 International Society of Urologic Pathology consensus conference, AS may also be an initial option for men with favorable intermediate-risk PC. We estimated and compared the risk of PC-specific mortality (PCSM) following high dose radiation therapy and androgen deprivation therapy as appropriate amongst men with low, favorable intermediate, unfavorable intermediate, and high-risk PC. Methods: The study consisted of 6,595 consecutively treated men (median age: 68 years) with localized or locally advanced PC at the Chicago PC Center between 1997 and 2013. Fine and Gray competing risks regression analyses (table) were used to assess the risk of PCSM in men with favorable intermediate, unfavorable intermediate or high-risk compared to low-risk PC, adjusting for age at and year of treatment. Results: After median follow-up of 7.76 years, 820 men died: 72 of PC. While men with favorable intermediate-risk did not have significantly increased risk of PCSM as compared to low-risk PC (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.28, 0.63-2.62 95% confidence interval (CI), p-value 0.49), men with high (adjusted HR 9.91, 5.48-17.94 95% CI, p-value <0.0001) or unfavorable intermediate-risk PC (adjusted HR 3.17, 1.60-6.30, p-value 0.001) did. Eight-year point estimates of PCSM were low: 0.68% [0.32-1.31% 95% CI] and 0.44% [0.25-0.75% 95% CI] for men with favorable intermediate and low-risk PC, respectively. Conclusions: Men with low and favorable intermediate-risk PC have similar and low estimates of PCSM during the first decade following standard management. These results provide evidence to support AS as an initial approach for men with favorable intermediate-risk PC. [Table: see text]

“Management Migration” in United States patients diagnosed with localized prostate cancer from 2010-2015.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 11-11
Author(s):  
Santino Butler ◽  
Idalid Ivy Franco ◽  
Amandeep R Mahal ◽  
Nina Niu Sanford ◽  
Quoc-Dien Trinh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Risk Category ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
National Guidelines ◽  
Initial Management ◽  
Public Surveillance ◽  
Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Network

11 Background: National guidelines have increasingly supported active surveillance/watchful waiting (AS/WW) in low- and favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa). It is unknown how these changes have influenced national management patterns across localized PCa. Therefore, we sought to define the U.S. trends in management of localized PCa across National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk groups. Methods: Using the novel and non-public Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program Prostate with AS/WW Database, we identified 164,760 men diagnosed with localized PCa and actively treated with either AS/WW, radical prostatectomy [RP], or radiation therapy [RT] from 2010-2015. Rates of initial management type over time, stratified by NCCN risk-category, were determined. Multivariable logistic regression defined adjusted odds ratios (AORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for receipt of each initial management type, with year of diagnosis (2010-2015) as the independent variable of interest (Year 2010 = referent). Results: AS/WW utilization increased from 14.5% to 42.1% from 2010-2015 in low-risk disease (AOR 4.50 [95% CI 4.17–4.86, P < 0.001]); conversely, RT and RP decreased from 38.0% to 26.6% (AOR 0.55 [0.51–0.59, P < 0.001]), and from 47.4% to 31.3% (AOR 0.50, [0.47-0.54, P < 0.001]), respectively (all Ptrends< 0.001). AS/WW increased in intermediate-risk disease from 5.78% to 9.60% (AOR 1.83 [1.67–2.00, P < 0.001]) and RT also decreased from 42.4% to 39.8% (AOR 0.81 [0.77–0.85], P < 0.001; Ptrends< 0.001)—Yet, there was no change in RP (51.8% vs. 50.6%; AOR 1.03 [0.98–1.09, P = 0.254]). Notably, while RP for high-risk disease increased from 38.0% to 42.8% (AOR 1.41 [1.30–1.53, P < 0.001]), RT decreased from 60.1% to 55.0% (AOR 0.71 [0.65–0.77, P < 0.001]; Ptrends< 0.001). Conclusions: These findings capture the rapidly shifting landscape of management for localized PCa and are suggestive of “management migration”—where down-trending RP utilization in low-risk disease (in the setting of up-trending AS/WW) may drive non-evidence based management bias toward RP over RT in higher risk disease. These national patterns serve as a targetable trend that should be addressed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document