The impact of complications after diagnostic biopsy on repeat biopsy in men: Results from the Prostate Cancer Research International: Active surveillance (PRIAS-JAPAN) study.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e17616-e17616
Author(s):  
Yoichiro Tohi ◽  
Takuma Kato ◽  
Ryuji Matsumoto ◽  
Nobuo Shinohara ◽  
Akira Yokomizo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Research ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Repeat Biopsy ◽  
Protocol Biopsy ◽  
Cancer Aggressiveness ◽  
Diagnostic Biopsy ◽  
Prostate Cancer Research ◽  
The Impact

e17616 Background: Active surveillance(AS) is the strategy to avoid the overtreatment for favorable prostate cancer. For safer AS protocol execution, repeat protocol biopsy is essential in evaluating cancer aggressiveness accurately. However, some men on AS refuse repeat protocol biopsy because of burdens on biopsy. We aimed to assess the complications of prostate biopsy and the impact of complications after diagnostic biopsy on repeat protocol biopsy from the analysis Japanese cohort forming part of the Prostate cancer Research International: Active surveillance (PRIAS) study. Methods: PRIAS-JAPAN started in January 2010, 39 institutions are participating in this study. Men are prospectively followed and repeat protocol biopsy are planned at 1 year and 4 years thereafter, or if prostate specific antigen-doubling time is < 10 years. Data was collected on the complications such as infection, hematuria, hematospermia, pain, and antibiotics, and approach of biopsy, retrospectively. We compared the complications in diagnostic biopsy between repeat biopsy acceptance group and repeat biopsy non-acceptance group at 1 year. Results: From 2010 to 2018, 862 men with low-risk prostate cancer were prospectively enrolled in PRIAS-JAPAN. 794 men (92%) actually proceeded to protocol at 1 year. Of the 794 men, repeat protocol biopsy non-acceptance rate at 1 year was 18.4%(146 men). According to differences in the complications of diagnostic biopsy, hematuria(p = 0.003) and pain(p < 0.001) rate were significantly higher in repeat biopsy non-acceptance group, but infection(p = 0.105) and hematospermia(p = 0.224). Approach of biopsy(p = 0.651) was not different in two groups. Conclusions: Hematuria and pain in diagnostic biopsy were significantly more frequent in repeat biopsy non-acceptance group. Our study supports the importance of adequate explanation and management of the complications at biopsy to improve the rate of protocol biopsy acceptance. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals An assessment of Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS) criteria for active surveillance of clinically low-risk prostate cancer patients

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. 238-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vitor Da Silva ◽  
Ilias Cagiannos ◽  
Luke T. Lavallée ◽  
Ranjeeta Mallick ◽  
Kelsey Witiuk ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Research ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
Low Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
Psa Recurrence ◽  
Prostate Cancer Research

Introduction: Active surveillance is a strategy to delay or prevent treatment of indolent prostate cancer. The Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS) criteria were developed to select patients for prostate cancer active surveillance. The objective of this study was to compare pathological findings from PRIAS-eligible and PRIAS-ineligible clinically low-risk prostate cancer patients.Methods: A D’Amico low-risk cohort of 1512 radical prostatectomy patients treated at The Ottawa Hospital or Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Centre between January 1995 and December 2007 was reviewed. Pathological outcomes (pT3 tumours, Gleason sum ≥7, lymph node metastases, or a composite) and clinical outcomes (prostate-specific antigen [PSA] recurrence, secondary cancer treatments, and death) were compared between PRIAS-eligible and PRIAS-ineligible cohorts.Results: The PRIAS-eligible cohort (n=945) was less likely to have Gleason score ≥7 (odds ratio [OR] 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49‒0.75), pT3 (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.31‒0.55), nodal metastases (OR 0.37; 95% CI 0.10‒1.31), or any adverse feature (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.45‒0.69) compared to the PRIAS-ineligible cohort. The probability of any adverse pathology in the PRIAS-eligible cohort was 41% vs. 56% in the PRIAS-ineligible cohort. At median followup of 3.7 years, 72 (4.8%) patients had a PSA recurrence, 24 (1.6%) received pelvic radiation, and 13 (0.9%) received androgen deprivation. No difference was detected for recurrence-free and overall survival between groups (recurrence hazard ratio [HR] 0.71; 95% CI 0.46–1.09 and survival HR 0.72; 95% CI 0.36–1.47).Conclusions: Low-risk prostate cancer patients who met PRIAS eligibility criteria are less likely to have higher-risk cancer compared to those who did not meet at least one of these criteria.

Predictors for reclassification at repeat biopsy in active surveillance cohort for low-risk prostate cancer: From an interim analysis of PRIAS-JAPAN.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 118-118
Author(s):  
Mikio Sugimoto ◽  
Yoshiyuki Kakehi ◽  
Hiromi Hirama ◽  
Seiji Naito ◽  
Akito Yamaguchi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Clinical Stage ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Repeat Biopsy ◽  
Japanese Cohort ◽  
Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
Low Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
Positive Core

118 Background: The Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS) study is a large international prospective observational AS study that commenced in 2006. Japan has participated in the study (PRIAS-JAPAN) since 2010, and recruitment remains ongoing. The objective of this study is to define clinical and pathological factors predicting reclassification at the time of 1-year repeat biopsy (re-Bx) based on a Japanese cohort forming part of the PRIAS study. Methods: The inclusion criteria for the PRIAS study are as follows: clinical stage T1c/T2, PSA ≤ 10 ng/ml, PSA density (PSAD) < 0.2 ng/ml per milliliter, one or two positive biopsy cores, and Gleason score (GS) ≤ 6 at initial diagnostic biopsy. Baseline clinical characteristics and prostate-specific antigen doubling time (PSADT) at the time of re-Bx were analyzed via multivariate logistic regression with respect to reclassification on the 1-year re-Bx. Results: A total of 711 patients were enrolled in PRIAS-JAPAN by September 2016. Of these, 409 underwent re-Bx at 1-year. The re-Bx acceptance rate was 83.3%. A total of 122 (29.8%) was reclassified whereas 150 (36.7%) had no cancer. Older age, a higher PSAD, a higher positive core rate, and a shorter PSADT were significant predictors of reclassification. Among them, the positive core rate was the strongest predictor for pathological reclassification at 1-year after starting AS. The AS remaining rates at 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 years were 93.9%, 70.6%, 65.7%, 60.0% and 49.5% respectively Conclusions: An interim analysis of a Japanese AS cohort participating in PRIAS revealed that the positive core rate was strongly associated with reclassification at the 1-year re-Bx. Clinical trial information: UMIN000002874. [Table: see text]

Outcomes of the patients with pT0 on first protocol biopsy during active surveillance for early prostate cancer: From the PRIAS-JAPAN study.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 20-20
Author(s):  
Takuma Kato ◽  
Mikio Sugimoto ◽  
Yoshiyuki Kakehi ◽  
Akito Yamaguchi ◽  
Akira Yokomizo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Clinical Stage ◽  
Protocol Biopsy ◽  
Japanese Cohort ◽  
Definitive Therapy ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Prostate Cancer Research ◽  
Therapy Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trial Information

20 Background: We assessed the outcomes of the patients with pT0 on first protocol biopsy during active surveillance(AS) from the analysis Japanese cohort forming part of the Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS) study. Methods: PRIAS-JAPAN started in January 2010. 39 institutions are participating in this study. The inclusion criteria for the PRIAS study are as follows: clinical stage T1c/T2, PSA ≤ 10 ng/ml, PSA density (PSAD) < 0.2 ng/ml per milliliter, one or two positive biopsy cores, and Gleason score (GS) ≤ 6 at initial diagnostic biopsy.In this analysis, we defined the patients presenting no reclassification with cancer after first protocol biopsy as NR-CA group and the patients presenting no reclassification showing pT0 as NR-noCA group. We compared AS remaining rate, pathological outcomes in extra biopsy and second protocol biopsy at 4 years between two groups. Results: First protocol biopsy was performed on 514 patients. 191 patients were in NR-noCA group and 199 patients were in NR-CA group. Patients background of NR-noCA group was as follows: Median age was 68, median PSA was 5.6ng/ml, and median prostate volume was 38.4cc. T1c were in 183 and T2a were in 8. At the time of first protocol biopsy, there was no significant differences about PSA parameters and pathological factors between NR-noCA group and NR-CA group. Also, extra biopsy performing rate (NR-noCA group vs NR-CA group; 5.75% vs 7.53%) and implementation rate of second protocol biopsy at 4 years (75.6% vs 63.6%) showed no significant differences. On second protocol biopsy, number of cancer positive cores were significantly smaller and rate of pT0 was higher in NR-noCA group. After five years, both group showed comparable AS remaining rate (76.9 vs 75.3%). Thirty eight patients of NR-noCA group selected definitive therapy and surgery was the most frequently chosen treatment option. Conclusions: Although rate of pT0 on second biopsy was higher in NR-noCA group, there was no significant difference between both groups in AS remaining rate. The patients in NR-noCA group tended to choose surgery as a definitive therapy. Clinical trial information: UMIN000002874.

27 Protocol based versus non-protocol based discontinuation in the Prostate cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS) study

2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. e27-e27a
Author(s):  
L.P. Bokhorst ◽  
J.W. Salman ◽  
L.D. Venderbos ◽  
A. Rannikko ◽  
R. Valdagni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Research ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Prostate Cancer Research

Indications for intervention during active surveillance of prostate cancer: a comparison of the Johns Hopkins and Prostate Cancer Research International Active Surveillance (PRIAS) protocols

2014 ◽  
Vol 115 (2) ◽  
pp. 216-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
Max Kates ◽  
Jeffrey J. Tosoian ◽  
Bruce J. Trock ◽  
Zhaoyong Feng ◽  
H. Ballentine Carter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Research ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Prostate Cancer Research

scholarly journals Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA): The Historical Perspective

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Ming Chu
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
New York ◽  
Cancer Research ◽  
New York State ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Prostatic Acid Phosphatase ◽  
Prostate Tumor ◽  
Major Area ◽  
State Institute ◽  
Prostate Cancer Research

In 1970, shortly after joining Roswell Park Memorial Institute, the New York State institute for the study of malignant diseases, the author initiated investigations on the use of tumor cell products for diagnosis and therapy of cancer. Immunochemical approaches were used primarily to differentiate quantitatively or qualitatively normal cells from tumor cells. Prostate cancer was a major area of endeavor, with the goal to identify and characterize prostate tumor specific and associated antigens, and eventually to develop a simple but reliable blood test for prostate cancer. Prostate cancer research had not received much attention at the time this work was begun. The early studies focused upon, among others, prostatic acid phosphatase, alkaline phosphatase, and new prostate tumor markers. By the mid 1970s, three able investigators--Dr. Ching-Li Lee, Dr. Carl S. Killian, and Dr. Ming C. Wang--had joined the prostate cancer research team, and were invited to take charge of these three research projects, respectively.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document