scholarly journals Evaluation of Transabdominal and Transperineal Ultrasound-Derived Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) Density and Clinical Utility Compared to MRI Prostate Volumes: A Feasibility Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Pantelidou ◽  
Iztok Caglic ◽  
Anne George ◽  
Oleg Blyuss ◽  
Vincent Gnanapragasam ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Risk Stratification ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Intra Class Correlation ◽  
Psa Density ◽  
Risk Stratification Tool ◽  
Density Values ◽  
Intra Class Correlation Coefficient ◽  
Good Agreement

Abstract PurposeTo investigate the accuracy of surface-based ultrasound-derived PSA-density (US-PSAD) versus gold-standard MRI-PSAD as a risk-stratification tool. MethodsSingle-centre prospective study of patients undergoing MRI for suspected prostate cancer (PCa). Four combinations of US-volumes were calculated using transperineal (TP) and transabdominal (TA) views, with triplanar measurements to calculate volume and US-PSAD. Intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was used tocompare US and MRI volumes. Categorical comparison of MRI-PSAD and US-PSAD was performed at PSAD cut-offs <0.15, 0.15-0.20, and >0.20 ng/mL2 to assess agreement with MRI-PSAD risk-stratification decisions.Results64 men were investigated, mean age 69 years and PSA 7.0 ng/mL. 36/64 had biopsy-confirmed prostate cancer (18 Gleason 3+3, 18 Gleason ≥3+4). Mean MRI-derived gland volume was 60 mL, compared to 56 mL for TA-US, and 65 mL TP-US. ICC demonstrated good agreement for all US volumes with MRI, with highest agreement for transabdominal US, followed by combined TA/TP volumes. Risk-stratification decisions to biopsy showed concordant agreement between triplanar MRI-PSAD and ultrasound-PSAD in 86-91% and 92-95% at PSAD thresholds of >0.15 ng/mL2 and >0.12 ng/mL2, respectively. Biopsy-decision making at threshold >0.12 ng/mL2, demonstrated sensitivity ranges of 81-100%, specificity 85-100%, PPV 86-100% and NPV 83-100%. Transabdominal US provided optimal sensitivity of 100% for this clinical decision, with specificity 85%, and transperineal US provided optimal specificity of 100%, with sensitivity 87%.ConclusionTransperineal-US and combined TA-TP US-derived PSA density values compare well with standard MRI-derived values and could be used to provide accurate PSAD at presentation and inform the need for further investigations.

scholarly journals Clinical use of the SelectMDx urinary-biomarker test with or without mpMRI in prostate cancer diagnosis: a prospective, multicenter study in biopsy-naïve men

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rianne J. Hendriks ◽  
Marloes M. G. van der Leest ◽  
Bas Israël ◽  
Gerjon Hannink ◽  
Anglita YantiSetiasti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Risk Stratification ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Low Grade ◽  
Diagnostic Study ◽  
High Grade ◽  
Net Benefit ◽  
Conditional Strategy ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Guided Biopsy

Abstract Background Risk stratification in men with suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa) requires reliable diagnostic tests, not only to identify high-grade PCa, also to minimize the overdetection of low-grade PCa, and reduction of “unnecessary” prostate MRIs and biopsies. This study aimed to evaluate the SelectMDx test to detect high-grade PCa in biopsy-naïve men. Subsequently, to assess combinations of SelectMDx test and multi-parametric (mp) MRI and its potential impact on patient selection for prostate biopsy. Methods This prospective multicenter diagnostic study included 599 biopsy-naïve patients with prostate-specific antigen level ≥3 ng/ml. All patients underwent a SelectMDx test and mpMRI before systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUSGB). Patients with a suspicious mpMRI also had an in-bore MR-guided biopsy (MRGB). Histopathologic outcome of TRUSGB and MRGB was used as reference standard. High-grade PCa was defined as ISUP Grade Group (GG) ≥ 2. The primary outcome was the detection rates of low- and high-grade PCa and number of biopsies avoided in four strategies, i.e., (1) SelectMDx test-only, (2) mpMRI-only, (3) SelectMDx test followed by mpMRI when SelectMDx test was positive (conditional strategy), and (4) SelectMDx test and mpMRI in all (joint strategy). A positive SelectMDx test outcome was a risk score of ≥−2.8. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was performed to assess clinical utility. Results Prevalence of high-grade PCa was 31% (183/599). Thirty-eight percent (227/599) of patients had negative SelectMDx test in whom biopsy could be avoided. Low-grade PCa was not detected in 35% (48/138) with missing 10% (18/183) high-grade PCa. Yet, mpMRI-only could avoid 49% of biopsies, not detecting 4.9% (9/183) of high-grade PCa. The conditional strategy reduces the number of mpMRIs by 38% (227/599), avoiding biopsy in 60% (357/599) and missing 13% (24/183) high-grade PCa. Low-grade PCa was not detected in 58% (80/138). DCA showed the highest net benefit for the mpMRI-only strategy, followed by the conditional strategy at-risk thresholds >10%. Conclusions SelectMDx test as a risk stratification tool for biopsy-naïve men avoids unnecessary biopsies in 38%, minimizes low-grade PCa detection, and misses only 10% high-grade PCa. Yet, using mpMRI in all patients had the highest net benefit, avoiding biopsy in 49% and missing 4.9% of high-risk PCa. However, if mpMRI availability is limited or expensive, using mpMRI-only in SelectMDx test positive patients is a good alternative strategy.

scholarly journals Integrated predictive model for prostatic cancer using clinical, laboratory and ultrasound data

2016 ◽  
Vol 43 (6) ◽  
pp. 430-437
Author(s):  
GUSTAVO DAVID LUDWIG ◽  
HENRIQUE PERES ROCHA ◽  
LÚCIO JOSÉ BOTELHO ◽  
MAIARA BRUSCO FREITAS
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Predictive Model ◽  
Prostate Biopsy ◽  
Clinical Laboratory ◽  
Prostate Volume ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Digital Rectal Examination ◽  
Roc Curves ◽  
Rectal Examination ◽  
Psa Density

ABSTRACT Objective: to develop a predictive model to estimate the probability of prostate cancer prior to biopsy. Methods: from September 2009 to January 2014, 445 men underwent prostate biopsy in a radiology service. We excluded from the study patients with diseases that could compromise the data analysis, who had undergone prostatic resection or used 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors. Thus, we selected 412 patients. Variables included in the model were age, prostate specific antigen (PSA), digital rectal examination, prostate volume and abnormal sonographic findings. We constructed Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves and calculated the areas under the curve, as well as the model's Positive Predictive Value (PPV) . Results: of the 412 men, 155 (37.62%) had prostate cancer (PC). The mean age was 63.8 years and the median PSA was 7.22ng/ml. In addition, 21.6% and 20.6% of patients had abnormalities on digital rectal examination and image suggestive of cancer by ultrasound, respectively. The median prostate volume and PSA density were 45.15cm3 and 0.15ng/ml/cm3, respectively. Univariate and multivariate analyses showed that only five studied risk factors are predictors of PC in the study (p<0.05). The PSA density was excluded from the model (p=0.314). The area under the ROC curve for PC prediction was 0.86. The PPV was 48.08% for 95%sensitivity and 52.37% for 90% sensitivity. Conclusion: the results indicate that clinical, laboratory and ultrasound data, besides easily obtained, can better stratify the risk of patients undergoing prostate biopsy.

scholarly journals Pre-treatment risk stratification of prostate cancer patients:A critical review

2012 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
George Rodrigues ◽  
Padraig Warde ◽  
Tom Pickles ◽  
Juanita Crook ◽  
Michael Brundage ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Cancer Risk ◽  
Risk Stratification ◽  
Gleason Score ◽  
Critical Review ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Prostate Cancer Risk ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Pre Treatment

Introduction:  The use of accepted prostate cancer risk stratification groups based on prostate-specific antigen, T stage and Gleason score assists in therapeutic treatment decision-making, clinical trial design and outcome reporting. The utility of integrating novel prognostic factors into an updated risk stratification schema is an area of current debate. The purpose of this work is to critically review the available literature on novel pre-treatment prognostic factors and alternative prostate cancer risk stratification schema to assess the feasibility and need for changes to existing risk stratification systems. Methods:  A systematic literature search was conducted to identify original research publications and review articles on prognostic factors and risk stratification in prostate cancer. Search terms included risk stratification, risk assessment, prostate cancer or neoplasms, and prognostic factors. Abstracted information was assessed to draw conclusions regarding the potential utility of changes to existing risk stratification schema. Results:  The critical review identified three specific clinically relevant potential changes to the most commonly used three-group risk stratification system: (1) the creation of a very-low risk category; (2) the splitting of intermediate-risk into a low- and highintermediate risk groups; and (3) the clarification of the interface between intermediate- and high-risk disease. Novel pathological factors regarding high-grade cancer, subtypes of Gleason score 7 and percentage biopsy cores positive were also identified as potentially important risk-stratification factors. Conclusions:  Multiple studies of prognostic factors have been performed to create currently utilized prostate cancer risk stratification systems. We propose potential changes to existing systems.

scholarly journals Usefulness of Prostate-Specific Antigen Density as an Indicator for Recommending Prebiopsy Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Prevent Missed Prostate Cancer Diagnoses

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 155-163
Author(s):  
Jin Hyung Jeon ◽  
Kyo Chul Koo ◽  
Byung Ha Chung ◽  
Kwang Suk Lee
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Prostate Specific Antigen ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Psa Density ◽  
Systematic Biopsy ◽  
Target Biopsy

Purpose: To identify the indication for recommending prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to prevent prostate cancer missed diagnoses in cases without prebiopsy MRI.Materials and Methods: Between January 2017 and September 2020, 585 patients suspected with prostate cancer underwent prostate biopsy after MRI. For patients with visible lesions, MRI-targeted biopsy using an image-based fusion program was performed in addition to the 12- core systematic biopsy. Patients for whom MRI was performed in other institutions (n=4) and patients who underwent target biopsy alone (n=7) were excluded.Results: Of 574 patients (median prostate-specific antigen [PSA] level, 6.88 ng/mL; mean age, 68.2 years), 342 (59.6%) were diagnosed with prostate cancer (visible lesions=312/449 [69.5%]; nonvisible lesions=30/123 [24.0%]). The detection rates of visible lesions stratified using the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System score (3 vs. 4 vs. 5) were 30.9% (54 of 175), 61.2% (150 of 245), and 90.1% (127 of 141), respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that PSA density was a significant factor for presence of visible lesions, prostate cancer, and significant prostate cancer diagnosis. Among patients with positive lesions, 27 (8.2%) were diagnosed with prostate cancer concomitant with negative systematic biopsy results. A PSA density of 0.15 ng/mL/cm<sup>3</sup> was identified as the significant cutoff value for predicting positive target biopsy in groups with negative systematic biopsy. Sixty of the negative target lesions (26.1%) were diagnosed using systematic biopsy.Conclusions: To maximize cancer detection rates, both targeted and systematic biopsies should be implemented. PSA density was identified as a useful factor for recommending prebiopsy MRI to patients suspected with prostate cancer.

scholarly journals Clinical and pathological variables that predict changes in tumour grade after radical prostatectomy in patients with prostate cancer

2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 93 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stavros Sfoungaristos ◽  
Petros Perimenis
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Gleason Score ◽  
Prostate Volume ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Secondary Analysis ◽  
Intraepithelial Neoplasia ◽  
Treatment Modalities ◽  
Psa Density ◽  
Group 2

Introduction: Preoperative Gleason score is crucial, in combination with other preoperative parameters, in selecting the appropriate treatment for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. The aim of the present study is to determine the clinical and pathological variables that can predict differences in Gleason score between biopsy and radical prostatectomy.Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of 302 patients who had a radical prostatectomy between January 2005 and September 2010. The association between grade changes and preoperative Gleason score, age, prostate volume, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), PSA density, number of biopsy cores, presence of prostatitis and high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia was analyzed. We also conducted a secondary analysis of the factors that influence upgrading in patients with preoperative Gleason score ≤6 (group 1) and downgrading in patients with Gleason score ≤7 (group 2).Results: No difference in Gleason score was noted in 44.3% of patients, while a downgrade was noted in 13.7% and upgrade in 42.1%. About 2/3 of patients with a Gleason score of ≤6 upgraded after radical prostatectomy. PSA density (p = 0.008) and prostate volume (p = 0.032) were significantly correlated with upgrade. No significant predictors were found for patients with Gleason score ≤7 who downgraded postoperatively.Conclusion: Smaller prostate volume and higher values of PSA density are predictors for upgrade in patients with biopsy Gleason score ≤6 and this should be considered when deferred treatment modalities are planned.

scholarly journals Repeatability of the Universiti Teknologi MARA reading charts

2015 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 236-240 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noor Halilah Buari ◽  
Nur Hidayah Yusuf ◽  
Adib Mohd Satali ◽  
Ai Hong Chen
Keyword(s):  
Random Sequence ◽  
Medical Science ◽  
Reading Rate ◽  
Read Aloud ◽  
Intra Class Correlation ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Good Consistency ◽  
Reading Charts ◽  
Intra Class Correlation Coefficient ◽  
Good Agreement

Objective: This study was done to investigate the repeatability measurements in reading rate using the Universiti Teknologi MARA Malay related words (UiTM-Mrw) reading chart and Universiti Teknologi MARA Malay unrelated words (UiTM-Muw) reading chart. Methodology: Thirty normally sighted participants were randomly recruited through randomised sampling (mean age =21.5±1.1 years). Participants were instructed to read aloud, clearly and as quickly as possible at 2 different sessions using two different charts. The two charts were selected at random sequence. A minimum of 7 days interval was used to minimize the learning affect. The time taken to read each chart was recorded and any errors while reading was noted. Reading performance was quantified as reading rate in words per minute (wpm). Results: Comparison of reading rate between session 1 and session 2 was not significantly different (p=0.894, df=1, F=0.018) for UiTM-Mrw reading chart. The reading rate between session 1 and 2 also showed no significant difference (p=0.99, df=1, F=2.811) in UiTM-Muw reading chart. Intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) showed a good consistency in repeatability for both UiTM-Mrw reading chart and UiTM-Muw reading chart with ICC values of 0.849 and 0.814 respectively. The Bland and Altman plot between measurement of reading rate in session 1 and session 2 showed a good agreement in UiTM-Mrw reading chart and UiTM-Muw reading chart. Conclusion: Both UiTM-Mrw reading chart and UiTM-Mur reading chart showed a good consistency and good agreement in repeated measurement of reading rate.Bangladesh Journal of Medical Science Vol.14(3) 2015 p.236-240

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document