scholarly journals Epigenetic Signature: A New Player as Predictor of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer (PCa) in Patients on Active Surveillance (AS)

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (6) ◽  
pp. 1146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matteo Ferro ◽  
Paola Ungaro ◽  
Amelia Cimmino ◽  
Giuseppe Lucarelli ◽  
Gian Busetto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Clinically Significant

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]

scholarly journals The utility of prostate MRI within active surveillance: description of the evidence

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Georgina Dominique ◽  
Wayne G. Brisbane ◽  
Robert E. Reiter
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Negative Predictive Value ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Multiparametric Mri ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Active Monitoring ◽  
Initial Biopsy ◽  
Clinically Significant

Abstract Purpose We present an overview of the literature regarding the use of MRI in active surveillance of prostate cancer. Methods Both MEDLINE® and Cochrane Library were queried up to May 2020 for studies of men on active surveillance with MRI and later confirmatory biopsy. The terms studied were ‘prostate cancer’ as the anchor followed by two of the following: active surveillance, surveillance, active monitoring, MRI, NMR, magnetic resonance imaging,  MRI, and multiparametric MRI. Studies were excluded if pathologic reclassification (GG1 →  ≥ GG2) and PI-RADS or equivalent was not reported. Results Within active surveillance, baseline MRI is effective for identifying clinically significant prostate cancer and thus associated with fewer reclassification events. A positive initial MRI (≥ PI-RADS 3) with GG1 identified at biopsy has a positive predictive value (PPV) of 35–40% for reclassification by 3 years. MRI possessed a stronger negative predictive value, with a negative MRI (≤ PI-RADS 2) yielding a negative predictive value of up to 85% at 3 years. Surveillance MRI, obtained after initial biopsy, yielded a PPV of 11–65% and NPV of 85–95% for reclassification. Conclusion MRI is useful for initial risk stratification of prostate cancer in men on active surveillance, especially if MRI is negative when imaging is obtained during surveillance. While useful, MRI cannot replace biopsy and further research is necessary to fully integrate MRI into active surveillance.

scholarly journals IDEAL Stage 2a experience with in-office, transperineal MRI/ultrasound software fusion targeted prostate biopsy

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. e000025
Author(s):  
Michael Tzeng ◽  
Eliza Cricco-Lizza ◽  
Bashir Al Hussein Al Awamlh ◽  
Morgan Pantuck ◽  
Daniel J Margolis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Local Anesthesia ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Robotic Arm ◽  
Targeted Biopsy ◽  
Pubic Arch ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
Transperineal Biopsy ◽  
Software Fusion

ObjectiveAlthough the feasibility of transperineal biopsy under local anesthesia has been demonstrated, little is known regarding the application of MRI/ultrasound software fusion targeted biopsy for transperineal biopsy under local anesthesia. The objective of our study is to describe our initial experience with in-office transperineal MRI/ultrasound software fusion targeted biopsy (Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment, Long-term Follow-up [IDEAL] Stage 2a).MethodsBetween October 2017 and July 2019, 33 men underwent in-office transperineal MRI-targeted biopsy using the Artemis (Eigen, Grass Valley, CA, USA) fixed-robotic arm system. The indication for biopsy was elevated prostate specific antigen (PSA) (n=14), prior negative biopsy (n=10), active surveillance (n=6), and surveillance after partial gland cryoablation (n=3). We prospectively captured patient demographic and clinical characteristics, biopsy outcomes, and complications. Complications were classified according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) V.5.0.ResultsThe median patient age was 67 years (IQR 61–71) and the median serum PSA level was 7.0 ng/mL (IQR 5.1–11.4). The median duration of in-office MRI-targeted transperineal biopsy was 26 min (IQR 23–28). Overall, transperineal MRI-targeted biopsy detected prostate cancer in 18 (54.6%) men, with 8 (24.2%) being clinically significant (Gleason Score ≥3+4, Grade Group ≥2). Clinically significant prostate cancer was detected in four (28.6%) biopsy naïve men, two (20.0%) men with a prior negative, one (16.7%) man on active surveillance and one (33.3%) man following partial gland ablation. Three (9.1%) men experienced complications: two hematuria and one urinary retention.ConclusionOur findings demonstrate the feasibility of the fixed-robotic arm fusion platform for in-office transperineal MRI-targeted biopsy and a low rate of adverse events. However, larger prostate size precludes MRI/ultrasound software fusion and pubic arch interference hindered the transperineal MRI-targeted approach in 9.1% of men. Pubic arch interference was overcome by a free-hand approach with software fusion guidance.

Latest Evidence on the Role of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Active Surveillance for Insignificant Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (7) ◽  
pp. 925-930 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco Cantiello ◽  
Stefano Manno ◽  
Giorgio I. Russo ◽  
Sebastiano Cimino ◽  
Salvatore Privitera ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Clinically Significant

Objective: Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (mpMRI) has become a very useful tool in the management of PCa. Particularly, there is a great interest in using mpMRI for men on Active Surveillance (AS) for low risk PCa. The aim of this systematic review was to critically review the latest literature concerning the role of mpMRI in this clinical setting, underlying current strengths and weakness. Evidence Acquisition: A comprehensive literature research for English-language original and review articles was carried out using the National Center for Biotechnology Information PubMed database with the aim to identify studies pertaining to mpMRI for AS in low risk PCa patients. The following search terms were used: active surveillance, prostate cancer and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. Evidence Synthesis: Data from 28 recent original studies and reviews were reviewed. We only considered studies on the use of mpMRI in selecting AS patients and during AS follow-up, in order to solve two important questions: -Can mpMRI have a role in improving the detection of clinically significant disease, better selecting AS patients? -Can mpMRI identify the progression of disease and, consequently, be used during AS follow-up? Conclusions: mpMRI is useful to better select the ideal candidates to AS and to monitor them during follow-up. However, despite many advantages, there are yet important limitations to detect all clinically significant PCa and to better define mpMRI-radiological progression during AS. Further larger prospective studies are needed to definitively solve these important problems.

scholarly journals Interobserver reproducibility of the PRECISE scoring system for prostate MRI on active surveillance: results from a two-centre pilot study

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 2082-2090 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco Giganti ◽  
Martina Pecoraro ◽  
Vasilis Stavrinides ◽  
Armando Stabile ◽  
Stefano Cipollari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Scoring System ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Interobserver Reproducibility ◽  
Radiological Progression ◽  
Radiological Change ◽  
Percent Agreement ◽  
Visible Lesion ◽  
Clinically Significant

Abstract Objectives We aimed to determine the interobserver reproducibility of the Prostate Cancer Radiological Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation (PRECISE) criteria for magnetic resonance imaging in patients on active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer (PCa) at two different academic centres. Methods The PRECISE criteria score the likelihood of clinically significant change over time. The system is a 1-to-5 scale, where 1 or 2 implies regression of a previously visible lesion, 3 denotes stability and 4 or 5 indicates radiological progression. A retrospective analysis of 80 patients (40 from each centre) on AS with a biopsy-confirmed low- or intermediate-risk PCa (i.e. ≤ Gleason 3 + 4 and prostate-specific antigen ≤ 20 ng/ml) and ≥ 2 prostate MR scans was performed. Two blinded radiologists reported all scans independently and scored the likelihood of radiological change (PRECISE score) from the second scan onwards. Cohen’s κ coefficients and percent agreement were computed. Results Agreement was substantial both at a per-patient and a per-scan level (κ = 0.71 and 0.61; percent agreement = 79% and 81%, respectively) for each PRECISE score. The agreement was superior (κ = 0.83 and 0.67; percent agreement = 90% and 91%, respectively) when the PRECISE scores were grouped according to the absence/presence of radiological progression (PRECISE 1–3 vs 4–5). Higher inter-reader agreement was observed for the scans performed at University College London (UCL) (κ = 0.81 vs 0.55 on a per-patient level and κ = 0.70 vs 0.48 on a per-scan level, respectively). The discrepancies between institutions were less evident for percent agreement (80% vs 78% and 86% vs 75%, respectively). Conclusions Expert radiologists achieved substantial reproducibility for the PRECISE scoring system, especially when data were pooled together according to the absence/presence of radiological progression (PRECISE 1–3 vs 4–5). Key Points • Inter-reader agreement between two experienced prostate radiologists using the PRECISE criteria was substantial. • The agreement was higher when the PRECISE scores were grouped according to the absence/presence of radiological progression (i.e. PRECISE 1–3 vs PRECISE 4 and 5). • Higher inter-reader agreement was observed for the scans performed at UCL, but the discrepancies between institutions were less evident for percent agreement.

scholarly journals Clinically significant prostate cancer detection and segmentation in low-risk patients using a convolutional neural network on multi-parametric MRI

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (12) ◽  
pp. 6582-6592
Author(s):  
Muhammad Arif ◽  
Ivo G. Schoots ◽  
Jose Castillo Tovar ◽  
Chris H. Bangma ◽  
Gabriel P. Krestin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Neural Network ◽  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Deep Neural Network ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Targeted Biopsy ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
Systematic Biopsy ◽  
Group 1

Abstract Objectives To develop an automatic method for identification and segmentation of clinically significant prostate cancer in low-risk patients and to evaluate the performance in a routine clinical setting. Methods A consecutive cohort (n = 292) from a prospective database of low-risk patients eligible for the active surveillance was selected. A 3-T multi-parametric MRI at 3 months after inclusion was performed. Histopathology from biopsies was used as reference standard. MRI positivity was defined as PI-RADS score ≥ 3, histopathology positivity was defined as ISUP grade ≥ 2. The selected cohort contained four patient groups: (1) MRI-positive targeted biopsy-positive (n = 116), (2) MRI-negative systematic biopsy-negative (n = 55), (3) MRI-positive targeted biopsy-negative (n = 113), (4) MRI-negative systematic biopsy-positive (n = 8). Group 1 was further divided into three sets and a 3D convolutional neural network was trained using different combinations of these sets. Two MRI sequences (T2w, b = 800 DWI) and the ADC map were used as separate input channels for the model. After training, the model was evaluated on the remaining group 1 patients together with the patients of groups 2 and 3 to identify and segment clinically significant prostate cancer. Results The average sensitivity achieved was 82–92% at an average specificity of 43–76% with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.65 to 0.89 for different lesion volumes ranging from > 0.03 to > 0.5 cc. Conclusions The proposed deep learning computer-aided method yields promising results in identification and segmentation of clinically significant prostate cancer and in confirming low-risk cancer (ISUP grade ≤ 1) in patients on active surveillance. Key Points • Clinically significant prostate cancer identification and segmentation on multi-parametric MRI is feasible in low-risk patients using a deep neural network. • The deep neural network for significant prostate cancer localization performs better for lesions with larger volumes sizes (> 0.5 cc) as compared to small lesions (> 0.03 cc). • For the evaluation of automatic prostate cancer segmentation methods in the active surveillance cohort, the large discordance group (MRI positive, targeted biopsy negative) should be included.

scholarly journals Primary Circulating Prostate Cells Are Not Detected in Men with Low Grade Small Volume Prostate Cancer

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nigel P. Murray ◽  
Eduardo Reyes ◽  
Cynthia Fuentealba ◽  
Nelson Orellana ◽  
Omar Jacob
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Prospective Study ◽  
Active Surveillance ◽  
Small Volume ◽  
Low Grade ◽  
Prostate Cells ◽  
Study Population ◽  
Initial Biopsy ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
A Prospective Study

Objective. To determine if primary circulating prostate cells (CPCs) are found in all men with prostate cancer.Methods and Patients. A prospective study, to analyze all men with an elevated PSA between 4.0 and 10.0 ng/mL undergoing initial biopsy. Primary CPCs were obtained by differential gel centrifugation and detected using standard immunocytochemistry using anti-PSA; positive samples underwent a second process with anti-P504S. A malignant primary CPC was defined as PSA (+) P504S (+) and a test positive if 1 cell/4 mL was detected. Biopsy results were registered as cancer/no-cancer, number of cores positive, and percent infiltration of the cores.Results. 328/1123 (29.2%) of the study population had prostate cancer diagnosed on initial biopsy, and 42/328 (12.8%) were negative for primary CPCs. CPC negative men were significantly older, and had lower PSA levels, lower Gleason scores, and fewer positive cores and with infiltration by the cancer. 38/42 (91%) of CPC negative men complied with the criteria for active surveillance in comparison with 34/286 (12%) of CPC positive men.Conclusions. Using primary CPC detection as a sequential test to select men with an elevated PSA for biopsy, the risk of missing clinically significant prostate cancer is minimal when the patient is primary CPC negative; less than 0.5% of all primary CPC negative men had a clinically significant prostate cancer.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document