Risk of Prostate Cancer after a Negative Magnetic Resonance Imaging Guided Biopsy

被引:24
|
作者
Kinnaird, Adam [1 ]
Sharma, Vidit [1 ]
Chuang, Ryan [1 ]
Priester, Alan [2 ]
Tran, Elizabeth [1 ]
Barsa, Danielle E. [1 ]
Delfin, Merdie [1 ]
Kwan, Lorna [1 ]
Sisk, Anthony [3 ]
Felker, Ely [4 ]
Marks, Leonard S. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif Los Angeles, David Geffen Sch Med, Dept Urol, 300 Stein Plaza,3rd Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90095 USA
[2] Univ Calif Los Angeles, Dept Bioengn, Los Angeles, CA USA
[3] Univ Calif Los Angeles, Dept Pathol & Lab Med, Los Angeles, CA USA
[4] Univ Calif Los Angeles, Dept Radiol Sci, Los Angeles, CA 90024 USA
来源
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY | 2020年 / 204卷 / 06期
关键词
biopsy; prostatic neoplasms; magnetic resonance imaging;
D O I
10.1097/JU.0000000000001232
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Purpose: Magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy which reveals no cancer may impart reassurance beyond that offered by ultrasound guided biopsy. However, followup of men after a negative magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy has been mostly by prostate specific antigen testing and reports of followup tissue confirmation are few. We investigated the incidence of clinically significant prostate cancer in such men who, because of persistent cancer suspicion, subsequently underwent a repeat magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy. Materials and Methods: Subjects were all men with a negative initial magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy who underwent at least 1 further magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy due to continued clinical suspicion of clinically significant prostate cancer (September 2009 to July 2019). Biopsies were magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion with targeted and systematic cores. Regions of interest from initial magnetic resonance imaging and any new regions of interest at followup magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy were targeted. The primary end point was detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (Gleason Grade Group 2 or greater). Results: Of 2,716 men 733 had a negative initial magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy. Study subjects were 73/733 who underwent followup magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy. Median (IQR) age and prostate specific antigen density were 64 years (59-67) and 0.12 ng/ml/cc (0.08-0.17), respectively. Baseline PI-RADS (R) scores were 3 or greater in 74%. At followup magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy (median 2.4 years, IQR 1.3e3.6), 17/73 (23%) were diagnosed with clinically significant prostate cancer. When followup magnetic resonance imaging revealed a lesion (PI-RADS 3 or greater), clinically significant prostate cancer was found in 17/53 (32%). When followup magnetic resonance imaging was negative (PI-RADS less than 3), cancer was not found (0/ 20) (p <0.01). Overall 54% of men with PI-RADS 5 at followup magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy were found to have clinically significant prostate cancer. Conclusions: Men with negative magnetic resonance imaging following an initial negative magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy are unlikely to harbor clinically significant prostate cancer and may avoid repeat biopsy. However, when lesions are seen on followup magnetic resonance imaging, repeat magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy is warranted.
引用
收藏
页码:1180 / 1186
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Guided Confirmatory Biopsy for Initiating Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer
    Jayadevan, Rajiv
    Felker, Ely R.
    Kwan, Lorna
    Barsa, Danielle E.
    Zhang, Haoyue
    Sisk, Anthony E.
    Delfin, Merdie
    Marks, Leonard S.
    JAMA NETWORK OPEN, 2019, 2 (09)
  • [22] Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion Guided Prostate Biopsy Improves Cancer Detection Following Transrectal Ultrasound Biopsy and Correlates With Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging
    Pinto, Peter A.
    Chung, Paul H.
    Rastinehad, Ardeshir R.
    Baccala, Angelo A., Jr.
    Kruecker, Jochen
    Benjamin, Compton J.
    Xu, Sheng
    Yan, Pingkun
    Kadoury, Samuel
    Chua, Celene
    Locklin, Julia K.
    Turkbey, Baris
    Shih, Joanna H.
    Gates, Stacey P.
    Buckner, Carey
    Bratslavsky, Gennady
    Linehan, W. Marston
    Glossop, Neil D.
    Choyke, Peter L.
    Wood, Bradford J.
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2011, 186 (04): : 1281 - 1285
  • [23] The role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance-guided biopsy in active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: A systematic review
    Alshehri, Sultan Zaher
    Alshahrani, Omar Safar
    Almsaoud, Nazal Ahmed
    Al-Ghamdi, Muhammad Ahmad
    Alqahtani, Abdulaziz Mohammed
    Almurayyi, Muath Mohammed
    Autwdi, Ali Salem
    Al-Ghamdi, Saeed Ahmed
    Zogan, Mohammed Mesadef
    Alamri, Abdulrahim Mohammed
    ANNALS OF MEDICINE AND SURGERY, 2020, 57 : 171 - 178
  • [24] THE ANALYSIS OF PROSTATE BIOPSY IN NEGATIVE MULTIPARAMETRIC MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING PATIENTS
    Liu, Ming
    Zhang, Zhipeng
    Wang, Jianye
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2017, 197 (04): : E25 - E25
  • [25] Environmental Impact of Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Transrectal Ultrasound Guided Prostate Biopsy
    Leapman, Michael S.
    Thiel, Cassandra L.
    Gordon, Ilyssa O.
    Nolte, Adam C.
    Perecman, Aaron
    Loeb, Stacy
    Overcash, Michael
    Sherman, Jodi D.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2023, 83 (05) : 463 - 471
  • [26] WHAT IS THE PREDICTIVE VALUE OF A NEGATIVE MULTIPARAMETRIC MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING IN EXCLUDING PROSTATE CANCER AT BIOPSY?
    Lopez del Campo, Ricardo
    Cuadras Sole, Merce
    Miret Alomar, Enric
    Salazar Gabarro, Aina
    Roche Valles, Sarai
    Regis Placido, Lucas
    Celma Domenech, Ana
    Lorente Garcia, David
    Placer Santos, Jose
    Planas Morin, Jacques
    Trilla Herrera, Enrique
    Morote Robles, Juan
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2018, 199 (04): : E484 - E484
  • [27] Which Patients with Negative Magnetic Resonance Imaging Can Safely Avoid Biopsy for Prostate Cancer?
    Oishi, Masakatsu
    Shin, Toshitaka
    Ohe, Chisato
    Nassiri, Nima
    Palmer, Suzanne L.
    Aron, Manju
    Ashrafi, Akbar N.
    Cacciamani, Giovanni E.
    Chen, Frank
    Duddalwar, Vinay
    Stern, Mariana C.
    Ukimura, Osamu
    Gill, Inderbir S.
    Abreu, Andre Luis de Castro
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2019, 201 (02): : 268 - 276
  • [28] COMPARING THE CANCER DETECTION RATE OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING-ULTRASOUND FUSION GUIDED VERSUS COGNITIVE-MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING GUIDED PROSTATE BIOPSY FOR SMALL PROSTATE LESIONS
    Mare, Anton
    Bergersen, Phil
    Chalasani, Venu
    Goolam, Ahmed
    Dias, Max
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2020, 203 : E310 - E310
  • [29] Magnetic Resonance Imaging Targeted Biopsy in Men with Previously Negative Prostate Biopsy Results
    Lee, Seung Hwan
    Chung, Mun Su
    Kim, Joo Hee
    Oh, Young Taik
    Rha, Koon Ho
    Chung, Byung Ha
    JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2012, 26 (07) : 787 - 791
  • [30] Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion Guided Prostate Biopsy for Patients with Small Lesions Suspicious for Cancer Revealed by Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging
    Kamoi, K.
    Okihara, K.
    Iwata, T.
    Kawauchi, A.
    Miki, T.
    UROLOGY, 2012, 80 (03) : S13 - S13