Combination of biparametric magnetic resonance imaging with prostate-specific antigen density to stratify the risk of significant prostate cancer: Initial biopsy and long-term follow-up results

被引:3
作者
Konishi, Tsuzumi [1 ]
Washino, Satoshi [1 ]
Okochi, Tomohisa [2 ]
Miyagawa, Tomoaki [1 ]
机构
[1] Jichi Med Univ, Saitama Med Ctr, Dept Urol, Saitama, Japan
[2] Jichi Med Univ, Saitama Med Ctr, Dept Radiol, Saitama, Japan
关键词
biparametric magnetic resonance imaging; follow-up; prostate biopsy; prostate cancer; prostate-specific antigen density; MRI; ACCURACY;
D O I
10.1111/iju.14948
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
Objectives To assess whether the combination of biparametric magnetic resonance imaging with prostate-specific antigen density can properly stratify the risk of significant prostate cancer in patients undergoing prostate biopsies and how this approach affects the detection of prostate cancer during follow-up in patients who do not undergo prostate biopsy. Methods In total, 411 biopsy-naive patients who had elevated prostate-specific antigen levels and then underwent biparametric magnetic resonance imaging for suspicious prostate cancer were analyzed: 203 patients underwent prostate biopsies, whereas 208 patients did not. Significant prostate cancer detection rates stratified by the combination of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System score and prostate-specific antigen density were assessed in patients who underwent prostate biopsies. The cumulative incidence of prostate cancer detection during the follow-up was assessed in patients who omitted biopsy. Results The negative predictive value for significant prostate cancer was 89% for Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System scores 1-3, which increased to 97% when prostate-specific antigen density <0.15 ng/ml/cm(3) was combined. Among patients who did not undergo biopsy, patients with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System scores 1-3 plus prostate-specific antigen density <0.15 ng/ml/cm(3) included significantly less cases in which significant prostate cancer was detected during the follow-up, compared with the others (3.2% versus 17% at 36 months). Conclusions Restriction of prostate biopsies to patients with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System scores 4-5 or prostate-specific antigen density >= 0.15 ng/ml/cm(3) proved to be the good biopsy strategy, effectively balancing risks and benefits.
引用
收藏
页码:1031 / 1037
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] The potential role of prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging combined with prostate-specific antigen density in the detection of prostate cancer
    Kubota, Yasuaki
    Kamei, Shingo
    Nakano, Masahiro
    Ehara, Hidetoshi
    Deguchi, Takashi
    Tanaka, Osamu
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2008, 15 (04) : 322 - 326
  • [22] Combining Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System, Histogram Analysis, and Prostate-Specific Antigen Density to Determine the Risk of Prostate Cancer in Patients With Prostate-Specific Antigen of 4 to 20 ng/mL
    Liu, Xiaohang
    Deng, Lin
    Zhou, Liangping
    Peng, Weijun
    JOURNAL OF COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY, 2019, 43 (04) : 645 - 651
  • [23] Can combined multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate and prostate-specific antigen density improve the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: A prospective single-center cross-sectional study
    Yadav, Kuldeep
    Sureka, Binit
    Elhence, Poonam
    Choudhary, Gautam Ram
    Pandey, Himanshu
    Garg, Pawan Kumar
    Yadav, Taruna
    Khera, Pushpinder Singh
    JOURNAL OF CANCER RESEARCH AND THERAPEUTICS, 2021, 17 (02) : 372 - 378
  • [24] Combining prostate-specific antigen density with prostate imaging reporting and data system score version 2.1 to improve detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: A retrospective study
    Lei, Yin
    Li, Tian Jie
    Gu, Peng
    Yang, Yu Kun
    Zhao, Lei
    Gao, Chao
    Hu, Juan
    Liu, Xiao Dong
    FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY, 2022, 12
  • [25] Long-term follow-up of radiotherapy for prostate cancer
    Swanson, GP
    Riggs, MW
    Earle, JD
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2004, 59 (02): : 406 - 411
  • [26] Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and follow-up to avoid prostate biopsy in 4259 men
    Venderink, Wulphert
    van Luijtelaar, Annemarijke
    van der Leest, Marloes
    Barentsz, Jelle O.
    Jenniskens, Sjoerd F. M.
    Sedelaar, Michiel J. P.
    Hulsbergen-van de Kaa, Christina
    Overduin, Christiaan G.
    Fuetterer, Jurgen J.
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2019, 124 (05) : 775 - 784
  • [27] Evaluation of prostate-specific antigen density in the diagnosis of prostate cancer combined with magnetic resonance imaging before biopsy in men aged 70 years and older with elevated PSA
    Yanai, Yoshinori
    Kosaka, Takeo
    Hong, Hiroshi
    Matsumoto, Kazuhiro
    Shinojima, Toshiaki
    Kikuchi, Eiji
    Miyajima, Akira
    Mizun, Ryuichi
    Mikami, Shuji
    Jinzaki, Masahiro
    Oya, Mototsugu
    MOLECULAR AND CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2018, 9 (06) : 656 - 660
  • [28] Implementation of a 5-Minute Magnetic Resonance Imaging Screening Protocol for Prostate Cancer in Men With Elevated Prostate-Specific Antigen Before Biopsy
    Weiss, Jakob
    Martirosian, Petros
    Notohamiprodjo, Mike
    Kaufmann, Sascha
    Othman, Ahmed E.
    Grosse, Ulrich
    Nikolaou, Konstantin
    Gatidis, Sergios
    INVESTIGATIVE RADIOLOGY, 2018, 53 (03) : 186 - 190
  • [29] Value of prostate-specific antigen density in negative or equivocal lesions on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging
    Rico, Luis
    Contreras, Pablo
    Vitagliano, Gonzalo
    Pita, Hernando Rios
    Ameri, Carlos
    Blas, Leandro
    TURKISH JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2020, 46 (05): : 367 - 372
  • [30] Can Prostate-Specific Antigen Density Be an Index to Distinguish Patients Who Can Omit Repeat Prostate Biopsy in Patients with Negative Magnetic Resonance Imaging?
    Yu, Jiwoong
    Boo, Youngjun
    Kang, Minyong
    Sung, Hyun Hwan
    Jeong, Byong Chang
    Seo, Seongil
    Jeon, Seong Soo
    Lee, Hyunmoo
    Jeon, Hwang Gyun
    CANCER MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH, 2021, 13 : 5467 - 5475