Comparison of Gleason score of Prostate Cancer at Ultrasound/MRI Fusion Target Biopsy vs. Systematic Transrectal Ultrasound Guided Biopsy with Final Gleason score at Radical Prostatectomy

Author:

Jinxing YuORCID,Ugo Falagario,Sarah G Winks,Kendal Angell,Ann S Fulcher,Mary A Turner,Sterling Jones,Rohan Kankaria,Steven C Smith

Abstract

Purpose: To compare accuracy in predicting final Gleason Grade Group (GGG) of Prostate Cancer (PCa) of US/MRI fusion guided target (fBx) vs. systematic Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided (TRUS) biopsy, using histopathologic analysis at prostatectomy as the gold standard. Materials and methods: After obtaining IRB approval, we retrospectively reviewed records of patients who underwent Radical Prostatectomy (RP) from January 2014 through May 2019 with prior US/MRI fusion guided target or TRUS biopsy. The rates of upgrading (RP GGG > BX GGG), downgrading (RP GGG < BX GGG), and concordance (RP GGG = BX GGG) were compared between the fBx and TRUS groups. Age, PSA, PSA density, and prostate volume were also noted for all patients. Statistical analysis was utilized to assess the data. Results: A total of 348 men with complete clinical data were included in this study. The rate of downgrading and upgrading in the fBx group was less than in the TRUS biopsy group (14% vs. 19.6%, and 13.2% vs. 19.6%, respectively). The concordance rate was higher in the US-MR fBx group (72.9% vs. 60.7%, p < 0.05)) across all GGG. Notably, lower rates of concordance were found for GGG 1 (24.1%) and GGG 4 (3.6%) in the TRUS Bx group. Patients who underwent US-MR fBx had higher average PSA (9.4 vs. 6.5 ng/ml), higher PSA density (0.3 vs. 0.2 ng/ml2), and lower prostate volume (31 vs. 42 cc). Additionally, biopsy results showed a lower rate of GGG 1 (3.1% vs. 13.2%) and a higher rate of GGG 5 (14.7% vs. 5.5%) in the US-MR fBx group. Conclusions: Target biopsy has a higher GGG concordance compared to TRUS biopsy (72.9% vs. 60.7%, p < 0.05). In addition, there was less downgrading or upgrading of final PCa GGG in the fBx groups compared to TRUS Bx (14% vs. 19.6%, 13.2% vs. 19.6%, respectively). This finding may have important implications for treatment decisions.

Publisher

Peertechz Publications Private Limited

Subject

General Materials Science

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3