A biopsy simulation study to assess the accuracy of several transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)-biopsy strategies compared with template prostate mapping biopsies in patients who have undergone radical prostatectomy

BJU International

Volumn 110, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 812-820

  Hu, Yipeng ^a   Ahmed, Hashim U ^a   Carter, Tim ^a   Arumainayagam, Nimalan ^a   Lecornet, Emilie ^d   Barzell, Winston ^e   Freeman, Alex ^b   Nevoux, Pierre ^d   Hawkes, David J ^a   Villers, Arnauld ^d   Emberton, Mark ^a,c   Barratt, Dean C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON HOSPITALS   (United Kingdom)

^c University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust ^*  (United Kingdom)

^d UNIV LILLE   (France)

^e FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

active surveillance; focal therapy; prostate cancer; transperineal template prostate mapping

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; AGED; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; BIOPSY TECHNIQUE; CANCER PATIENT; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE PROCESSING; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TRANSPERINEAL TEMPLATE PROSTATE MAPPING BIOPSY; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY;

ADULT; AGED; BIOPSY, NEEDLE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; HUMANS; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSTATE; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, INTERVENTIONAL;

EID: 84865478632     PISSN: 14644096     EISSN: 1464410X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.10933.x     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Ahmed HU, Pendse D, Illing R, Allen C, van der Meulen JH, Emberton M,. Will focal therapy become a standard of care for men with localized prostate cancer? Nat Clin Pract Oncol 2007; 4: 632-42
2. Wei JT,. Limitations of a contemporary prostate biopsy: the blind march forward. Urol Oncol 2010; 28: 546-9
3. Smaldone MC, Cowan JE, Carroll PR, Davies BJ,. Eligibility for active surveillance and pathological outcomes for men undergoing radical prostatectomy in a large, community based cohort. J Urol 2010; 183: 138-43
4. Singh PB, Ahmed HU, Emberton M,. Active surveillance: is there a need for better risk stratification at the outset? J Clin Oncol 2010; 28: e513; author reply e514
5. de la Rosette J, Ahmed HU, Barentsz J, et al,. Focal therapy in prostate cancer-report from a consensus panel. J Endourol 2010; 24: 775-80
6. Mouraviev V, Johansen TE, Polascik TJ,. Contemporary results of focal therapy for prostate cancer using cryoablation. J Endourol 2010; 24: 827-34
7. Carter HB, Kettermann A, Warlick C, et al,. Expectant management of prostate cancer with curative intent: an update of the Johns Hopkins experience. J Urol 2007; 178: 2359-64
8. Onik G, Miessau M, Bostwick DG,. Three-dimensional prostate mapping biopsy has a potentially significant impact on prostate cancer management. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27: 4321-6
9. Ahmed HU, Freeman A, Kirkham A, et al,. Focal therapy for prostate cancer: a phase I/II trial. J Urol 2011; 185: 1246-54
10. Bott SR, Henderson A, Halls JE, Montgomery BS, Laing R, Langley SE,. Extensive transperineal template biopsies of prostate: modified technique and results. Urology 2006; 68: 1037-41
11. Andriole GL,. Pathology: the lottery of conventional prostate biopsy. Nat Rev Urol 2009; 6: 188-9
12. Alpert NM, Bradshaw JF, Kennedy D, Correia JA,. The Principal Axes Transformation-A Method for Image Registration. J Nucl Med 1990; 31: 1717-22
13. Raya SP, Udupa JK,. Shape-based interpolation of multidimensional objects. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1990; 9: 32-42
14. Loughlin M, Carlbom I, Busch C, et al,. Three-dimensional modeling of biopsy protocols for localized prostate cancer. Comput Med Imaging Graph 1998; 22: 229-38
15. Jonmarker S, Valdman A, Lindberg A, Hellström M, Egevad L,. Tissue shrinkage after fixation with formalin injection of prostatectomy specimens. Virchows Arch 2006; 449: 297-301
16. Heidenreich A, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, et al,. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised disease. Eur Urol 2011; 59: 572-83
17. Mohler J, Bahnson RR, Boston B, et al,. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology: prostate cancer. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2010; 8: 162-200
18. Dickinson L, Ahmed HU, Allen C, et al,. Magnetic resonance imaging for the detection, localisation, and characterisation of prostate cancer: recommendations from a European consensus meeting. Eur Urol 2011; 59: 477-94
19. Ouzzane A, Puech P, Lemaitre L, et al,. Combined Multiparametric MRI and Targeted Biopsies Improve Anterior Prostate Cancer Detection, Staging, and Grading. Urology 2011; 78: 1356-62
20. Massey FJ,. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test for Goodness of Fit. J Am Stat Assoc 1951; 46: 68. (C78)
21. Esserman L, Shieh Y, Thompson I,. Rethinking screening for breast cancer and prostate cancer. JAMA 2009; 302: 1685-92
22. Ahmed HU,. The index lesion and the origin of prostate cancer. NEJM 2009; 361: 1704-6
23. Karavitakis M, Ahmed HU, Abel PD, Hazell S, Winkler MH,. Tumor focality in prostate cancer: implications for focal therapy. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2011; 8: 48-55
24. Wolters T, Roobol MJ, van Leeuwen PJ, et al,. A critical analysis of the tumor volume threshold for clinically insignificant prostate cancer using a data set of a randomized screening trial. J Urol 2011; 185: 121-5
25. Shen F, Shinohara K, Kumar D, et al,. Three-dimensional sonography with needle tracking-Role in diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer. J Ultrasound Med 2008; 27: 895-905
26. Mozer P, Baumann M, Chevreau G, et al,. Mapping of transrectal ultrasonographic prostate biopsies: quality control and learning curve assessment by image processing. J Ultrasound Med 2009; 28: 455-60
27. Roehl KA, Antenor JA, Catalona WJ,. Serial biopsy results in prostate cancer screening study. J Urol 2002; 167: 2435-9
28. Cohen MS, Hanley RS, Kurteva T, et al,. Comparing the Gleason prostate biopsy and Gleason prostatectomy grading system: the Lahey Clinic Medical Center experience and an international meta-analysis. Eur Urol 2008; 54: 371-81
29. Kepner GR, Kepner JV,. Transperineal prostate biopsy: analysis of a uniform core sampling pattern that yields data on tumor volume limits in negative biopsies. Theor Biol Med Model 2010; 7: 23
30. Ahmed HU, Kirkham A, Arya M, et al,. Is it time to consider a role for MRI before prostate biopsy? Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2009; 6: 197-206
31. Crawford ED, Wilson SS, Torkko KC, et al,. Clinical staging of prostate cancer: a computer-simulated study of transperineal prostate biopsy. BJU Int 2005; 96: 999-1004
32. Merrick GS, Taubenslag W, Andreini H, et al,. The morbidity of transperineal template-guided prostate mapping biopsy. BJU Int 2008; 101: 1524-9