How reliable is 12-core prostate biopsy procedure in the detection of prostate cancer?

Journal of the Canadian Urological Association

Volumn 7, Issue 5-6, 2013, Pages

  Serefoglu, Ege Can ^a   Altinova, Serkan ^a   Ugras, Nevzat Serdar ^a   Akincioglu, Egemen ^a   Asil, Erem ^a   Balbay, M Derya ^a  

^a ATATURK TRAINING AND RESEARCH HOSPITAL   (Turkey)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84877791680     PISSN: 19116470     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5489/cuaj.11224     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Hodge KK, McNeal JE, Terris MK, et al. Random systematic versus directed ultrasound guided transrectal core biopsies of the prostate. J Urol 1989;142:71-74; discussion 74-5.
2. Ravery V, Dominique S, Panhard X, et al. The 20-core prostate biopsy protocol-a new gold standard? J Urol 2008;179:504-507. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2007.09.033.
3. Scattoni V, Raber M, Abdollah F, et al. Biopsy schemes with the fewest cores for detecting 95% of the prostate cancers detected by a 24-core biopsy. Eur Urol 2010;57:1-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2009.08.011.
4. Scattoni V, Roscigno M, Raber M, et al. Initial extended transrectal prostate biopsy-are more prostate cancers detected with 18 cores than with 12 cores? J Urol 2008;179:1327-1331; discussion 1331. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2007.11.052.
5. Levine MA, Ittman M, Melamed J, et al. Two consecutive sets of transrectal ultrasound guided sextant biopsies of the prostate for the detection of prostate cancer. J Urol 1998;159:471-475; discussion 475-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(01)63951-X
6. Babaian RJ, Toi A, Kamoi K, et al. A comparative analysis of sextant and an extended 11-core multisite directed biopsy strategy. J Urol 2000;163:152-157. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67993-1.
7. Pepe P, Aragona F. Saturation prostate needle biopsy and prostate cancer detection at initial and repeat evaluation. Urology 2007;70:1131-1135. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2007.07.068.
8. Serefoglu EC, Ozdemir AT, Balbay MD. Re: The 20-core prostate biopsy protocol-a new gold standard?: V. Ravery, S. Dominique, X. Panhard, M. Toublanc, L. Boccon-Gibod and L. Boccon-Gibod. J Urol 2008;179:504-507. J Urol 2008;180:2256-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2008.07.077.
9. Stamey TA. Making the most out of six systematic sextant biopsies. Urology 1995;45:2-12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0090-4295(95)96168-2.
10. Aus G, Bergdahl S, Hugosson J, et al. Outcome of laterally directed sextant biopsies of the prostate in screened males aged 50-66 years. Implications for sampling order. Eur Urol 2001;39:655-660; discussion 661.http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000052523.
11. Eskicorapci SY, Baydar DE, Akbal C, et al. An extended 10-core transrectal ultrasonography guided prostate biopsy protocol improves the detection of prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2004;45:444-448; discussion 448-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2003.11.024.
12. Letran JL, Meyer GE, Loberiza FR, et al. The effect of prostate volume on the yield of needle biopsy. J Urol 1998;160:1718-1721. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(01)62392-9.
13. Eskicorapci SY, Guliyev F, Akdogan B, et al. Individualization of the biopsy protocol according to the prostate gland volume for prostate cancer detection. J Urol 2005;173:1536-1540. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000154242.60413.3d
14. Vashi AR, Wojno KJ, Gillespie B, et al. A model for the number of cores per prostate biopsy based on patient age and prostate gland volume. J Urol 1998;159:920-924. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(01)63771-6.
15. Aus G, Becker C, Franzen S, et al. Cumulative prostate cancer risk assessment with the aid of the free-to-total prostate specific antigen ratio. Eur Urol 2004;45:160-165. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2003.09.008.
16. Lodding P, Aus G, Bergdahl S, et al. Characteristics of screening detected prostate cancer in men 50 to 66 years old with 3 to 4 ng./ml. Prostate specific antigen. J Urol 1998;159:899-903. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(01)63766-2.
17. Horninger W, Reissigl A, Rogatsch H, et al. Prostate cancer screening in the Tyrol, Austria: experience and results. Eur J Cancer 2000;36:1322-1335. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0959-8049(00)00113-1.
18. Thompson IM, Pauler DK, Goodman PJ, et al. Prevalence of prostate cancer among men with a prostatespecific antigen level < or =4.0 ng per milliliter. N Engl J Med 2004;350:2239-2246. http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa031918.
19. Huber PR, Schmid HP, Mattarelli G, et al. Serum free prostate specific antigen: isoenzymes in benign hyperplasia and cancer of the prostate. Prostate 1995;27:212-219. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pros.2990270406.
20. Benson MC, Whang IS, Pantuck A, et al. Prostate specific antigen density: a means of distinguishing benign prostatic hypertrophy and prostate cancer. J Urol 1992;147:815-816.
21. Zlotta AR, Djavan B, Marberger M, et al. Prostate specific antigen density of the transition zone: a new effective parameter for prostate cancer prediction. J Urol 1997;157:1315-1321. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(01)64961-9.
22. Oesterling JE, Jacobsen SJ, Chute CG, et al. Serum prostate-specific antigen in a community-based population of healthy men. Establishment of age-specific reference ranges. JAMA 1993;270:860-864. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.1993.03510070082041.
23. Catalona WJ, Smith DS, Wolfert RL, et al. Evaluation of percentage of free serum prostate-specific antigen to improve specificity of prostate cancer screening. JAMA 1995;274:1214-1220. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.1995.03530150038031.
24. Okihara K, Cheli CD, Partin AW, et al. Comparative analysis of complexed prostate specific antigen, free prostate specific antigen and their ratio in detecting prostate cancer. J Urol 2002;167:2017-2023; discussion 2023-4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(05)65075-6.
25. Carter HB, Pearson JD, Metter EJ, et al. Longitudinal evaluation of prostate-specific antigen levels in men with and without prostate disease. JAMA 1992;267:2215-2220. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.1992.03480160073037.
26. Schmid HP, McNeal JE, Stamey TA. Observations on the doubling time of prostate cancer. The use of serial prostate-specific antigen in patients with untreated disease as a measure of increasing cancer volume. Cancer 1993;71:2031-2040. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(19930315)71:62031:AIDCNCR28207106183.0.CO;2-Q
27. Svetec D, McCabe K, Peretsman S, et al. Prostate rebiopsy is a poor surrogate of treatment efficacy in localized prostate cancer. J Urol 1998;159:1606-1608. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00005392-199805000-00052.
28. Fink KG, Hutarew G, Lumper W, et al. Prostate cancer detection with two sets of ten-core compared with two sets of sextant biopsies. Urology 2001;58:735-739. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0090-4295(01)01352-8.
29. Leibovici D, Shilo Y, Raz O, et al. Is the diagnostic yield of prostate needle biopsies affected by prostate volume? Urol Oncol 2011 Sept 14. [Epub ahead of print]
30. Numao N, Kawakami S, Sakura M, et al. Characteristics and clinical significance of prostate cancers missed by initial transrectal 12-core biopsy. BJU Int 2012;109:665-71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10427.x. Epub 2011 Sep 21.
31. 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;54:371-381. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2008.03.049.
32. Davies JD, Aghazadeh MA, Phillips S, et al. Prostate Size as a Predictor of Gleason Score Upgrading in Patients With Low Risk Prostate Cancer. J Urol 2011;186:2221-2227. Epub 2011 Oct 19.
33. D'Amico AV, Renshaw AA, Arsenault L, et al. Clinical predictors of upgrading to Gleason grade 4 or 5 disease at radical prostatectomy: potential implications for patient selection for radiation and androgen suppression therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999;45:841-846. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0360-3016(99)00260-6.
34. Chun FK, Steuber T, Erbersdobler A, et al. Development and internal validation of a nomogram predicting the probability of prostate cancer Gleason sum upgrading between biopsy and radical prostatectomy pathology. Eur Urol 2006;49:820-826. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2005.11.007.
35. Fukagai T, Namiki T, Namiki H, et al. Discrepancies between Gleason scores of needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens. Pathol Int 2001;51:364-370. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1440-1827.2001.01207.x