Lesion volume predicts prostate cancer risk and aggressiveness: validation of its value alone and matched with prostate imaging reporting and data system score

BJU International

Volumn 120, Issue 1, 2017, Pages 92-103

  Martorana, Eugenio ^a   Pirola, Giacomo Maria ^a   Scialpi, Michele ^b   Micali, Salvatore ^a   Iseppi, Andrea ^a   Bonetti, Luca Reggiani ^a   Kaleci, Shaniko ^a   Torricelli, Pietro ^a   Bianchi, Giampaolo ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MODENA AND REGGIO EMILIA   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PERUGIA   (Italy)

Author keywords

clinically significant prostate cancer; lesion volume; PI RADS v2 score; prostate cancer detection; tumour aggressiveness

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BIOPSY; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER RISK; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; GLEASON SCORE; HEMATOMA; HEMATURIA; HEMOSPERMIA; HISTOLOGY; HUMAN; LESION VOLUME; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PERINEAL HEMATOMA; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATE IMAGING REPORTING AND DATA SYSTEM VERSION 2 SCORE; PROSTATE VOLUME; PROSTATECTOMY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SCORING SYSTEM; TUMOR VOLUME; ULTRASONOGRAPHY FUSION TARGETED BIOPSY; URINE RETENTION; VOLUME; BLOOD; CANCER GRADING; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; IMAGE GUIDED BIOPSY; ITALY; MIDDLE AGED; ORGAN SIZE; PATHOLOGY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PROCEDURES; PROSTATE; PROSTATE TUMOR; VALIDATION STUDY;

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

AGED; HUMANS; IMAGE-GUIDED BIOPSY; ITALY; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM GRADING; ORGAN SIZE; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROSTATE; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TUMOR BURDEN;

EID: 84990225500     PISSN: 14644096     EISSN: 1464410X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/bju.13649     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Fütterer JJ, Briganti A, De Visschere P et al. Can clinically significant prostate cancer be detected with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging? A systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol 2015; 68: 1045–53
2. Hoeks CM, Barentsz JO, Hambrock T et al. Prostate cancer: multiparametric MR imaging for detection, localization, and staging. Radiology 2011; 261: 46–66
3. Delongchamps NB, Beuvon F, Eiss D et al. Multiparametric MRI is helpful to predict tumor focality, stage, and size in patients diagnosed with unilateral low-risk prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2011; 14: 232–7
4. Delongchamps NB, Rouanne M, Flam T et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for the detection and localization of prostate cancer: combination of T2-weighted, dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted imaging. BJU Int 2011; 107: 1411–18
5. Hamoen EH, De Rooij M, Witjes JA, Barentsz JO, Rovers MM. Use of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) for prostate cancer detection with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging: a diagnostic meta-analysis. Eur Urol 2015; 67: 1112–21
6. Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL et al. PI-RADS prostate imaging - reporting and data system: 2015, Version 2. Eur Urol 2016; 69: 16–40
7. Schoots IG, Roobol MJ, Nieboer D, Bangma CH, Steyerberg EW, Hunink MG. Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy may enhance the diagnostic accuracy of significant prostate cancer detection compared to standard transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 2015; 68: 438–50
8. Barentsz JO, Weinreb JC, Verma S et al. Synopsis of the PI-RADS v2 guidelines for multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging and recommendations for use. Eur Urol 2016; 69: 41–9
9. Hansen N, Patruno G, Wadhwa K et al. Magnetic resonance and ultrasound image fusion supported transperineal prostate biopsy using the Ginsburg protocol: technique, learning points, and biopsy results. Eur Urol 2016; 70: 332–40
10. Moore CM, Kasivisvanathan V, Eggener S et al. Standards of reporting for MRI-targeted biopsy studies (START) of the prostate: recommendations from an International Working Group. Eur Urol 2013; 64: 544–52
11. Matyka M, Ollila MA. Pressure model for soft body simulation. Conference Proceedings from SIGRAD2003. Available at: http://www.ep.liu.se/ecp/010/007/ecp01007.pdf. Accessed September 2016
12. Ancona MG. Computational Methods for Applied Science and Engineering: An Interactive Approach, Paramus, NJ, USA: Rinton Press, 2002
13. Matyka M. How To Implement a Pressure Soft Body Model, March 30, 2004. Available at: maq@panoramix.ift.uni.wroc. Accessed September 2016.
14. Baco E, Ukimura O, Rud E et al. Magnetic resonance imaging-transectal ultrasound image-fusion biopsies accurately characterize the index tumor: correlation with step-sectioned radical prostatectomy specimens in 135 patients. Eur Urol 2015; 67: 787–94
15. Perera M, Lawrentschuk N, Bolton D, Clouston D. Comparison of contemporary methods for estimating prostate tumour volume in pathological specimens. BJU Int 2014; 113(Suppl. 2): 29–34
16. Kuru TH, Wadhwa K, Chang RT et al. Definitions of terms, processes and a minimum dataset for transperineal prostate biopsies: a standardization approach of the Ginsburg Study Group for Enhanced Prostate Diagnostics. BJU Int 2013; 112: 568–77
17. Le JD, Tan N, Shkolyar E et al. Multifocality and prostate cancer detection by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging: correlation with whole-mount histopathology. Eur Urol 2015; 67: 569–76
18. Cash H, Maxeiner A, Stephan C et al. The detection of significant prostate cancer is correlated with the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) in MRI/transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy. World J Urol 2016; 34: 525–32
19. Liddell H, Jyoti R, Haxhimolla HZ. mp-MRI prostate characterised PIRADS 3 lesions are associated with a low risk of clinically significant prostate cancer- a retrospective review of 92 biopsed PIRADS 3 lesions. Curr Urol 2015; 8: 96–100
20. Valerio M, Donaldson I, Emberton M et al. Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer using magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy: a systematic review. Eur Urol 2015; 68: 8–19
21. Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Truong H et al. Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound-fusion biopsy significantly upgrades prostate cancer versus systematic 12-core transrectal ultrasound biopsy. Eur Urol 2013; 64: 713–19
22. Martorana E, Micali S, Ghaith A et al. Advantages of single-puncture transperineal saturation biopsy of prostate: analysis of outcomes in 125 patients using our scheme. Int Urol Nephrol 2015; 47: 735–41
23. 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
24. Radtke JP, Schwab C, Wolf MB et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and MRI-transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy for index tumor detection: correlation with radical prostatectomy specimen. Eur Urol 2016; [Epub ahead of print]. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.12.052
25. Litjens GJ, Barentsz JO, Karssemeijer N, Huisman HJ. Clinical evaluation of a computer-aided diagnosis system for determining cancer aggressiveness in prostate MRI. Eur Radiol 2015; 25: 3187–99
26. Dwivedi DK, Kumar R, Bora GS et al. Stratification of the aggressiveness of prostate cancer using pre-biopsy multiparametric MRI (mpMRI). NMR Biomed 2016; 29: 232–8
27. Wolters T, Roobol MJ, van Leeuwen PJ et al. Should pathologists routinely report prostate tumour volume? The prognostic value of tumour volume in prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2010; 57: 821–9