Current prostate biopsy protocols cannot reliably identify patients for focal therapy: correlation of low-risk prostate cancer on biopsy with radical prostatectomy findings.

Focal therapy appears to be an attractive alternative approach for patients with localized prostate cancer (PCa). Identifying suitable candidates is crucial to the success of focal therapy. Currently, standard transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy remains the widespread approach to evaluate patient suitability. In this study, we evaluated the ability of current biopsy protocols to predict cancer characteristics in radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens. We reviewed 4437 cases from 2000 to 2008 in our PowerPath database, and identified 158 patients with low-risk cancer, defined as a pre-biopsy PSA level <or= 10 ng/mL, unilateral, low tumor volume (<or=5%) and low to intermediate Gleason score (GS<or=6) on first positive prostate biopsy. The pathological characteristics of subsequent RP specimens were reviewed. We found that, of 158 patients with these criteria, 117 (74%) had bilateral cancer, 49 (31%) had increased tumor volume (>or= 10%), and 46 (29%) were upgraded to GS >or= 7 at RPs. When patients were stratified by total biopsy core numbers, extended biopsy core protocols were not significantly more reliable in identifying unilateral and low volume prostate cancer patients. One core positive on biopsy was not significantly superior to > 2 positive cores in predicting unilateral, low volume, low stage cancer at prostatectomy. These findings indicate that current standard prostate biopsy protocols have limited accuracy in identifying candidates for focal therapy.

[1]  A. Kassis,et al.  Putative molecular signatures for the imaging of prostate cancer , 2010, Expert review of molecular diagnostics.

[2]  Rajiv Dhir,et al.  Differences in gene expression in prostate cancer, normal appearing prostate tissue adjacent to cancer and prostate tissue from cancer free organ donors , 2005, BMC Cancer.

[3]  T. Stamey,et al.  Secondary Cancers in the Prostate Do Not Determine PSA Biochemical Failure in Untreated Men Undergoing Radical Retropubic Prostatectomy , 2001, European Urology.

[4]  M. Terris,et al.  Predicting unilateral prostate cancer based on biopsy features: implications for focal ablative therapy--results from the SEARCH database. , 2007, The Journal of urology.

[5]  J. Lloreta,et al.  The relationship between tumor volume and the number of positive cores in men undergoing multisite extended biopsy: implication for expectant management. , 2005, The Journal of urology.

[6]  Caroline Moore,et al.  Minimally-invasive technologies in uro-oncology: the role of cryotherapy, HIFU and photodynamic therapy in whole gland and focal therapy of localised prostate cancer. , 2009, Surgical oncology.

[7]  M. Brawer,et al.  Topography of neovascularity in human prostate carcinoma , 1995, Cancer.

[8]  Oliver Sartor,et al.  Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer: a critical appraisal of rationale and modalities. , 2007, The Journal of urology.

[9]  K. Butler,et al.  Differential gene expression in tumor adjacent histologically normal prostatic tissue indicates field cancerization. , 2009, International journal of oncology.

[10]  M. Terris,et al.  Random systematic versus directed ultrasound guided transrectal core biopsies of the prostate. , 1989, The Journal of urology.

[11]  E. H. Lambert,et al.  Focal cryosurgery: encouraging health outcomes for unifocal prostate cancer. , 2005, Urology.

[12]  S. Lele,et al.  Udp‐glucose dehydrogenase as a novel field‐specific candidate biomarker of prostate cancer , 2010, International journal of cancer.

[13]  Yan Yan,et al.  Is there a better way to biopsy the prostate? Prospects for a novel transrectal systematic biopsy approach. , 2007, Urology.

[14]  J. Gore,et al.  Optimal combinations of systematic sextant and laterally directed biopsies for the detection of prostate cancer. , 2001, The Journal of urology.

[15]  H. Ozen,et al.  Individualization of the biopsy protocol according to the prostate gland volume for prostate cancer detection. , 2005, The Journal of urology.

[16]  M. Melamed,et al.  Appropriate patient selection in the focal treatment of prostate cancer: the role of transperineal 3-dimensional pathologic mapping of the prostate--a 4-year experience. , 2007, Urology.

[17]  Hashim Uddin Ahmed,et al.  The index lesion and the origin of prostate cancer. , 2009, The New England journal of medicine.

[18]  Alevizos Alevizos,et al.  Impact of Additional Sampling in the TRUS-Guided Biopsy for the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer , 2007, Urologia Internationalis.

[19]  V. Mouraviev,et al.  Focal therapy for prostate cancer is a reasonable treatment option in properly selected patients. , 2009, Urology.

[20]  S. Taneja,et al.  Can contemporary transrectal prostate biopsy accurately select candidates for hemi‐ablative focal therapy of prostate cancer? , 2009, BJU international.

[21]  J. Gillespie,et al.  Gene promoter methylation in prostate tumor-associated stromal cells. , 2006, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[22]  Baris Turkbey,et al.  Imaging localized prostate cancer: current approaches and new developments. , 2009, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[23]  M. Marberger.  Energy-based ablative therapy of prostate cancer: high-intensity focused ultrasound and cryoablation , 2007, Current opinion in urology.

[24]  D. Bostwick,et al.  Preoperative prediction of unifocal, unilateral, margin-negative, and small volume prostate cancer. , 2008, Urology.

[25]  E. Crawford,et al.  The Current Use and Future Trends of Focal Surgical Therapy in the Management of Localized Prostate Cancer , 2007, Cancer journal.

[26]  Jonathan I. Epstein,et al.  Ability to Predict Metastasis Based On Pathology Findings and Alterations in Nuclear Structure Of Normal-Appearing and Cancer Peripheral Zone Epithelium in the Prostate , 2004, Clinical Cancer Research.

[27]  Leo L. Cheng,et al.  Metabolomic Imaging for Human Prostate Cancer Detection , 2010, Science Translational Medicine.

[28]  N. Polissar,et al.  Cancer-related changes in prostate DNA as men age and early identification of metastasis in primary prostate tumors , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[29]  Albert P. Chen,et al.  Hyperpolarized 13C lactate, pyruvate, and alanine: noninvasive biomarkers for prostate cancer detection and grading. , 2008, Cancer research.

[30]  A. Mazumder,et al.  Quantitative, spatial resolution of the epigenetic field effect in prostate cancer , 2008, The Prostate.

[31]  Xavière Panhard,et al.  The 20-core prostate biopsy protocol--a new gold standard? , 2008, The Journal of urology.

[32]  J. Srigley.  Key issues in handling and reporting radical prostatectomy specimens. , 2009, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[33]  J. Moul,et al.  Prostate cancer laterality as a rationale of focal ablative therapy for the treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer , 2007, Cancer.

[34]  Jun Luo,et al.  Copy Number Analysis Indicates Monoclonal Origin of Lethal Metastatic Prostate Cancer , 2009, Nature Medicine.

[35]  M. Toublanc,et al.  Extensive biopsy protocol improves the detection rate of prostate cancer. , 2000, The Journal of urology.

[36]  C. Pan,et al.  Comparative analysis of sampling methods for grossing radical prostatectomy specimens performed for nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostatic adenocarcinoma. , 2001, Human pathology.