Prostate rebiopsy is a poor surrogate of treatment efficacy in localized prostate cancer.

PURPOSE Many investigators use prostate rebiopsy as an indicator of treatment efficacy and tumor response of localized prostate cancer for therapies in which the gland remains in situ. Because of the inherent sampling error of needle directed biopsies, however, some men will have a false-negative rebiopsy even if they have had no therapy or if the therapeutic intervention was unsuccessful in eradicating the malignancy. We evaluate the risk of a false-negative biopsy and the clinical factors that influence this risk. MATERIALS AND METHODS A total of 90 patients undergoing radical prostatectomy for clinically localized disease underwent sextant biopsy of the prostate immediately after removal of the gland. Data collected included prostate specific antigen (PSA), hormonal status, age and biopsy core status. RESULTS Of the total study population 67.8% received neoadjuvant hormonal therapy. While all patients had pathologically confirmed adenocarcinoma within the prostatectomy specimen, 45.6% demonstrated a false-negative rebiopsy. Within a combined predictive model, PSA and hormonal status demonstrated a statistically significant effect on the false-negative rebiopsy rate. Predictive power of this combined model was high across the spectrum of risk for a false-negative rebiopsy. CONCLUSIONS This series demonstrates that the risk of a false-negative sextant biopsy in the presence of documented prostate cancer is high and is affected by several factors, including PSA and hormonal status. These data suggest that prostate sextant rebiopsy is an inaccurate method of assessing the therapeutic efficacy of treatments for carcinoma of the prostate in which the gland remains in situ following therapy.

[1]  P. Walsh,et al.  Use of repeat sextant and transition zone biopsies for assessing extent of prostate cancer. , 1997, The Journal of urology.

[2]  R. Abrams,et al.  Androgen deprivation with radiation therapy compared with radiation therapy alone for locally advanced prostatic carcinoma: a randomized comparative trial of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group. , 1995, Urology.

[3]  G. Perry,et al.  Routine prostate biopsies following radiotherapy for prostate cancer: results for 226 patients. , 1995, Urology.

[4]  R. B. Smith,et al.  The incidence and significance of detectable levels of serum prostate specific antigen after radical prostatectomy. , 1994, The Journal of urology.

[5]  P C Prorok,et al.  Prostate cancer screening in the prostate, lung, colorectal and ovarian cancer screening trial of the National Cancer Institute. , 1994, The Journal of urology.

[6]  F. Lee,et al.  US-guided percutaneous cryoablation of prostate cancer. , 1994, Radiology.

[7]  W. Catalona,et al.  Serial prostatic biopsies in men with persistently elevated serum prostate specific antigen values. , 1994, The Journal of urology.

[8]  A. Zietman,et al.  Radical radiation therapy in the management of prostatic adenocarcinoma: the initial prostate specific antigen value as a predictor of treatment outcome. , 1994, The Journal of urology.

[9]  Boris Rubinsky,et al.  Transrectal ultrasound‐guided percutaneous radical cryosurgical ablation of the prostate , 1993, Cancer.

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

[11]  H. Stricker,et al.  Detection of non-palpable prostate cancer. A mathematical and laboratory model. , 1993, British journal of urology.