Clinicopathologic differences between prostate cancers detected during initial and repeat transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy in Korea

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate: Lights and shadows

Prostate cancer is the second most commonly diagnosed cancer in man. Since the first MRI was performed, enormous progress has been made in diagnosis, treatment, and follow up of PCa, mainly due to multiparametric prostatic MRI (mpMRI). Although mpMRI has become the best imaging tool for identifying PCa, some limitations still exist. Prostate imaging with mpMRI is, to date, the best way to locate suspicious lesions to trigger prostate biopsy, plan active surveillance, or definitive treatment. In case of relapse, mpMRI can help detect local disease and provide specific management. It is well known that there is a subset of patients in whom mpMRI fails to depict csPCa. These missed significant cancers demand great attention. Prostate mpMRI quality depends on several factors related to equipment (including equipment vendor, magnet field and gradient strength, coil set used, software and hardware levels, sequence parameter choices), patient (medications, body habitus, motion, metal implants, rectal gas), and most importantly the radiologic interpretation of images (learning curve effects, subjectivity of observations, interobserver variations, and reporting styles). Inter-reader variability represents a huge current limitation of this method. Therefore, mpMRI remains the best imaging tool available to detect PCa, guiding diagnosis, treatment, and follow up while inter-reader variability represents the best limitation. Radiomics can help identifying imaging biomarkers to help radiologist in detecting significant PCa, reducing examination times, and costs.

Predictive factors of prostate cancer diagnosis with PSA 4.0-10.0 ng/ml in a multi-ethnic Asian population, Malaysia

OBJECTIVES

To identify the associated factors determining prostate cancer detection using transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy, within a multi-ethnic Malaysian population with prostate specific antigen (PSA) between 4.0 and 10.0 ng/ml.

METHODS

Study subjects included men with initial PSA between 4.0 and 10.0 ng/ml that have undergone 12-core TRUS-guided prostate biopsy between 2009 and 2016. The prostate cancer detection rate was calculated, while potential factors associated with detection were investigated via univariable and multivariable analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 617 men from a multi-ethnic background encompassing Chinese (63.5%), Malay (23.1%) and Indian (13.3%) were studied. The overall cancer detection rate was 14.3% (88/617), which included cancers detected at biopsy 1 (first biopsy), biopsy 2 (second biopsy with previous negative biopsy) and biopsy ≥ 3 (third or more biopsies with prior negative biopsies). Indian men displayed higher detection rate (23.2%) and increased risk of prostate cancer development (OR 1.85, 95% CI 1.03-3.32, p < 0.05), compared to their Malay (9.8%) and Chinese (14.0%) counterparts. Multivariable analysis revealed that ethnicity and PSA density (PSAD) are independent factors associated with overall prostate cancer detection rate. A unit increase of PSAD reflected an increase in PSA after controlling for prostate volume.

CONCLUSION

Prostate cancer detection in Malaysia is comparatively lower. Our study suggests that ethnicity and PSA density should be considered when recommending first or repeat TRUS-guided prostate biopsy for prostate cancer detection in a multi-ethnic Malaysian population.