Korean J Urol.  2014 Apr;55(4):245-248. 10.4111/kju.2014.55.4.245.

Detection Rate of Prostate Cancer on the Basis of the Vienna Nomogram: A Singapore Study

• Teo JK
• Poh BK
• Ng FC
• Fong YK

• KMID: 1885604
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4111/kju.2014.55.4.245

Abstract

PURPOSE
The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy of the Vienna nomogram prostate biopsy model in the detection of prostate cancer in our local population. We also assessed the incidence of complications from using such a template.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
From January 2006 to June 2007, 120 men with either elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) scores (>4 ng/mL) and/or abnormal digital rectal examination were enrolled prospectively to undergo extraction of 6 to 18 cores for transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy, as indicated by the Vienna nomogram.
RESULTS
The mean age was 62.6+/-8.3 years (range, 40-86 years). The mean PSA score was 13.42 ng/mL. The mean number of cores obtained was 9.68+/-3.1. According to the Vienna nomogram, 27 out of a total of 120 patients had prostate cancer, for a detection rate of 22.5%. In the group of patients with PSA scores <10 ng/mL, the detection rate was 14.9% (14 of 94 patients). The group of patients with PSA scores >10 ng/mL had a detection rate of 50% (13 of 26). The complication rate in our study was 7.5%.
CONCLUSIONS
With the use of the Vienna nomogram, our prostate cancer detection rate is comparable to previously published data for Asian patients. This nomogram offers an easy tool with which to select the optimal number of prostate biopsy cores to be taken on the basis of patient age and total prostate volume. With this biopsy strategy, we also have found that the complication rate from prostate biopsy is low.

Keyword

Biopsy; Nomogram; Prostate neoplasms

MeSH Terms

Asian Continental Ancestry Group
Biopsy
Digital Rectal Examination
Humans
Incidence
Male
Nomograms*
Prospective Studies
Prostate*
Prostate-Specific Antigen
Prostatic Neoplasms*
Singapore*
Prostate-Specific Antigen

Figure

• 

  FIG. 1 Histopathological breakdown of the prostate cancer patients.

Reference

1. Seow A, Koh WP, Chia KS, Shi LM, Lee HP, Shanmugaratnam K. Cancer Incidence in Singapore 1968-2002: Singapore Cancer Registry Report No 6, 2000. Singapore: Singapore Cancer Registry;2007.

2. Eskew LA, Bare RL, McCullough DL. Systematic 5 region prostate biopsy is superior to sextant method for diagnosing carcinoma of the prostate. J Urol. 1997; 157:199–202.

3. Presti JC Jr, O'Dowd GJ, Miller MC, Mattu R, Veltri RW. Extended peripheral zone biopsy schemes increase cancer detection rates and minimize variance in prostate specific antigen and age related cancer rates: results of a community multi-practice study. J Urol. 2003; 169:125–129.

4. Djavan B, Zlotta A, Remzi M, Ghawidel K, Basharkhah A, Schulman CC, et al. Optimal predictors of prostate cancer on repeat prostate biopsy: a prospective study of 1,051 men. J Urol. 2000; 163:1144–1148.

5. Remzi M, Djavan B, Wammack R, Momeni M, Seitz C, Erne B, et al. Can total and transition zone volume of the prostate determine whether to perform a repeat biopsy? Urology. 2003; 61:161–166.

6. Remzi M, Fong YK, Dobrovits M, Anagnostou T, Seitz C, Waldert M, et al. The Vienna nomogram: validation of a novel biopsy strategy defining the optimal number of cores based on patient age and total prostate volume. J Urol. 2005; 174(4 Pt 1):1256–1260.

7. Yang WJ, Lee DH, Chung BH, Cho JS, Choi YD, Kim SJ, et al. Detection rate of prostate cancer on biopsy according to serum prostate-specific antigen in Korean men: a multicenter study. Urology. 2006; 67:333–336.

8. Ng LG, Yip S, Tan PH, Yuen J, Lau W, Cheng C. Improved detection rate of prostate cancer using the 10-core biopsy strategy in Singapore. Asian J Surg. 2002; 25:238–243.

9. Mariappan P, Chong WL, Sundram M, Mohamed SR. Increasing prostate biopsy cores based on volume vs the sextant biopsy: a prospective randomized controlled clinical study on cancer detection rates and morbidity. BJU Int. 2004; 94:307–310.

10. Egawa S, Matsumoto K, Yoshida K, Iwamura M, Kuwao S, Koshiba K. Results of transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsies and clinical significance of Japanese prostate cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 1998; 28:666–672.

11. Yu HJ, Lai MK. The usefulness of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density in patients with intermediate serum PSA level in a country with low incidence of prostate cancer. Urology. 1998; 51:5A Suppl. 125–130.

12. Gretzer MB, Partin AW. PSA levels and the detection rate of prostate cancer on biopsy. Eur Urol. 2002; 1:Suppl. 21–27.

13. Djavan B, Remzi M, Schulman CC, Marberger M, Zlotta AR. Repeat prostate biopsy: who, how and when? a review. Eur Urol. 2002; 42:93–103.

14. Ung JO, San Francisco IF, Regan MM, DeWolf WC, Olumi AF. The relationship of prostate gland volume to extended needle biopsy on prostate cancer detection. J Urol. 2003; 169:130–135.

15. Rietbergen JB, Kruger AE, Hoedemaeker RF, Bangma CH, Kirkels WJ, Schroder FH. Repeat screening for prostate cancer after 1-year followup in 984 biopsied men: clinical and pathological features of detected cancer. J Urol. 1998; 160(6 Pt 1):2121–2125.

16. Uzzo RG, Wei JT, Waldbaum RS, Perlmutter AP, Byrne JC, Vaughan ED Jr. The influence of prostate size on cancer detection. Urology. 1995; 46:831–836.

17. Lecuona A, Heyns CF. A prospective, randomized trial comparing the Vienna nomogram to an eight-core prostate biopsy protocol. BJU Int. 2011; 108:204–208.

18. Bak JB, Landas SK, Haas GP. Characterization of prostate cancer missed by sextant biopsy. Clin Prostate Cancer. 2003; 2:115–118.

19. Norberg M, Egevad L, Holmberg L, Sparen P, Norlen BJ, Busch C. The sextant protocol for ultrasound-guided core biopsies of the prostate underestimates the presence of cancer. Urology. 1997; 50:562–566.

20. Djavan B, Waldert M, Zlotta A, Dobronski P, Seitz C, Remzi M, et al. Safety and morbidity of first and repeat transrectal ultrasound guided prostate needle biopsies: results of a prospective European prostate cancer detection study. J Urol. 2001; 166:856–860.