Korean J Urol.  2013 Jun;54(6):364-368.

Are More Low-Risk Prostate Cancers Detected by Repeated Biopsy? A Retrospective Pilot Study

• Lee SJ
• Hwang I
• Hwang EC
• Jung SI
• Kang TW
• Kwon DD
• Park K

Abstract

PURPOSE
We hypothesized that there might be a higher incidence of low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) in men diagnosed at a repeated biopsy. Thus, we investigated differences in clinicopathological results of PCa after primary and repeated biopsy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We retrospectively reviewed patients diagnosed with PCa at a primary or repeated biopsy from January 2004 to April 2011. Patients were stratified into primary biopsy and repeated biopsy groups. We analyzed prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage, Gleason score (GS), positive core ratio, and low-risk group by using D'Amico classification. We also investigated GS upgrading and upstaging after radical prostatectomy (RP).
RESULTS
Among 448 primary and 37 repeated biopsy PCa patients, 82 (group 1) and 25 (group 2) underwent RP. The percentage of low-risk patients did not differ significantly between the groups. The positive biopsy core ratio was significantly lower in group 2 (p=0.009). The percentages of GS upgrading and upstaging were 42.7% and 47.6% in group 1, respectively (p=0.568), and 48.0% and 52.0% in group 2, respectively (p=0.901). In the analysis of low-risk patients, GS upgrading and upstaging were not significantly different between the groups (p=0.615 and p=0.959, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
A lower positive core ratio may imply a small volume of PCa and possibly insignificant PCa in the repeated biopsy group. However, no significant differences were observed for the ratio of low-risk cancers, GS upgrading, or upstaging between the groups. Therefore, PCa diagnosed at a repeated biopsy is not an additional indication for active surveillance.

Keyword

Biopsy; Prostatectomy; Prostatic neoplasms

MeSH Terms

Biopsy
Humans
Incidence
Male
Neoplasm Grading
Passive Cutaneous Anaphylaxis
Pilot Projects
Prostate
Prostate-Specific Antigen
Prostatectomy
Prostatic Neoplasms
Retrospective Studies
Prostate-Specific Antigen

Reference

1. Liu D, Lehmann HP, Frick KD, Carter HB. Active surveillance versus surgery for low risk prostate cancer: a clinical decision analysis. J Urol. 2012; 187:1241–1246. PMID: 22335873.

2. Lane JA, Hamdy FC, Martin RM, Turner EL, Neal DE, Donovan JL. Latest results from the UK trials evaluating prostate cancer screening and treatment: the CAP and ProtecT studies. Eur J Cancer. 2010; 46:3095–3101. PMID: 21047592.

3. Djavan B, Susani M, Bursa B, Basharkhah A, Simak R, Marberger M. Predictability and significance of multifocal prostate cancer in the radical prostatectomy specimen. Tech Urol. 1999; 5:139–142. PMID: 10527256.

4. Yanke BV, Gonen M, Scardino PT, Kattan MW. Validation of a nomogram for predicting positive repeat biopsy for prostate cancer. J Urol. 2005; 173:421–424. PMID: 15643192.

5. Numao N, Kawakami S, Sakura M, Yoshida S, Koga F, Saito K, et al. Characteristics and clinical significance of prostate cancers missed by initial transrectal 12-core biopsy. BJU Int. 2012; 109:665–671. PMID: 21939488.

6. Park M, You D, Yoon JH, Jeong IG, Song C, Hong JH, et al. Does repeat biopsy affect the prognosis of patients with prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy? Analysis by the number of cores taken at initial biopsy. BJU Int. 2012; 109:1474–1479. PMID: 21933324.

7. Khang IH, Kim YB, Yang SO, Lee JK, Jung TY. Differences in postoperative pathological outcomes between prostate cancers diagnosed at initial and repeat biopsy. Korean J Urol. 2012; 53:531–535. PMID: 22949996.

8. Epstein JI, Walsh PC, Akingba G, Carter HB. The significance of prior benign needle biopsies in men subsequently diagnosed with prostate cancer. J Urol. 1999; 162:1649–1652. PMID: 10524890.

9. Tan N, Lane BR, Li J, Moussa AS, Soriano M, Jones JS. Prostate cancers diagnosed at repeat biopsy are smaller and less likely to be high grade. J Urol. 2008; 180:1325–1329. PMID: 18707706.

10. D'Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, Schultz D, Blank K, Broderick GA, et al. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA. 1998; 280:969–974. PMID: 9749478.

11. Ploussard G, Epstein JI, Montironi R, Carroll PR, Wirth M, Grimm MO, et al. The contemporary concept of significant versus insignificant prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2011; 60:291–303. PMID: 21601982.

12. Villa L, Capitanio U, Briganti A, Abdollah F, Suardi N, Salonia A, et al. The number of cores taken in patients diagnosed with a single microfocus at initial biopsy is a major predictor of insignificant prostate cancer. J Urol. 2013; 189:854–859. PMID: 23022004.

13. Bastian PJ, Mangold LA, Epstein JI, Partin AW. Characteristics of insignificant clinical T1c prostate tumors: a contemporary analysis. Cancer. 2004; 101:2001–2005. PMID: 15372478.

14. Lopez-Corona E, Ohori M, Wheeler TM, Reuter VE, Scardino PT, Kattan MW, et al. Prostate cancer diagnosed after repeat biopsies have a favorable pathological outcome but similar recurrence rate. J Urol. 2006; 175(3 Pt 1):923–927. PMID: 16469581.

15. Djavan B, Ravery V, Zlotta A, Dobronski P, Dobrovits M, Fakhari M, et al. Prospective evaluation of prostate cancer detected on biopsies 1, 2, 3 and 4: when should we stop? J Urol. 2001; 166:1679–1683. PMID: 11586201.