» Articles » PMID: 34181465

The Risk of Prostate Cancer Progression in Active Surveillance Patients with Bilateral Disease Detected by Combined Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Fusion and Systematic Biopsy

Abstract

Purpose: We sought to evaluate whether bilateral prostate cancer detected at active surveillance (AS) enrollment is associated with progression to Grade Group (GG) ≥2 and to compare the efficacy of combined targeted biopsy plus systematic biopsy (Cbx) vs systematic biopsy (Sbx) or targeted biopsy alone to detect bilateral disease.

Materials And Methods: A prospectively maintained database of patients referred to our institution from 2007-2020 was queried. The study cohort included all AS patients with GG1 on confirmatory Cbx and followup of at least 1 year. Cox proportional hazard analysis identified baseline characteristics associated with progression to ≥GG2 at any point throughout followup.

Results: Of 579 patients referred, 103 patients had GG1 on Cbx and were included in the study; 49/103 (47.6%) patients progressed to ≥GG2, with 30/72 (41.7%) patients with unilateral disease progressing and 19/31 (61.3%) patients with bilateral disease progressing. Median time to progression was 68 months vs 52 months for unilateral and bilateral disease, respectively (p=0.006). Both prostate specific antigen density (HR 1.72, p=0.005) and presence of bilateral disease (HR 2.21, p=0.012) on confirmatory biopsy were associated with AS progression. At time of progression, GG and risk group were significantly higher in patients with bilateral versus unilateral disease. Cbx detected 16% more patients with bilateral disease than Sbx alone.

Conclusions: Bilateral disease and prostate specific antigen density at confirmatory Cbx conferred greater risk of earlier AS progression. Cbx was superior to Sbx for identifying bilateral disease. AS risk-stratification protocols may benefit from including presence of bilateral disease and should use Cbx to detect bilateral disease.

Citing Articles

Method to determine the nadir PSA following partial gland ablation.

Stone N, Skouteris V, Shu R, Stock R, Vanneste B BJUI Compass. 2025; 6(2):e496.

PMID: 39958259 PMC: 11826440. DOI: 10.1002/bco2.496.


Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer with high tumor burden at biopsy: lessons learned from a contemporary radical prostatectomy cohort.

Oliva J, Anastay V, Baboudjian M, Roumiguie M, Peltier A, Dariane C World J Urol. 2024; 42(1):513.

PMID: 39251425 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-024-05227-3.


The association between patient and disease characteristics, and the risk of disease progression in patients with prostate cancer on active surveillance.

Duijn M, de Reijke T, Barwari K, Hagens M, Rynja S, Immerzeel J World J Urol. 2024; 42(1):87.

PMID: 38372786 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-024-04805-9.


Aggressive Prostate Cancer in Patients Treated with Active Surveillance.

Tohi Y, Kato T, Sugimoto M Cancers (Basel). 2023; 15(17).

PMID: 37686546 PMC: 10486407. DOI: 10.3390/cancers15174270.


Role of multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging fusion biopsy in active surveillance of prostate cancer: a systematic review.

Ellis E, Frye T Ther Adv Urol. 2022; 14:17562872221106883.

PMID: 35872881 PMC: 9297445. DOI: 10.1177/17562872221106883.


References
1.
Tosoian J, Mamawala M, Epstein J, Landis P, Macura K, Simopoulos D . Active Surveillance of Grade Group 1 Prostate Cancer: Long-term Outcomes from a Large Prospective Cohort. Eur Urol. 2020; 77(6):675-682. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.12.017. View

2.
Turkbey B, Xu S, Kruecker J, Locklin J, Pang Y, Bernardo M . Documenting the location of prostate biopsies with image fusion. BJU Int. 2010; 107(1):53-7. PMC: 3272674. DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09483.x. View

3.
Gallagher K, Christopher E, Cameron A, Little S, Innes A, Davis G . Four-year outcomes from a multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based active surveillance programme: PSA dynamics and serial MRI scans allow omission of protocol biopsies. BJU Int. 2018; 123(3):429-438. PMC: 7379595. DOI: 10.1111/bju.14513. View

4.
Turkbey B, Rosenkrantz A, Haider M, Padhani A, Villeirs G, Macura K . Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2.1: 2019 Update of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2. Eur Urol. 2019; 76(3):340-351. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.02.033. View

5.
Hamdy F, Donovan J, Athene Lane J, Mason M, Metcalfe C, Holding P . 10-Year Outcomes after Monitoring, Surgery, or Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016; 375(15):1415-1424. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1606220. View