Standardized Prostate Cancer Incidence and Mortality Rates Following Initial Non-malignant Biopsy Result

Overview

Journal BJU Int

Specialty Urology

Date 2023 Feb 27

PMID 36847603

Authors

Hein V Stroomberg

Marc C M Andersen

John Thomas Helgstrand

Signe Benzon Larsen

Andrew J Vickers

Klaus Brasso

Andreas Roder

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the incidence of subsequent prostate cancer diagnosis and death following an initial non-malignant systematic transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) biopsy with that in an age- and calendar-year matched population over a 20-year period.

Subjects And Methods: This population-based analysis compared a cohort of all men with initial non-malignant TRUS biopsy in Denmark between 1995 and 2016 (N = 37 231) with the Danish population matched by age and calendar year, obtained from the NORDCAN 9.1 database. Age- and calendar year-corrected standardized prostate cancer incidence (SIR) and prostate cancer-specific mortality ratios (SMRs) were calculated and heterogeneity among age groups was assessed with the Cochran's Q test.

Results: The median time to censoring was 11 years, and 4434 men were followed for more than 15 years. The corrected SIR was 5.2 (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.1-5.4) and the corrected SMR was 0.74 (95% CI 0.67-0.81). Estimates differed among age groups (P < 0.001 for both), with a higher SIR and SMR among younger men.

Conclusion: Men with non-malignant TRUS biopsy have a much higher incidence of prostate cancer but a risk of prostate cancer death below the population average. This underlines that the oncological risk of cancers missed in the initial TRUS biopsy is low. Accordingly, attempts to increase the sensitivity of initial biopsy are unjustified. Moreover, current follow-up after non-malignant biopsy is likely to be overaggressive, particularly in men over the age of 60 years.

Citing Articles

Prostate-specific antigen screening at low thresholds of men with pathogenic BRCA1/2 variants.

Stroomberg H, Brasso K, Blak A, Byrjalsen A, Hansen T, Roder A Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2025; .

PMID: 39838196 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-025-00938-z.

MRI-Targeted Prostate Biopsy Introduces Grade Inflation and Overtreatment.

Batouche A, Czeizler E, Lehto T, Erickson A, Shadbahr T, Laajala T medRxiv. 2024; .

PMID: 38260466 PMC: 10802666. DOI: 10.1101/2024.01.10.24300922.

Modifiable risk factors for subsequent lethal prostate cancer among men with an initially negative prostate biopsy.

Feng X, Zhang Y, Vaselkiv J, Li R, Nguyen P, Penney K Br J Cancer. 2023; 129(12):1988-2002.

PMID: 37898724 PMC: 10703766. DOI: 10.1038/s41416-023-02472-y.

Danish Prostate Registry (DanProst) - an Updated Version of the Danish Prostate Cancer Registry, Methodology, and Early Results.

Stroomberg H, Larsen S, Lanthen G, Nielsen T, Helgstrand J, Brasso K J Med Syst. 2023; 47(1):98.

PMID: 37702859 PMC: 10499673. DOI: 10.1007/s10916-023-01991-8.

References

Kawa S, Larsen S, Helgstrand J, Iversen P, Brasso K, Roder M . What is the risk of prostate cancer mortality following negative systematic TRUS-guided biopsies? A systematic review. BMJ Open. 2020; 10(12):e040965. PMC: 7751212. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-040965. View

Vickers A . Effects of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Targeting on Overdiagnosis and Overtreatment of Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol. 2021; 80(5):567-572. PMC: 8530856. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.06.026. View

Breslow N, Day N . Statistical methods in cancer research. Volume II--The design and analysis of cohort studies. IARC Sci Publ. 1987; (82):1-406. View

Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Norlen B, Busch C, Norberg M . No increased prostate cancer incidence after negative transrectal ultrasound guided multiple biopsies in men with increased prostate specific antigen and/or abnormal digital rectal examination. J Urol. 2003; 170(4 Pt 1):1180-3. DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000087325.57314.5c. View

Kim E, Andriole G . Should men undergo MRI before prostate biopsy - CON. Urol Oncol. 2021; 41(2):92-95. DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2021.08.006. View

Helgstrand J, Klemann N, Roder M, Toft B, Brasso K, Vainer B . Danish Prostate Cancer Registry - methodology and early results from a novel national database. Clin Epidemiol. 2016; 8:351-360. PMC: 5045909. DOI: 10.2147/CLEP.S114917. View

Wilt T, Jones K, Barry M, Andriole G, Culkin D, Wheeler T . Follow-up of Prostatectomy versus Observation for Early Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2017; 377(2):132-142. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1615869. View

Mottet N, van den Bergh R, Briers E, Van den Broeck T, Cumberbatch M, De Santis M . EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer-2020 Update. Part 1: Screening, Diagnosis, and Local Treatment with Curative Intent. Eur Urol. 2020; 79(2):243-262. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.09.042. View

Schouten M, Hoeks C, Bomers J, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa C, Witjes J, Thompson L . Location of Prostate Cancers Determined by Multiparametric and MRI-Guided Biopsy in Patients With Elevated Prostate-Specific Antigen Level and at Least One Negative Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015; 205(1):57-63. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.14.12960. View

10.

Sayyid R, Alibhai S, Sutradhar R, Eberg M, Fung K, Klaassen Z . Population-based outcomes of men with a single negative prostate biopsy: Importance of continued follow-up among older patients. Urol Oncol. 2019; 37(5):298.e19-298.e27. DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2019.01.030. View

11.

Sonn G, Chang E, Natarajan S, Margolis D, Macairan M, Lieu P . Value of targeted prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion in men with prior negative biopsy and elevated prostate-specific antigen. Eur Urol. 2013; 65(4):809-15. PMC: 3858524. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.03.025. View

12.

Tan N, Lane B, Li J, Moussa A, Soriano M, Stephen Jones J . Prostate cancers diagnosed at repeat biopsy are smaller and less likely to be high grade. J Urol. 2008; 180(4):1325-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.06.022. View

13.

Djavan B, Mazal P, Zlotta A, Wammack R, Ravery V, Remzi M . Pathological features of prostate cancer detected on initial and repeat prostate biopsy: results of the prospective European Prostate Cancer Detection study. Prostate. 2001; 47(2):111-7. DOI: 10.1002/pros.1053. View

14.

Durkan G, Sheikh N, Johnson P, Hildreth A, Greene D . Improving prostate cancer detection with an extended-core transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsy protocol. BJU Int. 2002; 89(1):33-9. DOI: 10.1046/j.1464-4096.2001.01488.x. View

15.

Hendriks R, van Oort I, Schalken J . Blood-based and urinary prostate cancer biomarkers: a review and comparison of novel biomarkers for detection and treatment decisions. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2016; 20(1):12-19. DOI: 10.1038/pcan.2016.59. View

16.

Futterer J, Briganti A, De Visschere P, Emberton M, Giannarini G, Kirkham A . Can Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Be Detected with Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging? A Systematic Review of the Literature. Eur Urol. 2015; 68(6):1045-53. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.01.013. View

17.

Simmons L, Kanthabalan A, Arya M, Briggs T, Barratt D, Charman S . The PICTURE study: diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric MRI in men requiring a repeat prostate biopsy. Br J Cancer. 2017; 116(9):1159-1165. PMC: 5418442. DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2017.57. View

18.

Djavan B, Waldert M, Zlotta A, Dobronski P, Seitz C, Remzi M . 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(3):856-60. View

19.

Karlsen R, Larsen S, Christensen J, Brasso K, Friis S, Tjonneland A . PSA testing without clinical indication for prostate cancer in relation to socio-demographic and clinical characteristics in the Danish Diet, Cancer and Health Study. Acta Oncol. 2013; 52(8):1609-14. DOI: 10.3109/0284186X.2013.831474. View

20.

Schroder F, van den Bergh R, Wolters T, van Leeuwen P, Bangma C, van der Kwast T . Eleven-year outcome of patients with prostate cancers diagnosed during screening after initial negative sextant biopsies. Eur Urol. 2009; 57(2):256-66. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.10.031. View