1
|
Kishan AU, Valle LF, Marks LS. Bullseye or Tip of the Iceberg: Magnetic Resonance Imaging-visible Disease in Radiorecurrent Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol 2024; 85:47-48. [PMID: 37805372 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2023.09.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/13/2023] [Accepted: 09/19/2023] [Indexed: 10/09/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Amar U Kishan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Department of Urology, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
| | - Luca F Valle
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Greater Los Angeles Veteran Affairs, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Leonard S Marks
- Department of Urology, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Hudson J, Cruickshank M, Quinton R, Aucott L, Wu F, Grossmann M, Bhasin S, Snyder PJ, Ellenberg SS, Travison TG, Brock GB, Gianatti EJ, van der Schouw YT, Emmelot-Vonk MH, Giltay EJ, Hackett G, Ramachandran S, Svartberg J, Hildreth KL, Antonic KG, Tenover JL, Tan HM, Ho Chee Kong C, Tan WS, Marks LS, Ross RJ, Schwartz RS, Manson P, Roberts SA, Skovsager Andersen M, Velling Magnussen L, Aceves-Martins M, Gillies K, Hernández R, Oliver N, Dhillo WS, Bhattacharya S, Brazzelli M, Jayasena CN. Symptomatic benefits of testosterone treatment in patient subgroups: a systematic review, individual participant data meta-analysis, and aggregate data meta-analysis. Lancet Healthy Longev 2023; 4:e561-e572. [PMID: 37804846 DOI: 10.1016/s2666-7568(23)00169-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/24/2023] [Revised: 08/08/2023] [Accepted: 08/10/2023] [Indexed: 10/09/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Testosterone replacement therapy is known to improve sexual function in men younger than 40 years with pathological hypogonadism. However, the extent to which testosterone alleviates sexual dysfunction in older men and men with obesity is unclear, despite the fact that testosterone is being increasingly prescribed to these patient populations. We aimed to evaluate whether subgroups of men with low testosterone derive any symptomatic benefit from testosterone treatment. METHODS We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate characteristics associated with symptomatic benefit of testosterone treatment versus placebo in men aged 18 years and older with a baseline serum total testosterone concentration of less than 12 nmol/L. We searched major electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and clinical trial registries for reports published in English between Jan 1, 1992, and Aug 27, 2018. Anonymised individual participant data were requested from the investigators of all identified trials. Primary (cardiovascular) outcomes from this analysis have been published previously. In this report, we present the secondary outcomes of sexual function, quality of life, and psychological outcomes at 12 months. We did a one-stage individual participant data meta-analysis with a random-effects linear regression model, and a two-stage meta-analysis integrating individual participant data with aggregated data from studies that did not provide individual participant data. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42018111005. FINDINGS 9871 citations were identified through database searches. After exclusion of duplicates and publications not meeting inclusion criteria, 225 full texts were assessed for inclusion, of which 109 publications reporting 35 primary studies (with a total 5601 participants) were included. Of these, 17 trials provided individual participant data (3431 participants; median age 67 years [IQR 60-72]; 3281 [97%] of 3380 aged ≥40 years) Compared with placebo, testosterone treatment increased 15-item International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-15) total score (mean difference 5·52 [95% CI 3·95-7·10]; τ2=1·17; n=1412) and IIEF-15 erectile function subscore (2·14 [1·40-2·89]; τ2=0·64; n=1436), reaching the minimal clinically important difference for mild erectile dysfunction. These effects were not found to be dependent on participant age, obesity, presence of diabetes, or baseline serum total testosterone. However, absolute IIEF-15 scores reached during testosterone treatment were subject to thresholds in patient age and baseline serum total testosterone. Testosterone significantly improved Aging Males' Symptoms score, and some 12-item or 36-item Short Form Survey quality of life subscores compared with placebo, but it did not significantly improve psychological symptoms (measured by Beck Depression Inventory). INTERPRETATION In men aged 40 years or older with baseline serum testosterone of less than 12 nmol/L, short-to-medium-term testosterone treatment could provide clinically meaningful treatment for mild erectile dysfunction, irrespective of patient age, obesity, or degree of low testosterone. However, due to more severe baseline symptoms, the absolute level of sexual function reached during testosterone treatment might be lower in older men and men with obesity. FUNDING National Institute for Health and Care Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jemma Hudson
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | | | - Richard Quinton
- Translational & Clinical Research Institute, University of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Lorna Aucott
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Frederick Wu
- Division of Diabetes, Endocrinology & Gastroenterology, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Mathis Grossmann
- University of Melbourne Austin Health, Heidelberg, VIC, Australia
| | | | - Peter J Snyder
- Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Susan S Ellenberg
- Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | | | - Gerald B Brock
- Department of Surgery, Western University and Omega Fertility Center, London, ON, Canada
| | - Emily J Gianatti
- Department of Endocrinology, Fiona Stanley Hospital, Murdoch, WA, Australia
| | - Yvonne T van der Schouw
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Marielle H Emmelot-Vonk
- Department of Geriatrics, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Erik J Giltay
- Department of Psychiatry, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, Netherlands
| | - Geoff Hackett
- School of Health and Life Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, UK
| | | | - Johan Svartberg
- Division of Internal Medicine, Section of Endocrinology, University Hospital of North Norway, Tromsø, Norway; Tromsø Endocrine Research Group, Department of Clinical Medicine, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway
| | - Kerry L Hildreth
- Division of Geriatric Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA
| | - Kristina Groti Antonic
- Department of Endocrinology, University Medical Centre, Ljubljana, Slovenia; Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - Joyce Lisa Tenover
- Geriatric Medicine, VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, CA, USA; School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Hui Meng Tan
- Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | | | - Wei Shen Tan
- MD Anderson Cancer Center, University of Texas, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Leonard S Marks
- David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Richard J Ross
- Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Robert S Schwartz
- Division of Geriatric Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA
| | - Paul Manson
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | | | | | | | | | - Katie Gillies
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Rodolfo Hernández
- Health Economics Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Nick Oliver
- Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | | | - Siladitya Bhattacharya
- School of Medicine, Medical Sciences and Nutrition, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Miriam Brazzelli
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Topoozian M, Calais J, Felker E, Sisk A, Gonzalez S, Lee SJ, Marks LS. Focal therapy of prostate cancer: Assessment with prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) imaging. Urol Case Rep 2023; 50:102461. [PMID: 37358989 PMCID: PMC10285561 DOI: 10.1016/j.eucr.2023.102461] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/28/2023] [Accepted: 06/05/2023] [Indexed: 06/28/2023] Open
Abstract
Focal therapy of prostate cancer (PCa) is currently of great interest, but a metric of success. other than biopsy, is not yet available. In a patient with a repeatedly negative MRI and negative systematic biopsies, a scan employing the radioisotope 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT identified a PSMA-avid hotspot in the prostate. PSMA-guided biopsy confirmed the diagnosis of a clinically-significant PCa. Following ablation of the lesion with high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), the PSMA-avid lesion disappeared and targeted biopsy confirmed a fibrotic scar with no residual cancer. PSMA imaging may have a role in guiding diagnosis, focal ablation, and follow-up of men with PCa.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mark Topoozian
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, United States
| | - Jeremie Calais
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, United States
| | - Ely Felker
- Department of Radiology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, United States
| | - Anthony Sisk
- Department of Pathology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, United States
| | - Samantha Gonzalez
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, United States
| | - Sean J. Lee
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, United States
| | - Leonard S. Marks
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Javier-DesLoges J, Dall'Era MA, Brisbane W, Chamie K, Washington SL, Chandrasekar T, Marks LS, Nguyen H, Daneshvar M, Gin G, Kane CJ, Bagrodia A, Cooperberg MR. The state of focal therapy in the treatment of prostate cancer: the university of California collaborative (UC-Squared) consensus statement. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2023:10.1038/s41391-023-00702-1. [PMID: 37553435 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-023-00702-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2023] [Revised: 05/24/2023] [Accepted: 07/17/2023] [Indexed: 08/10/2023]
Affiliation(s)
| | - Marc A Dall'Era
- Department of Urology, University of California-Davis, Sacramento, CA, USA
| | - Wayne Brisbane
- Department of Urology, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Karim Chamie
- Department of Urology, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Samuel L Washington
- Department of Urology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | | | - Leonard S Marks
- Department of Urology, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Hao Nguyen
- Department of Urology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Michael Daneshvar
- Department of Urology, University of California-Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA
| | - Gregory Gin
- Department of Urology, University of California-Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA
| | - Christopher J Kane
- Department of Urology, University of California-San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA
| | - Aditya Bagrodia
- Department of Urology, University of California-San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA
| | - Matthew R Cooperberg
- Department of Urology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Priester A, Fan RE, Shubert J, Rusu M, Vesal S, Shao W, Khandwala YS, Marks LS, Natarajan S, Sonn GA. Prediction and Mapping of Intraprostatic Tumor Extent with Artificial Intelligence. EUR UROL SUPPL 2023; 54:20-27. [PMID: 37545845 PMCID: PMC10403686 DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2023.05.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 05/21/2023] [Indexed: 08/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) underestimation of prostate cancer extent complicates the definition of focal treatment margins. Objective To validate focal treatment margins produced by an artificial intelligence (AI) model. Design setting and participants Testing was conducted retrospectively in an independent dataset of 50 consecutive patients who had radical prostatectomy for intermediate-risk cancer. An AI deep learning model incorporated multimodal imaging and biopsy data to produce three-dimensional cancer estimation maps and margins. AI margins were compared with conventional MRI regions of interest (ROIs), 10-mm margins around ROIs, and hemigland margins. The AI model also furnished predictions of negative surgical margin probability, which were assessed for accuracy. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis Comparing AI with conventional margins, sensitivity was evaluated using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and negative margin rates using chi-square tests. Predicted versus observed negative margin probability was assessed using linear regression. Clinically significant prostate cancer (International Society of Urological Pathology grade ≥2) delineated on whole-mount histopathology served as ground truth. Results and limitations The mean sensitivity for cancer-bearing voxels was higher for AI margins (97%) than for conventional ROIs (37%, p < 0.001), 10-mm ROI margins (93%, p = 0.24), and hemigland margins (94%, p < 0.001). For index lesions, AI margins were more often negative (90%) than conventional ROIs (0%, p < 0.001), 10-mm ROI margins (82%, p = 0.24), and hemigland margins (66%, p = 0.004). Predicted and observed negative margin probabilities were strongly correlated (R2 = 0.98, median error = 4%). Limitations include a validation dataset derived from a single institution's prostatectomy population. Conclusions The AI model was accurate and effective in an independent test set. This approach could improve and standardize treatment margin definition, potentially reducing cancer recurrence rates. Furthermore, an accurate assessment of negative margin probability could facilitate informed decision-making for patients and physicians. Patient summary Artificial intelligence was used to predict the extent of tumors in surgically removed prostate specimens. It predicted tumor margins more accurately than conventional methods.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alan Priester
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Avenda Health, Inc., Culver City, CA, USA
| | - Richard E. Fan
- Department of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | | | - Mirabela Rusu
- Department of Radiology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Sulaiman Vesal
- Department of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Wei Shao
- Department of Radiology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
- Department of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
| | - Yash Samir Khandwala
- Department of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Leonard S. Marks
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Shyam Natarajan
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Avenda Health, Inc., Culver City, CA, USA
| | - Geoffrey A. Sonn
- Department of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
- Department of Radiology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Valle LF, Calais J, Marks LS, Raman S, Reiter RE, Rettig M, Shen J, Czernin J, Weiner AB, Steinberg ML, Nickols NG, Chang AJ, Boutros PC, Ye H, Hotta M, Huang RR, Kishan AU. Radiographic-pathologic concordance in the workup of locally radiorecurrent prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2023. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2023.41.6_suppl.313] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/15/2023] Open
Abstract
313 Background: Advanced molecular PET/CT (mPET) studies are increasingly being utilized in conjunction with multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) to evaluate the burden of radiorecurrent disease in men who develop a biochemical recurrence following definitive radiotherapy (RT) for prostate cancer (PCa). However, radiographic concordance with pathologic confirmation of radiorecurrent disease in this setting is poorly described. We sought to conduct a patient-level analysis comparing concordance of radiographic and pathologic findings between mpMRI and mPET. Methods: Men who had previously undergone definitive RT for PCa and subsequently experienced treatment failure defined by the Phoenix definition were enrolled in a prospective registry study wherein radiographically identified local PCa recurrences were biopsied using mpMRI or mPET fusion (Artemis) with real-time ultrasound. Prior to biopsy, men underwent diagnostic imaging with mpMRI, advanced mPET (68Ga-PSMA-11 or 18F-FACBC), or both in order to identify a biopsy target. At least one imaging modality had to reveal a recurrent lesion based on PIRADS or PROMISE imaging classifications in order to prompt biopsy. Radiographic and pathologic findings were classified as either “treatment effect” or “recurrent disease”. Using biopsy as the reference standard, positive predictive value (PPV) was evaluated for mpMRI and mPET modalities separately. Results: Of 28 patients with radiographic recurrence on mpMRI or mPET, 10/28 (35.7%) exhibited treatment effect without evidence of active cancer on biopsy confirmation. Prostate adenocarcinoma was identified in 17/28 patient biopsies, whereas small cell prostate cancer was present in 1 patient. All 28 men underwent mpMRI prior to biopsy and 23/28 (82.1%) additionally underwent mPET; 19/23 (82.6%) underwent 68Ga-PSMA-11 and 4/23 (17.4%) were imaged with 18F-FACBC. Concordance in the assessment of recurrent disease between mpMRI and mPET was achieved in 12/23 (52.2%) men who underwent both imaging modalities. Among the 28 men who underwent mpMRI, PPV was 0.84, whereas PPV for the 23 men who underwent mPET was 0.70. Conclusions: In patients for whom clinical suspicion of radiorecurrence was high enough to warrant a biopsy, pre-biopsy mpMRI outperforms mPET in terms of PPV for detecting pathologically confirmed locally radiorecurrent PCa. Used in tandem, mpMRI and mPET might better select appropriate candidates for biopsy than either radiographic modality alone. While advanced mPET remains promising for detecting distant recurrences at the time of RT failure, biopsy confirmation following radiographic detection of local radiorecurrence remains essential for evaluating the true burden of local recurrence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Leonard S. Marks
- Department of Urology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Steven Raman
- David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA
| | | | | | - John Shen
- UCLA Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, CA
| | | | - Adam B Weiner
- University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Michael L. Steinberg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
| | | | - Albert J Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
| | | | - Huihui Ye
- University of California Los Angeles (Los Angeles, CA), Los Angeles, CA
| | | | | | - Amar Upadhyaya Kishan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Aker MN, Brisbane WG, Kwan L, Gonzalez S, Priester AM, Kinnaird A, Delfin MK, Felker E, Sisk AE, Kuppermann D, Marks LS. Cryotherapy for partial gland ablation of prostate cancer: Oncologic and safety outcomes. Cancer Med 2023; 12:9351-9362. [PMID: 36775929 PMCID: PMC10166973 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.5692] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2022] [Revised: 01/27/2023] [Accepted: 01/31/2023] [Indexed: 02/14/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Partial gland ablation (PGA) is a new option for treatment of prostate cancer (PCa). Cryotherapy, an early method of PGA, has had favorable evaluations, but few studies have employed a strict protocol using biopsy endpoints in men with clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). METHODS 143 men with unilateral csPCa were enrolled in a prospective, observational trial of outpatient PGA-cryotherapy. Treatment was a 2-cycle freeze of the affected prostate part. Participants were evaluated with MRI-guided biopsy (MRGB) at baseline and at 6 months and 18 months after treatment. Absence of csPCa upon MRGB was the primary endpoint; quality-of-life at baseline and at 6 months after treatment was assessed by EPIC-CP questionnaires in the domains of urinary and sexual function. RESULTS Of the 143 participants, 136 (95%) completed MRGB at 6 months after treatment. In 103/136 (76%), the biopsy revealed no csPCa. Of the 103, 71 subsequently had an 18-month comprehensive biopsy; of the 71 with 18-month biopsies, 46 (65%) were found to have no csPCa. MRI lesions became undetectable in 96/130 (74%); declines in median serum PSA levels (6.9 to 2.5 ng/mL), PSA density (0.15 to 0.07), and prostate volume (42 to 34cc) were observed (all p < 0.01). Neither lesion disappearance on MRI nor PSA decline correlated with biopsy outcome. Urinary function was affected only slightly and sexual function moderately. CONCLUSION In the near to intermediate term, partial gland ablation with cryotherapy was found to be a safe and moderately effective treatment of intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Eradication of cancer was better determined by MRI-guided biopsy than by MRI or PSA.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mamdouh N Aker
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Wayne G Brisbane
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Lorna Kwan
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Samantha Gonzalez
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | | | - Adam Kinnaird
- Department of Urology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, USA
| | - Merdie K Delfin
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Ely Felker
- Department of Radiology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Anthony E Sisk
- Department of Pathology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - David Kuppermann
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Leonard S Marks
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Nassiri N, Richardson S, Kuppermann D, Brisbane WG, Gonzalez S, Kwan L, Felker E, Wallner C, Marks LS. Partial Gland Ablation of Prostate Cancer: Effects of Repeat Treatment. Urology 2022; 170:161-167. [PMID: 35907484 DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2022.07.024] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/16/2022] [Revised: 06/24/2022] [Accepted: 07/17/2022] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the near-term clinical and pathological effects of repeat partial gland ablation (PGA) in men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa). MATERIALS AND METHODS One hundred seventy men with focal lesions of PCa (all GG2 or GG3) underwent PGA with high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) or cryotherapy (CRYO) in prospective trials. Residual PCa in or near the ablation zone was found in 37 men after a first PGA; 30 went on to receive a second PGA and were the subjects of study. At 3 timepoints, baseline and 6 months after first and second ablations, quality-of-life (QOL) questionnaires (IIEF, IPSS) and MRI-guided biopsies (MRGB) were performed. Biopsies were targeted and systematic at baseline and in follow-up, comprehensively about the ablation zone. RESULTS All 30 patients completed QOL questionnaires and 26 had MRGB at the 3 timepoints. Mean QOL scores were not significantly different from the baseline after the first or second PGA. No operative complications were encountered; and "decisional regret" was reported in only 2/29 men after the repeat ablation. A decrease in semen volume was reported by 25% of patients. Repeat ablation was successful (absence of csPCa on MRGB) in 14/26 (53%) of men. PSA levels decreased and MRI lesions resolved after ablations, but neither was a reliable predictor of biopsy outcomes. CONCLUSION When initial PGA fails, repeat PGA is a reasonable consideration, because in near-term follow-up, secondary procedures appear to be safe, causing only minimal detriment to urinary and sexual function, with csPCa becoming undetectable by MRGB in approximately half the patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nima Nassiri
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Shannon Richardson
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA
| | - David Kuppermann
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Wayne G Brisbane
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Samantha Gonzalez
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Lorna Kwan
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Ely Felker
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Caroline Wallner
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Leonard S Marks
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Vesal S, Gayo I, Bhattacharya I, Natarajan S, Marks LS, Barratt DC, Fan RE, Hu Y, Sonn GA, Rusu M. Domain generalization for prostate segmentation in transrectal ultrasound images: A multi-center study. Med Image Anal 2022; 82:102620. [PMID: 36148705 PMCID: PMC10161676 DOI: 10.1016/j.media.2022.102620] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/21/2022] [Revised: 08/31/2022] [Accepted: 09/05/2022] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
Prostate biopsy and image-guided treatment procedures are often performed under the guidance of ultrasound fused with magnetic resonance images (MRI). Accurate image fusion relies on accurate segmentation of the prostate on ultrasound images. Yet, the reduced signal-to-noise ratio and artifacts (e.g., speckle and shadowing) in ultrasound images limit the performance of automated prostate segmentation techniques and generalizing these methods to new image domains is inherently difficult. In this study, we address these challenges by introducing a novel 2.5D deep neural network for prostate segmentation on ultrasound images. Our approach addresses the limitations of transfer learning and finetuning methods (i.e., drop in performance on the original training data when the model weights are updated) by combining a supervised domain adaptation technique and a knowledge distillation loss. The knowledge distillation loss allows the preservation of previously learned knowledge and reduces the performance drop after model finetuning on new datasets. Furthermore, our approach relies on an attention module that considers model feature positioning information to improve the segmentation accuracy. We trained our model on 764 subjects from one institution and finetuned our model using only ten subjects from subsequent institutions. We analyzed the performance of our method on three large datasets encompassing 2067 subjects from three different institutions. Our method achieved an average Dice Similarity Coefficient (Dice) of 94.0±0.03 and Hausdorff Distance (HD95) of 2.28 mm in an independent set of subjects from the first institution. Moreover, our model generalized well in the studies from the other two institutions (Dice: 91.0±0.03; HD95: 3.7 mm and Dice: 82.0±0.03; HD95: 7.1 mm). We introduced an approach that successfully segmented the prostate on ultrasound images in a multi-center study, suggesting its clinical potential to facilitate the accurate fusion of ultrasound and MRI images to drive biopsy and image-guided treatments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sulaiman Vesal
- Department of Urology, Stanford University, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
| | - Iani Gayo
- Centre for Medical Image Computing, Wellcome/EPSRC Centre for Interventional & Surgical Sciences, and Department of Medical Physics & Biomedical Engineering, University College London, 66-72 Gower St, London WC1E 6EA, UK
| | - Indrani Bhattacharya
- Department of Urology, Stanford University, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA 94305, USA; Department of Radiology, Stanford University, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
| | - Shyam Natarajan
- Department of Urology, University of California Los Angeles, 200 Medical Plaza Driveway, Los Angeles, CA 90024, USA
| | - Leonard S Marks
- Department of Urology, University of California Los Angeles, 200 Medical Plaza Driveway, Los Angeles, CA 90024, USA
| | - Dean C Barratt
- Centre for Medical Image Computing, Wellcome/EPSRC Centre for Interventional & Surgical Sciences, and Department of Medical Physics & Biomedical Engineering, University College London, 66-72 Gower St, London WC1E 6EA, UK
| | - Richard E Fan
- Department of Urology, Stanford University, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
| | - Yipeng Hu
- Centre for Medical Image Computing, Wellcome/EPSRC Centre for Interventional & Surgical Sciences, and Department of Medical Physics & Biomedical Engineering, University College London, 66-72 Gower St, London WC1E 6EA, UK
| | - Geoffrey A Sonn
- Department of Urology, Stanford University, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
| | - Mirabela Rusu
- Department of Radiology, Stanford University, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Kinnaird A, Yerram NK, O’Connor L, Brisbane W, Sharma V, Chuang R, Jayadevan R, Ahdoot M, Daneshvar M, Priester A, Delfin M, Tran E, Barsa DE, Sisk A, Reiter RE, Felker E, Raman S, Kwan L, Choyke PL, Merino MJ, Wood BJ, Turkbey B, Pinto PA, Marks LS. Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Guided Biopsy in Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer. J Urol 2022; 207:823-831. [PMID: 34854746 PMCID: PMC10506469 DOI: 10.1097/ju.0000000000002343] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 10/31/2021] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The underlying premise of prostate cancer active surveillance (AS) is that cancers likely to metastasize will be recognized and eliminated before cancer-related disease can ensue. Our study was designed to determine the prostate cancer upgrading rate when biopsy guided by magnetic resonance imaging (MRGBx) is used before entry and during AS. MATERIALS AND METHODS The cohort included 519 men with low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer who enrolled in prospective studies (NCT00949819 and NCT00102544) between February 2008 and February 2020. Subjects were preliminarily diagnosed with Gleason Grade Group (GG) 1 cancer; AS began when subsequent MRGBx confirmed GG1 or GG2. Participants underwent confirmatory MRGBx (targeted and systematic) followed by surveillance MRGBx approximately every 12 to 24 months. The primary outcome was tumor upgrading to ≥GG3. RESULTS Upgrading to ≥GG3 was found in 92 men after a median followup of 4.8 years (IQR 3.1-6.5) after confirmatory MRGBx. Upgrade-free probability after 5 years was 0.85 (95% CI 0.81-0.88). Cancer detected in a magnetic resonance imaging lesion at confirmatory MRGBx increased risk of subsequent upgrading during AS (HR 2.8; 95% CI 1.3-6.0), as did presence of GG2 (HR 2.9; 95% CI 1.1-8.2) In men who upgraded ≥GG3 during AS, upgrading was detected by targeted cores only in 27%, systematic cores only in 25% and both in 47%. In 63 men undergoing prostatectomy, upgrading from MRGBx was found in only 5 (8%). CONCLUSIONS When AS begins and follows with MRGBx (targeted and systematic), upgrading rate (≥GG3) is greater when tumor is initially present within a magnetic resonance imaging lesion or when pathology is GG2 than when these features are absent.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adam Kinnaird
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, California
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
- Alberta Centre for Urologic Research and Excellence (ACURE), Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
- Cancer Research Institute of Northern Alberta (CRINA),Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| | - Nitin K. Yerram
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Luke O’Connor
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Wayne Brisbane
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, California
| | - Vidit Sharma
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, California
| | - Ryan Chuang
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, California
| | - Rajiv Jayadevan
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, California
| | - Michael Ahdoot
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Michael Daneshvar
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Alan Priester
- Department of Bioengineering, UCLA, Los Angeles, California
| | - Merdie Delfin
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, California
| | - Elizabeth Tran
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, California
| | - Danielle E. Barsa
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, California
| | - Anthony Sisk
- Department of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, California
| | - Robert E. Reiter
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, California
| | - Ely Felker
- Department of Radiological Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, California
| | - Steve Raman
- Department of Radiological Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, California
| | - Lorna Kwan
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, California
| | - Peter L. Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Maria J. Merino
- Laboratory of Pathology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Bradford J. Wood
- Center for Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Peter A. Pinto
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Leonard S. Marks
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, California
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Marks LS. Prostate Cancer: a comparison of focal therapy and radical prostatectomy. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2022; 25:381-382. [PMID: 35087221 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-021-00334-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/15/2020] [Revised: 12/21/2020] [Accepted: 01/20/2021] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
|
12
|
Jiang Y, Meyers TJ, Emeka AA, Cooley LF, Cooper PR, Lancki N, Helenowski I, Kachuri L, Lin DW, Stanford JL, Newcomb LF, Kolb S, Finelli A, Fleshner NE, Komisarenko M, Eastham JA, Ehdaie B, Benfante N, Logothetis CJ, Gregg JR, Perez CA, Garza S, Kim J, Marks LS, Delfin M, Barsa D, Vesprini D, Klotz LH, Loblaw A, Mamedov A, Goldenberg SL, Higano CS, Spillane M, Wu E, Carter HB, Pavlovich CP, Mamawala M, Landis T, Carroll PR, Chan JM, Cooperberg MR, Cowan JE, Morgan TM, Siddiqui J, Martin R, Klein EA, Brittain K, Gotwald P, Barocas DA, Dallmer JR, Gordetsky JB, Steele P, Kundu SD, Stockdale J, Roobol MJ, Venderbos LD, Sanda MG, Arnold R, Patil D, Evans CP, Dall’Era MA, Vij A, Costello AJ, Chow K, Corcoran NM, Rais-Bahrami S, Phares C, Scherr DS, Flynn T, Karnes RJ, Koch M, Dhondt CR, Nelson JB, McBride D, Cookson MS, Stratton KL, Farriester S, Hemken E, Stadler WM, Pera T, Banionyte D, Bianco FJ, Lopez IH, Loeb S, Taneja SS, Byrne N, Amling CL, Martinez A, Boileau L, Gaylis FD, Petkewicz J, Kirwen N, Helfand BT, Xu J, Scholtens DM, Catalona WJ, Witte JS. Genetic Factors Associated with Prostate Cancer Conversion from Active Surveillance to Treatment. HGG Adv 2022; 3:100070. [PMID: 34993496 PMCID: PMC8725988 DOI: 10.1016/j.xhgg.2021.100070] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/20/2021] [Accepted: 11/12/2021] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Men diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer (PC) are increasingly electing active surveillance (AS) as their initial management strategy. While this may reduce the side effects of treatment for prostate cancer, many men on AS eventually convert to active treatment. PC is one of the most heritable cancers, and genetic factors that predispose to aggressive tumors may help distinguish men who are more likely to discontinue AS. To investigate this, we undertook a multi-institutional genome-wide association study (GWAS) of 5,222 PC patients and 1,139 other patients from replication cohorts, all of whom initially elected AS and were followed over time for the potential outcome of conversion from AS to active treatment. In the GWAS we detected 18 variants associated with conversion, 15 of which were not previously associated with PC risk. With a transcriptome-wide association study (TWAS), we found two genes associated with conversion (MAST3, p = 6.9×10-7 and GAB2, p = 2.0×10-6). Moreover, increasing values of a previously validated 269-variant genetic risk score (GRS) for PC was positively associated with conversion (e.g., comparing the highest to the two middle deciles gave a hazard ratio [HR] = 1.13; 95% Confidence Interval [CI]= 0.94-1.36); whereas, decreasing values of a 36-variant GRS for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels were positively associated with conversion (e.g., comparing the lowest to the two middle deciles gave a HR = 1.25; 95% CI, 1.04-1.50). These results suggest that germline genetics may help inform and individualize the decision of AS-or the intensity of monitoring on AS-versus treatment for the initial management of patients with low-risk PC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yu Jiang
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94158, USA
| | - Travis J. Meyers
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94158, USA
| | - Adaeze A. Emeka
- Department of Urology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA
| | - Lauren Folgosa Cooley
- Department of Urology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA
| | - Phillip R. Cooper
- Department of Urology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA
| | - Nicola Lancki
- Division of Biostatistics, Department of Preventive Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA
| | - Irene Helenowski
- Division of Biostatistics, Department of Preventive Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA
| | - Linda Kachuri
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94158, USA
| | - Daniel W. Lin
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Cancer Prevention Program, Public Health Sciences, Seattle, WA 98109, USA
- Department of Urology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
| | - Janet L. Stanford
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Cancer Epidemiology Program, Public Health Sciences, Seattle, WA 98109, USA
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, School of Public Health, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
| | - Lisa F. Newcomb
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Cancer Prevention Program, Public Health Sciences, Seattle, WA 98109, USA
- Department of Urology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
| | - Suzanne Kolb
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Cancer Epidemiology Program, Public Health Sciences, Seattle, WA 98109, USA
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, School of Public Health, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
| | - Antonio Finelli
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Neil E. Fleshner
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Maria Komisarenko
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - James A. Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Behfar Ehdaie
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Nicole Benfante
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Christopher J. Logothetis
- Departments of Genitourinary Medical Oncology and Urology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Justin R. Gregg
- Departments of Genitourinary Medical Oncology and Urology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Cherie A. Perez
- Departments of Genitourinary Medical Oncology and Urology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Sergio Garza
- Departments of Genitourinary Medical Oncology and Urology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jeri Kim
- Departments of Genitourinary Medical Oncology and Urology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Leonard S. Marks
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Merdie Delfin
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Danielle Barsa
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Danny Vesprini
- Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health and Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Laurence H. Klotz
- Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health and Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Andrew Loblaw
- Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health and Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Alexandre Mamedov
- Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health and Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - S. Larry Goldenberg
- Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Celestia S. Higano
- Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Maria Spillane
- Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Eugenia Wu
- Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - H. Ballentine Carter
- Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Christian P. Pavlovich
- Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Mufaddal Mamawala
- Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Tricia Landis
- Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Peter R. Carroll
- Department of Urology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - June M. Chan
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94158, USA
- Department of Urology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Matthew R. Cooperberg
- Department of Urology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
- Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Janet E. Cowan
- Department of Urology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Todd M. Morgan
- Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Javed Siddiqui
- Department of Pathology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Rabia Martin
- Department of Pathology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Eric A. Klein
- Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Karen Brittain
- Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Paige Gotwald
- Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Daniel A. Barocas
- Department of Urology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Jeremiah R. Dallmer
- Department of Urology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
- Department of Urology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Jennifer B. Gordetsky
- Department of Urology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
- Department of Pathology, Microbiology, and Immunology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Pam Steele
- Department of Urology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Shilajit D. Kundu
- Department of Urology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA
| | - Jazmine Stockdale
- Department of Urology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA
| | - Monique J. Roobol
- Department of Urology, Erasmus Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Lionne D.F. Venderbos
- Department of Urology, Erasmus Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Martin G. Sanda
- Department of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Rebecca Arnold
- Department of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Dattatraya Patil
- Department of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Christopher P. Evans
- Department of Urologic Surgery, University of California, Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, CA, USA
| | - Marc A. Dall’Era
- Department of Urologic Surgery, University of California, Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, CA, USA
| | - Anjali Vij
- Department of Urologic Surgery, University of California, Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, CA, USA
| | - Anthony J. Costello
- Department of Urology, Royal Melbourne Hospital and University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Ken Chow
- Department of Urology, Royal Melbourne Hospital and University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Niall M. Corcoran
- Department of Urology, Royal Melbourne Hospital and University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Soroush Rais-Bahrami
- Department of Urology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA
- Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA
| | - Courtney Phares
- Department of Urology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA
| | - Douglas S. Scherr
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA
| | - Thomas Flynn
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA
| | | | - Michael Koch
- Department of Urology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | - Courtney Rose Dhondt
- Department of Urology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | - Joel B. Nelson
- Department of Urology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Dawn McBride
- Department of Urology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Michael S. Cookson
- Department of Urology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - Kelly L. Stratton
- Department of Urology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - Stephen Farriester
- Department of Urology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - Erin Hemken
- Department of Urology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | | | - Tuula Pera
- University of Chicago Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chicago, IL, USA
| | | | | | | | - Stacy Loeb
- Departments of Urology and Population Health, New York University Langone Health and Manhattan Veterans Affairs Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Samir S. Taneja
- Departments of Urology and Population Health, New York University Langone Health and Manhattan Veterans Affairs Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Nataliya Byrne
- Departments of Urology and Population Health, New York University Langone Health and Manhattan Veterans Affairs Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | | | - Ann Martinez
- Department of Urology, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA
| | - Luc Boileau
- Department of Urology, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA
| | - Franklin D. Gaylis
- Genesis Healthcare Partners, Department of Urology, University of California, San Diego, CA, USA
| | | | - Nicholas Kirwen
- Division of Urology, NorthShore University Health System, Evanston, IL, USA
| | - Brian T. Helfand
- Division of Urology, NorthShore University Health System, Evanston, IL, USA
| | - Jianfeng Xu
- Division of Urology, NorthShore University Health System, Evanston, IL, USA
| | - Denise M. Scholtens
- Division of Biostatistics, Department of Preventive Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA
| | - William J. Catalona
- Department of Urology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA
| | - John S. Witte
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94158, USA
- Department of Urology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
- Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
- Departments of Epidemiology and Population Health, Biomedical Data Science, and Genetics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Kinnaird A, Brisbane W, Kwan L, Priester A, Chuang R, Barsa DE, Delfin M, Sisk A, Margolis D, Felker E, Hu J, Marks LS. A prostate cancer risk calculator (PCRC-MRI): Use of clinical and magnetic resonance imaging data to predict biopsy outcome in North American men. Can Urol Assoc J 2021; 16:E161-E166. [PMID: 34672937 DOI: 10.5489/cuaj.7380] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION A functional tool to optimize patient selection for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided prostate biopsy (MRGB) is an unmet clinical need. We sought to develop a prostate cancer risk calculator (PCRC-MRI) that combines MRI and clinical characteristics to aid decision-making for MRGB in North American men. METHODS Two prospective registries containing 2354 consecutive men undergoing MRGB (September 2009 to April 2019) were analyzed. Patients were randomized into five groups, with one group randomly assigned to be the validation cohort against the other four groups as the discovery cohort. The primary outcome was detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) defined as Gleason grade group ≥2. Variables included age, ethnicity, digital rectal exam (DRE), prior biopsy, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), prostate volume, PSA density, and MRI score. Odds ratios were calculated from multivariate logistic regression comparing two models: one with clinical variables only (clinical) against a second combining clinical variables with MRI data (clinical+MRI). RESULTS csPCa was present in 942 (40%) of the 2354 men available for study. The positive and negative predictive values for csPCa in the clinical+MRI model were 57% and 89%, respectively. The area under the curve of the clinical+MRI model was superior to the clinical model in discovery (0.843 vs. 0.707, p<0.0001) and validation (0.888 vs. 0.757, p<0.0001) cohorts. Use of PCRC-MRI would have avoided approximately 16 unnecessary biopsies in every 100 men. Of all variables examined, Asian ethnicity was the most protective factor (odds ratio [OR] 0.46 [0.29-0.75]) while MRI score 5 indicated greatest risk (OR15.8 [10.5-23.9]). CONCLUSIONS A risk calculator (PCRC-MRI), based on a large North American cohort, is shown to improve patient selection for MRGB, especially in preventing unnecessary biopsies. This tool is available at https://www.uclahealth.org/urology/prostate-cancer-risk-calculator and may help rationalize biopsy decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adam Kinnaird
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, United States.,Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
| | - Wayne Brisbane
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, United States
| | - Lorna Kwan
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, United States
| | - Alan Priester
- Department of Bioengineering, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, United States
| | - Ryan Chuang
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, United States
| | - Danielle E Barsa
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, United States
| | - Merdie Delfin
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, United States
| | - Anthony Sisk
- Department of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, United States
| | - Daniel Margolis
- Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, United States
| | - Ely Felker
- Department of Radiological Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, United States
| | - Jim Hu
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, United States
| | - Leonard S Marks
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Liu Y, Zheng H, Liang Z, Miao Q, Brisbane WG, Marks LS, Raman SS, Reiter RE, Yang G, Sung K. Textured-Based Deep Learning in Prostate Cancer Classification with 3T Multiparametric MRI: Comparison with PI-RADS-Based Classification. Diagnostics (Basel) 2021; 11:1785. [PMID: 34679484 PMCID: PMC8535024 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics11101785] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/29/2021] [Revised: 09/24/2021] [Accepted: 09/24/2021] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
The current standardized scheme for interpreting MRI requires a high level of expertise and exhibits a significant degree of inter-reader and intra-reader variability. An automated prostate cancer (PCa) classification can improve the ability of MRI to assess the spectrum of PCa. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the performance of a texture-based deep learning model (Textured-DL) for differentiating between clinically significant PCa (csPCa) and non-csPCa and to compare the Textured-DL with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS)-based classification (PI-RADS-CLA), where a threshold of PI-RADS ≥ 4, representing highly suspicious lesions for csPCa, was applied. The study cohort included 402 patients (60% (n = 239) of patients for training, 10% (n = 42) for validation, and 30% (n = 121) for testing) with 3T multiparametric MRI matched with whole-mount histopathology after radical prostatectomy. For a given suspicious prostate lesion, the volumetric patches of T2-Weighted MRI and apparent diffusion coefficient images were cropped and used as the input to Textured-DL, consisting of a 3D gray-level co-occurrence matrix extractor and a CNN. PI-RADS-CLA by an expert reader served as a baseline to compare classification performance with Textured-DL in differentiating csPCa from non-csPCa. Sensitivity and specificity comparisons were performed using Mcnemar's test. Bootstrapping with 1000 samples was performed to estimate the 95% confidence interval (CI) for AUC. CIs of sensitivity and specificity were calculated by the Wald method. The Textured-DL model achieved an AUC of 0.85 (CI [0.79, 0.91]), which was significantly higher than the PI-RADS-CLA (AUC of 0.73 (CI [0.65, 0.80]); p < 0.05) for PCa classification, and the specificity was significantly different between Textured-DL and PI-RADS-CLA (0.70 (CI [0.59, 0.82]) vs. 0.47 (CI [0.35, 0.59]); p < 0.05). In sub-analyses, Textured-DL demonstrated significantly higher specificities in the peripheral zone (PZ) and solitary tumor lesions compared to the PI-RADS-CLA (0.78 (CI [0.66, 0.90]) vs. 0.42 (CI [0.28, 0.57]); 0.75 (CI [0.54, 0.96]) vs. 0.38 [0.14, 0.61]; all p values < 0.05). Moreover, Textured-DL demonstrated a high negative predictive value of 92% while maintaining a high positive predictive value of 58% among the lesions with a PI-RADS score of 3. In conclusion, the Textured-DL model was superior to the PI-RADS-CLA in the classification of PCa. In addition, Textured-DL demonstrated superior performance in the specificities for the peripheral zone and solitary tumors compared with PI-RADS-based risk assessment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yongkai Liu
- Department of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (H.Z.); (Q.M.); (S.S.R.); (K.S.)
- Physics and Biology in Medicine IDP, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA
| | - Haoxin Zheng
- Department of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (H.Z.); (Q.M.); (S.S.R.); (K.S.)
| | - Zhengrong Liang
- Departments of Radiology and Biomedical Engineering, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY 11794, USA;
| | - Qi Miao
- Department of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (H.Z.); (Q.M.); (S.S.R.); (K.S.)
| | - Wayne G. Brisbane
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (W.G.B.); (L.S.M.); (R.E.R.)
| | - Leonard S. Marks
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (W.G.B.); (L.S.M.); (R.E.R.)
| | - Steven S. Raman
- Department of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (H.Z.); (Q.M.); (S.S.R.); (K.S.)
| | - Robert E. Reiter
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (W.G.B.); (L.S.M.); (R.E.R.)
| | - Guang Yang
- National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, South Kensington, London SW7 2AZ, UK;
| | - Kyunghyun Sung
- Department of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (H.Z.); (Q.M.); (S.S.R.); (K.S.)
- Physics and Biology in Medicine IDP, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Sarma KV, Raman AG, Dhinagar NJ, Priester AM, Harmon S, Sanford T, Mehralivand S, Turkbey B, Marks LS, Raman SS, Speier W, Arnold CW. Harnessing clinical annotations to improve deep learning performance in prostate segmentation. PLoS One 2021; 16:e0253829. [PMID: 34170972 PMCID: PMC8232529 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0253829] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/24/2021] [Accepted: 06/13/2021] [Indexed: 12/09/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Developing large-scale datasets with research-quality annotations is challenging due to the high cost of refining clinically generated markup into high precision annotations. We evaluated the direct use of a large dataset with only clinically generated annotations in development of high-performance segmentation models for small research-quality challenge datasets. Materials and methods We used a large retrospective dataset from our institution comprised of 1,620 clinically generated segmentations, and two challenge datasets (PROMISE12: 50 patients, ProstateX-2: 99 patients). We trained a 3D U-Net convolutional neural network (CNN) segmentation model using our entire dataset, and used that model as a template to train models on the challenge datasets. We also trained versions of the template model using ablated proportions of our dataset, and evaluated the relative benefit of those templates for the final models. Finally, we trained a version of the template model using an out-of-domain brain cancer dataset, and evaluated the relevant benefit of that template for the final models. We used five-fold cross-validation (CV) for all training and evaluation across our entire dataset. Results Our model achieves state-of-the-art performance on our large dataset (mean overall Dice 0.916, average Hausdorff distance 0.135 across CV folds). Using this model as a pre-trained template for refining on two external datasets significantly enhanced performance (30% and 49% enhancement in Dice scores respectively). Mean overall Dice and mean average Hausdorff distance were 0.912 and 0.15 for the ProstateX-2 dataset, and 0.852 and 0.581 for the PROMISE12 dataset. Using even small quantities of data to train the template enhanced performance, with significant improvements using 5% or more of the data. Conclusion We trained a state-of-the-art model using unrefined clinical prostate annotations and found that its use as a template model significantly improved performance in other prostate segmentation tasks, even when trained with only 5% of the original dataset.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karthik V. Sarma
- University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States of America
| | - Alex G. Raman
- University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States of America
- Western University of Health Sciences, Pomona, CA, United States of America
| | - Nikhil J. Dhinagar
- University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States of America
- Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States of America
| | - Alan M. Priester
- University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States of America
| | - Stephanie Harmon
- National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, United States of America
- Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, MD, United States of America
| | - Thomas Sanford
- National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, United States of America
- SUNY Upstate Medical Center, Syracuse, NY, United States of America
| | - Sherif Mehralivand
- National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, United States of America
| | - Baris Turkbey
- National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, United States of America
| | - Leonard S. Marks
- University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States of America
| | - Steven S. Raman
- University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States of America
| | - William Speier
- University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States of America
| | - Corey W. Arnold
- University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States of America
- * E-mail:
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Brisbane WG, Natarajan S, Priester A, Felker ER, Kinnaird A, Marks LS. Focal Laser Ablation of Prostate Cancer: An Office Procedure. J Vis Exp 2021. [PMID: 33871450 DOI: 10.3791/61984] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/31/2022] Open
Abstract
In this article, we describe and illustrate an outpatient procedure for focal laser ablation (FLA) of prostate cancer (PCa). The procedure is conceptually similar to a fusion biopsy and is performed under local anesthesia in a clinic setting; treatment time is usually less than one hour. Laser insertion is guided by ultrasound; lesion targeting is via magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound (MRI/US) fusion, as in targeted prostate biopsy. Real-time ablation monitoring is achieved utilizing a thermal probe adjacent to the laser fiber. The video demonstrates procedure planning, patient preparation, various steps during the procedure, and treatment monitoring. Safety, feasibility, and efficacy of this approach have been established during a previous trial. Outpatient FLA under local anesthesia is an option for management of intermediate risk prostate cancer.
Collapse
|
17
|
Tan WP, Rastinehad AR, Klotz L, Carroll PR, Emberton M, Feller JF, George AK, Gill IS, Gupta RT, Katz AE, Lebastchi AH, Marks LS, Marra G, Pinto PA, Song DY, Sidana A, Ward JF, Sanchez-Salas R, Rosette JDL, Polascik TJ. Utilization of focal therapy for patients discontinuing active surveillance of prostate cancer: Recommendations of an international Delphi consensus. Urol Oncol 2021; 39:781.e17-781.e24. [PMID: 33676851 DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2021.01.027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/21/2020] [Revised: 01/19/2021] [Accepted: 01/25/2021] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND With the advancement of imaging technology, focal therapy (FT) has been gaining acceptance for the treatment of select patients with localized prostate cancer (CaP). We aim to provide details of a formal physician consensus on the utilization of FT for patients with CaP who are discontinuing active surveillance (AS). METHODS A 3-stage Delphi consensus on CaP and FT was conducted. Consensus was defined as agreement by ≥80% of physicians. An in-person meeting was attended by 17 panelists to formulate the consensus statement. RESULTS Fifty-six respondents participated in this interdisciplinary consensus study (82% urologist, 16% radiologist, 2% radiation oncology). The participants confirmed that there is a role for FT in men discontinuing AS (48% strongly agree, 39% agree). The benefit of FT over radical therapy for men coming off AS is: less invasive (91%), has a greater likelihood to preserve erectile function (91%), has a greater likelihood to preserve urinary continence (91%), has fewer side effects (86%), and has early recovery post-treatment (80%). Patients will need to undergo mpMRI of the prostate and/or a saturation biopsy to determine if they are potential candidates for FT. Our limitations include respondent's biases and that the participants of this consensus may not represent the larger medical community. CONCLUSIONS FT can be offered to men coming off AS between the age of 60 to 80 with grade group 2 localized cancer. This consensus from a multidisciplinary, multi-institutional, international expert panel provides a contemporary insight utilizing FT for CaP in select patients who are discontinuing AS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wei Phin Tan
- Division of Urology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC
| | | | - Laurence Klotz
- Department of Urology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario
| | - Peter R Carroll
- Department of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
| | - Mark Emberton
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | | | - Arvin K George
- Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - Inderbir S Gill
- Department of Urology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Rajan T Gupta
- Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC
| | - Aaron E Katz
- Department of Urology, New York University, New York City, NY
| | - Amir H Lebastchi
- Department of Urology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Leonard S Marks
- Department of Urology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
| | | | - Peter A Pinto
- Urologic Oncology Branch of the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| | - Daniel Y Song
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD
| | - Abhinav Sidana
- Department of Urology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH
| | - John F Ward
- Department of Urology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
18
|
Sarma KV, Harmon S, Sanford T, Roth HR, Xu Z, Tetreault J, Xu D, Flores MG, Raman AG, Kulkarni R, Wood BJ, Choyke PL, Priester AM, Marks LS, Raman SS, Enzmann D, Turkbey B, Speier W, Arnold CW. Federated learning improves site performance in multicenter deep learning without data sharing. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2021; 28:1259-1264. [PMID: 33537772 PMCID: PMC8200268 DOI: 10.1093/jamia/ocaa341] [Citation(s) in RCA: 57] [Impact Index Per Article: 19.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/06/2020] [Revised: 11/30/2020] [Accepted: 12/23/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Objective To demonstrate enabling multi-institutional training without centralizing or sharing the underlying physical data via federated learning (FL). Materials and Methods Deep learning models were trained at each participating institution using local clinical data, and an additional model was trained using FL across all of the institutions. Results We found that the FL model exhibited superior performance and generalizability to the models trained at single institutions, with an overall performance level that was significantly better than that of any of the institutional models alone when evaluated on held-out test sets from each institution and an outside challenge dataset. Discussion The power of FL was successfully demonstrated across 3 academic institutions while avoiding the privacy risk associated with the transfer and pooling of patient data. Conclusion Federated learning is an effective methodology that merits further study to enable accelerated development of models across institutions, enabling greater generalizability in clinical use.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karthik V Sarma
- Department of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA.,Department of Bioengineering, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Stephanie Harmon
- National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.,Clinical Monitoring Research Program Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, Maryland, USA
| | - Thomas Sanford
- Department of Urology, SUNY Upstate Medical Center, Syracuse, New York, USA
| | | | - Ziyue Xu
- NVIDIA Corporation, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | | | - Daguang Xu
- NVIDIA Corporation, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | | | - Alex G Raman
- Department of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Rushikesh Kulkarni
- Department of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Bradford J Wood
- National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Peter L Choyke
- National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Alan M Priester
- Department of Bioengineering, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA.,Department of Urology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Leonard S Marks
- Department of Urology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Steven S Raman
- Department of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Dieter Enzmann
- Department of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Baris Turkbey
- National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - William Speier
- Department of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Corey W Arnold
- Department of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA.,Department of Bioengineering, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA.,Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Dhinagar NJ, Speier W, Sarma KV, Raman A, Kinnaird A, Raman SS, Marks LS, Arnold CW. Semi-automated PIRADS scoring via mpMRI analysis. J Med Imaging (Bellingham) 2020; 7:064501. [PMID: 33392358 DOI: 10.1117/1.jmi.7.6.064501] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/30/2020] [Accepted: 12/11/2020] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose: Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common solid organ cancer and second leading cause of death in men. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) enables detection of the most aggressive, clinically significant PCa (csPCa) tumors that require further treatment. A suspicious region of interest (ROI) detected on mpMRI is now assigned a Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) score to standardize interpretation of mpMRI for PCa detection. However, there is significant inter-reader variability among radiologists in PIRADS score assignment and a minimal input semi-automated artificial intelligence (AI) system is proposed to harmonize PIRADS scores with mpMRI data. Approach: The proposed deep learning model (the seed point model) uses a simulated single-click seed point as input to annotate the lesion on mpMRI. This approach is in contrast to typical medical AI-based approaches that require annotation of the complete lesion. The mpMRI data from 617 patients used in this study were prospectively collected at a major tertiary U.S. medical center. The model was trained and validated to classify whether an mpMRI image had a lesion with a PIRADS score greater than or equal to PIRADS 4. Results: The model yielded an average receiver-operator characteristic (ROC) area under the curve (ROC-AUC) of 0.704 over a 10-fold cross-validation, which is significantly higher than the previously published benchmark. Conclusions: The proposed model could aid in PIRADS scoring of mpMRI, providing second reads to promote quality as well as offering expertise in environments that lack a radiologist with training in prostate mpMRI interpretation. The model could help identify tumors with a higher PIRADS for better clinical management and treatment of PCa patients at an early stage.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nikhil J Dhinagar
- University of California, Los Angeles, David Geffen School of Medicine, Department of Radiological Sciences, Los Angeles, California, United States
| | - William Speier
- University of California, Los Angeles, David Geffen School of Medicine, Department of Radiological Sciences, Los Angeles, California, United States
| | - Karthik V Sarma
- University of California, Los Angeles, David Geffen School of Medicine, Department of Radiological Sciences, Los Angeles, California, United States
| | - Alex Raman
- University of California, Los Angeles, David Geffen School of Medicine, Department of Radiological Sciences, Los Angeles, California, United States
| | - Adam Kinnaird
- University of California, Los Angeles, David Geffen School of Medicine, Department of Urology, Los Angeles, California, United States.,University of Alberta, Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| | - Steven S Raman
- University of California, Los Angeles, David Geffen School of Medicine, Department of Radiological Sciences, Los Angeles, California, United States
| | - Leonard S Marks
- University of California, Los Angeles, David Geffen School of Medicine, Department of Urology, Los Angeles, California, United States
| | - Corey W Arnold
- University of California, Los Angeles, David Geffen School of Medicine, Department of Radiological Sciences, Los Angeles, California, United States.,University of California, Los Angeles, David Geffen School of Medicine, Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Los Angeles, California, United States
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Elkhoury FF, Felker ER, Kwan L, Sisk AE, Delfin M, Natarajan S, Marks LS. Comparison of Targeted vs Systematic Prostate Biopsy in Men Who Are Biopsy Naive: The Prospective Assessment of Image Registration in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer (PAIREDCAP) Study. JAMA Surg 2020; 154:811-818. [PMID: 31188412 DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2019.1734] [Citation(s) in RCA: 101] [Impact Index Per Article: 25.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Importance Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) guidance improves the accuracy of prostate biopsy for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer, but the optimal use of such guidance is not yet clear. Objective To determine the cancer detection rate (CDR) of targeting MRI-visible lesions vs systematic prostate sampling in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer in men who were biopsy naive. Design, Setting, and Participants This paired cohort trial, known as the Prospective Assessment of Image Registration in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer (PAIREDCAP) study, was conducted in an academic medical center from January 2015 to April 2018. Men undergoing first-time prostate biopsy were enrolled. Paired-cohort participants were a consecutive series of men with MRI-visible lesions (defined by a Prostate Imaging Reporting & Data System version 2 score ≥ 3), who each underwent 3 biopsy methods at the same sitting: first, a systematic biopsy; second, an MRI-lesion biopsy targeted by cognitive fusion; and third, an MRI-lesion targeted by software fusion. Another consecutive series of men without MRI-visible lesions underwent systematic biopsies to help determine the false-negative rate of MRI during the trial period. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary end point was the detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer (Gleason grade group ≥2) overall and by each biopsy method separately. The secondary end points were the effects of the Prostate Imaging Reporting & Data System version 2 grade, prostate-specific antigen density, and prostate volume on the primary end point. Tertiary end points were the false-negative rate of MRI and concordance of biopsy-method results by location of detected cancers within the prostate. Results A total of 300 men participated; 248 had MRI-visible lesions (mean [SD] age, 65.5 [7.7] years; 197 were white [79.4%]), and 52 were control participants (mean [SD] age, 63.6 [5.9] years; 39 were white [75%]). The overall CDR was 70% in the paired cohort group, achieved by combining systematic and targeted biopsy results. The CDR by systematic sampling was 15% in the group without MRI-visible lesions. In the paired-cohort group, CDRs varied from 47% (116 of 248 men) when using cognitive fusion biopsy alone, to approximately 60% when using systematic biopsy (149 of 248 men) or either fusion method alone (154 of 248 men), to 70% (174 of 248 men) when combining systematic and targeted biopsy. Discordance of tumor locations suggests that the different biopsy methods detect different tumors. Thus, combining targeting and systematic sampling provide greatest sensitivity for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. For all biopsy methods, the Prostate Imaging Reporting & Data System version 2 grade and prostate-specific antigen density were directly associated with CDRs, and prostate volume was inversely associated. Conclusions and Relevance An MRI-visible lesion in men undergoing first-time prostate biopsy identifies those with a heightened risk of clinically significant prostate cancer. Combining targeted and systematic biopsy offers the best chances of detecting the cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fuad F Elkhoury
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Ely R Felker
- Department of Radiology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Lorna Kwan
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Anthony E Sisk
- Department of Pathology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Merdie Delfin
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Shyam Natarajan
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles.,Department of Bioengineering, University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Leonard S Marks
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Salami SS, Tosoian JJ, Nallandhighal S, Jones TA, Brockman S, Elkhoury FF, Bazzi S, Plouffe KR, Siddiqui J, Liu CJ, Kunju LP, Morgan TM, Natarajan S, Boonstra PS, Sumida L, Tomlins SA, Udager AM, Sisk AE, Marks LS, Palapattu GS. Serial Molecular Profiling of Low-grade Prostate Cancer to Assess Tumor Upgrading: A Longitudinal Cohort Study. Eur Urol 2020; 79:456-465. [PMID: 32631746 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.06.041] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/30/2019] [Accepted: 06/17/2020] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The potential for low-grade (grade group 1 [GG1]) prostate cancer (PCa) to progress to high-grade disease remains unclear. OBJECTIVE To interrogate the molecular and biological features of low-grade PCa serially over time. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Nested longitudinal cohort study in an academic active surveillance (AS) program. Men were on AS for GG1 PCa from 2012 to 2017. INTERVENTION Electronic tracking and resampling of PCa using magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion biopsy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS ERG immunohistochemistry (IHC) and targeted DNA/RNA next-generation sequencing were performed on initial and repeat biopsies. Tumor clonality was assessed. Molecular data were compared between men who upgraded and those who did not upgrade to GG ≥ 2 cancer. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Sixty-six men with median age 64 yr (interquartile range [IQR], 59-69) and prostate-specific antigen 4.9 ng/mL (IQR, 3.3-6.4) underwent repeat sampling of a tracked tumor focus (median interval, 11 mo; IQR, 6-13). IHC-based ERG fusion status was concordant at initial and repeat biopsies in 63 men (95% vs expected 50%, p < 0.001), and RNAseq-based fusion and isoform expression were concordant in nine of 13 (69%) ERG+ patients, supporting focal resampling. Among 15 men who upgraded with complete data at both time points, integrated DNA/RNAseq analysis provided evidence of shared clonality in at least five cases. Such cases could reflect initial undersampling, but also support the possibility of clonal temporal progression of low-grade cancer. Our assessment was limited by sample size and use of targeted sequencing. CONCLUSIONS Repeat molecular assessment of low-grade tumors suggests that clonal progression could be one mechanism of upgrading. These data underscore the importance of serial tumor assessment in men pursuing AS of low-grade PCa. PATIENT SUMMARY We performed targeted rebiopsy and molecular testing of low-grade tumors on active surveillance. Our findings highlight the importance of periodic biopsy as a component of monitoring for cancer upgrading during surveillance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Simpa S Salami
- Department of Urology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Michigan Center for Translational Pathology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
| | - Jeffrey J Tosoian
- Department of Urology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Michigan Center for Translational Pathology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | | | - Tonye A Jones
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Scott Brockman
- Department of Urology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Fuad F Elkhoury
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Selena Bazzi
- Department of Urology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Komal R Plouffe
- Department of Pathology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Javed Siddiqui
- Michigan Center for Translational Pathology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Department of Pathology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Chia-Jen Liu
- Michigan Center for Translational Pathology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Department of Pathology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Lakshmi P Kunju
- Department of Pathology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Todd M Morgan
- Department of Urology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Shyam Natarajan
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Philip S Boonstra
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Lauren Sumida
- Department of Pathology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Scott A Tomlins
- Department of Urology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Michigan Center for Translational Pathology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Department of Pathology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Aaron M Udager
- University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Michigan Center for Translational Pathology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Department of Pathology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Anthony E Sisk
- Department of Pathology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Leonard S Marks
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Ganesh S Palapattu
- Department of Urology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Al Hussein Al Awamlh B, Marks LS, Sonn GA, Natarajan S, Fan RE, Gross MD, Mauer E, Banerjee S, Hectors S, Carlsson S, Margolis DJ, Hu JC. Multicenter analysis of clinical and MRI characteristics associated with detecting clinically significant prostate cancer in PI-RADS (v2.0) category 3 lesions. Urol Oncol 2020; 38:637.e9-637.e15. [PMID: 32307327 DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2020.03.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/16/2019] [Revised: 01/27/2020] [Accepted: 03/21/2020] [Indexed: 01/24/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES We sought to identify clinical and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) characteristics in men with the Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) category 3 index lesions that predict clinically significant prostate cancer (CaP) on MRI targeted biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS Multicenter study of prospectively collected data for biopsy-naive men (n = 247) who underwent MRI-targeted and systematic biopsies for PI-RADS 3 index lesions. The primary endpoint was diagnosis of clinically significant CaP (Grade Group ≥2). Multivariable logistic regression models assessed for factors associated with clinically significant CaP. The probability distributions of clinically significant CaP based on different levels of predictors of multivariable models were plotted in a heatmap. RESULTS Men with clinically significant CaP had smaller prostate volume (39.20 vs. 55.10 ml, P < 0.001) and lower apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values (973 vs. 1068 μm2/s, P = 0.013), but higher prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density (0.21 vs. 0.13 ng/ml2, P = 0.027). On multivariable analyses, lower prostate volume (odds ratio [OR]: 0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.92-0.97), lower ADC value (OR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.99-1.00), and Prostate-specific antigen density >0.15 ng/ml2 (OR: 3.51, 95% CI 1.61-7.68) were independently associated with significant CaP. CONCLUSION Higher PSA density, lower prostate volume and ADC values are associated with clinically significant CaP in biopsy-naïve men with PI-RADS 3 lesions. We present regression-derived probabilities of detecting clinically significant CaP based on various clinical and imaging values that can be used in decision-making. Our findings demonstrate an opportunity for MRI refinement or biomarker discovery to improve risk stratification for PI-RADS 3 lesions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Leonard S Marks
- Department of Urology, Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Geoffrey A Sonn
- Department of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA
| | - Shyam Natarajan
- Department of Bioengineering, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Richard E Fan
- Department of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA
| | - Michael D Gross
- Department of Urology, New York Presbyterian Hospital, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY
| | - Elizabeth Mauer
- Division of Healthcare Policy and Research, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY
| | - Samprit Banerjee
- Division of Healthcare Policy and Research, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY
| | - Stefanie Hectors
- Department of Radiology,New York Presbyterian Hospital, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY
| | - Sigrid Carlsson
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Daniel J Margolis
- Department of Radiology,New York Presbyterian Hospital, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY
| | - Jim C Hu
- Department of Urology, New York Presbyterian Hospital, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY.
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Zhou SR, Chang E, Pataankar A, Huang J, Marks LS, Natarajan S. Prostate Cancer Detection Rate of Freehand versus 3-Dimensional Template Mapping Biopsy Using a Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Device in Biopsy Naïve Men. J Urol 2020; 203:699-705. [PMID: 31596671 PMCID: PMC7384745 DOI: 10.1097/ju.0000000000000587] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 10/02/2019] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Targeted prostate biopsy devices include a 3-dimensional digital template grid to guide systematic biopsy locations. Following a template could better ensure uniform and well distributed sampling of the prostate compared to the traditional freehand biopsy approach, possibly decreasing the chance of false-negative biopsy. Thus, we determined cancer detection rates obtained by conventional freehand systematic sampling vs template mapping sampling using a magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion device. MATERIALS AND METHODS Men who underwent first line conventional or image guided prostate biopsy were identified retrospectively in an institutional review board approved protocol. Excluded from study were men with prior biopsy or treatment or fewer than 10 cores taken. Targeted cores obtained by image guided biopsy were censored from analysis to simulate systematic template biopsy. The resulting cancer detection rate was compared to that of conventional biopsy. RESULTS We identified 1,582 patients between 2006 and 2014 who met the criteria for analysis, including 1,052 who underwent conventional biopsy and 530 who underwent template biopsy with a magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion device. Patient age, prostate specific antigen and the number of systematic cores were the same in the 2 groups. Template biopsy detected any prostate cancer in 257 of 530 men (48.5%) and clinically significant cancer in 196 (37.0%) while conventional biopsy detected any cancer in 432 of 1,052 (41.0%) (p=0.005) and clinically significant cancer in 308 (29.2%) (p=0.002). CONCLUSIONS Template mapping systematic biopsy detected more prostate cancer than conventional sampling in biopsy naïve men. It is a promising cost-effective alternative to magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion biopsy as an upfront screening tool.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Steve R. Zhou
- David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles
| | | | - Aalhad Pataankar
- Department of Bioengineering, University of California, Los Angeles
| | | | | | - Shyam Natarajan
- Department of Bioengineering, University of California, Los Angeles
- Department of Urology, University of California, Los Angeles
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Guorgui J, Kinnaird A, Jayadevan R, Priester AM, Arnold CW, Marks LS. An Electronic Form for Reporting Results of Targeted Prostate Biopsy: Urology Integrated Diagnostic Report (Uro-IDR). Urology 2020; 138:188-193. [PMID: 31978527 DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2020.01.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/20/2019] [Revised: 12/22/2019] [Accepted: 01/07/2020] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To detail the development of an electronic report that graphically conveys all relevant information from targeted prostate biopsy. METHODS The Urology Integrated Diagnostic Report (Uro-IDR) is based on a published framework (RadPath) which enables the compilation of diagnostic data from urology, radiology, and pathology. Each component of the Uro-IDR is generated by the contributing clinician, is assembled in one document, and provides correlation of the 3 inputs at a glance. Upon completion, the Uro-IDR is automatically linked to the electronic medical record as an interactive file and can also be downloaded for offline sharing as a PDF. RESULTS At our institution, 1638 individual Uro-IDRs were generated between June 2016 and April 2019. There were 5715 views of these documents via the EMR. The average turnaround time for the creation of an individual report decreased from nearly 8 days at the time of its launch to 2 days after 6 months of use. The average time for report generation was 22 seconds for the pathologist and 69 seconds for the radiologist. An instructive video is linked to this article. CONCLUSION The Uro-IDR has proven to be a feasible, efficient, clinically useful form to concisely transmit key information about targeted prostate biopsy to both clinicians and patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jacob Guorgui
- David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095
| | - Adam Kinnaird
- David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095; Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095
| | - Rajiv Jayadevan
- David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095; Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095
| | - Alan M Priester
- David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095; Department of Bioengineering, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095
| | - Corey W Arnold
- David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095; Department of Bioengineering, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095; Department of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles CA, 90024; Department of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095
| | - Leonard S Marks
- David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095; Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095.
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Chuang RJ, Marks LS. Targeted and Systematic Biopsy for Diagnosis and Management of Prostate Cancer. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2019; 32:144-148. [PMID: 31864796 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2019.11.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/11/2019] [Revised: 11/22/2019] [Accepted: 11/29/2019] [Indexed: 10/25/2022]
Abstract
The value of multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of clinically-significant prostate cancer is increasingly well-established, and has been adopted in current diagnostic pathways and clinical guidelines. Concurrently, the role of conventional ultrasound-guided systematic prostate biopsy is increasingly questioned. In this brief review, we evaluate the continued value of systematic biopsy including a review of prospective studies on targeted and systemic biopsies in the same patients. We also address current limitations of multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R J Chuang
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - L S Marks
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Zhou SR, Priester AM, Jayadevan R, Johnson DC, Yang JJ, Ballon J, Natarajan S, Marks LS. Using spatial tracking with magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound-guided biopsy to identify unilateral prostate cancer. BJU Int 2019; 125:399-406. [PMID: 31680423 DOI: 10.1111/bju.14943] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To create reliable predictive metrics of unilateral disease using spatial tracking from a fusion device, thereby improving patient selection for hemi-gland ablation of prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS We identified patients who received magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/ultrasound-guided biopsy and radical prostatectomy at a single institution between 2011 and 2018. In addition to standard clinical features, we extracted quantitative features related to biopsy core and MRI target locations predictive of tumour unilaterality. Classification and Regression Tree (CART) analysis was used to create a decision tree (DT) for identifying cancer laterality. We evaluated concordance of model-determined laterality with final surgical pathology. RESULTS A total of 173 patients were identified with biopsy coordinates and surgical pathology available. Based on CART analysis, in addition to biopsy- and MRI-confirmed disease unilaterality, patients should be further screened for cancer detected within 7 mm of midline in a 40 mL prostate, which equates to the central third of any-sized prostate by radius. The area under the curve for this DT was 0.82. Standard diagnostics and the DT correctly identified disease laterality in 73% and 80% of patients, respectively (P = 0.13). Of the patients identified as unilateral by standard diagnostics, 47% had undetected contralateral disease or were otherwise incorrectly identified. This error rate was reduced to 17% (P = 0.01) with the DT. CONCLUSION Using spatial tracking from fusion devices, a DT was more reliable for identifying laterality of prostate cancer compared to standard diagnostics. Patients with cancer detected within the central third of the prostate by radius are poor hemi-gland ablation candidates due to the risk of midline extension of tumour.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Steve R Zhou
- David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Alan M Priester
- Department of Urology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.,Department of Bioengineering, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Rajiv Jayadevan
- Department of Urology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - David C Johnson
- Department of Urology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Jason J Yang
- David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Jorge Ballon
- David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Shyam Natarajan
- Department of Urology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.,Department of Bioengineering, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Leonard S Marks
- Department of Urology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Jayadevan R, Felker ER, Kwan L, Barsa DE, Zhang H, Sisk AE, Delfin M, Marks LS. Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Guided Confirmatory Biopsy for Initiating Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer. JAMA Netw Open 2019; 2:e1911019. [PMID: 31509206 PMCID: PMC6739900 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.11019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/02/2023] Open
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Transrectal, ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsy often fails to disclose the severity of underlying pathologic findings for prostate cancer. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided biopsy may improve the characterization of prostate pathologic results, but few studies have examined its use for the decision to enter active surveillance. OBJECTIVE To evaluate whether confirmatory biopsy findings by MRI guidance are associated with the risk of pathologic disease upgrading among patients with prostate cancer during active surveillance. DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS This retrospective cohort study used prospectively obtained registry data from 332 men with prostate cancer of Gleason grade group (GG) 2 or lower who were referred for active surveillance at a large academic medical center from January 1, 2009, through December 31, 2017. EXPOSURES All confirmatory and follow-up biopsies were performed using MRI guidance with an MRI-ultrasonography fusion device. Patients underwent repeated MRI-guided biopsies every 12 to 24 months. At follow-up sessions, in addition to obtaining systematic samples, lesions seen on MRI were targeted and foci of low-grade prostate cancer were obtained again using tracking technology. Active surveillance was terminated with detection of at least GG3 disease or receipt of treatment. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was upgrading to at least GG3 disease during active surveillance. Secondary outcomes were the associations of MRI lesion grade, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, PSA density, and biopsy method (targeted, systematic, or tracked) with the primary outcome. RESULTS Of 332 patients (mean [SD] age, 62.8 [7.6] years), 39 (11.7%) upgraded to at least GG3 disease during follow-up. The incidence of upgrading was 7.9% (9 of 114) when the confirmatory biopsy finding was normal, 11.4% (20 of 175) when the finding showed GG1 disease, and 23.3% (10 of 43) when the finding was GG2 disease (P = .03). Men with GG2 disease were almost 8 times more likely to upgrade during surveillance compared with those with normal findings but only among those with low PSA density (hazard ratio [HR], 7.82; 95% CI, 2.29-26.68). A PSA density of at least 0.15 ng/mL/mL was associated with increased risk of upgrading among patients with normal findings (HR, 7.21; 95% CI, 1.98-26.24) or GG1 disease (HR, 2.86; 95% CI, 1.16 to 7.03) on confirmatory biopsy. A total of 46% of pathologic disease upgrades would have been missed if only the targeted biopsy was performed and 65% of disease upgrades were detected only with tracked biopsy. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The findings suggest that confirmatory biopsy with MRI guidance is significantly associated with future disease upgrading of prostate cancer, especially when combined with PSA density, and should be considered as an appropriate entry point for active surveillance. Systematic and targeted biopsies were additive in detection of clinically significant cancers. Repeated biopsy at sites at which findings were previously abnormal (tracking biopsy) facilitated detection of cancers not suitable for continued active surveillance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rajiv Jayadevan
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Ely R. Felker
- Department of Radiology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Lorna Kwan
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Danielle E. Barsa
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Haoyue Zhang
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Anthony E. Sisk
- Department of Pathology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Merdie Delfin
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Leonard S. Marks
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Johnson DC, Yang JJ, Kwan L, Barsa DE, Mirak SA, Pooli A, Sadun T, Jayadevan R, Zhou S, Priester AM, Natarajan S, Bajgiran AM, Shakeri S, Sisk A, Felker ER, Raman SS, Marks LS, Reiter RE. Do contemporary imaging and biopsy techniques reliably identify unilateral prostate cancer? Implications for hemiablation patient selection. Cancer 2019; 125:2955-2964. [PMID: 31042322 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.32170] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/31/2018] [Revised: 01/24/2019] [Accepted: 03/14/2019] [Indexed: 02/01/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Hemiablation is a less morbid treatment alternative for appropriately selected patients with unilateral prostate cancer (PCa). However, to the authors' knowledge, traditional diagnostic techniques inadequately identify appropriate candidates. In the current study, the authors quantified the accuracy for identifying hemiablation candidates using contemporary diagnostic techniques, including multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and MRI-fusion with complete systematic template biopsy. METHODS A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing MRI and MRI-fusion prostate biopsy, including full systematic template biopsy, prior to radical prostatectomy in a single tertiary academic institution between June 2010 and February 2018 was performed. Hemiablation candidates had unilateral intermediate-risk PCa (Gleason score [GS] of 3+4 or 4+3, clinical T classification ≤T2, and prostate-specific antigen level <20 ng/dL) on MRI-fusion biopsy and 2) no contralateral highly or very highly suspicious Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADSv2) MRI lesions. Hemiablation candidates were inappropriately selected if pathologists identified contralateral GS ≥3+4 or high-risk ipsilateral PCa on prostatectomy. The authors tested a range of hemiablation inclusion criteria and performed multivariable analysis of preoperative predictors of undetected contralateral disease. RESULTS Of 665 patients, 92 met primary hemiablation criteria. Of these 92 patients, 44 (48%) were incorrectly identified due to ipsilateral GS ≥3+4 tumors crossing the midline (21 patients), undetected distinct contralateral GS ≥3+4 tumors (20 patients), and/or ipsilateral high-risk PCa (3 patients) on prostatectomy. The rate of undetected contralateral disease ranged from 41% to 48% depending on inclusion criteria. On multivariable analysis, men with anterior index tumors were found to be 2.4 times more likely to harbor undetected contralateral GS ≥3+4 PCa compared with men with posterior lesions (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS Clinicians and patients must weigh the risk of inadequate oncologic treatment against the functional benefits of hemiablation. Further investigation into methods for improving patient selection for hemiablation is necessary.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David C Johnson
- National Clinician Scholars Program, Department of Veterans Affairs, Los Angeles, California.,Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| | - Jason J Yang
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| | - Lorna Kwan
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| | - Danielle E Barsa
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| | - Sohrab A Mirak
- Department of Radiology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| | - Aydin Pooli
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| | - Taylor Sadun
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| | - Rajiv Jayadevan
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| | - Steve Zhou
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| | - Alan M Priester
- Department of Bioengineering, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| | - Shyam Natarajan
- Department of Bioengineering, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| | - Amirhossein M Bajgiran
- Department of Radiology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| | - Sepideh Shakeri
- Department of Radiology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| | - Anthony Sisk
- Department of Pathology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| | - Ely R Felker
- Department of Radiology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| | - Steven S Raman
- Department of Radiology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| | - Leonard S Marks
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| | - Robert E Reiter
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Abstract
Here, we present a protocol to perform targeted prostate biopsy using a magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound (MRI/US) fusion system. Prostate cancer has traditionally been diagnosed via transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) biopsy. Though considered the gold standard, TRUS is unable to visualize most prostate cancer lesions and therefore requires sampling of the entire prostate. This biopsy method often undergrades prostate cancer and fails to detect up to 35% of cancers on initial biopsy. Prostate MRI has been shown to have excellent sensitivity in the detection of cancerous lesions, and advancements in MRI technology during the last decade have led to the development of targeted biopsy. In targeted biopsy, a software platform overlays MRI data onto live TRUS images to create a fused MRI/US three-dimensional model of the prostate. Regions suspicious for malignancy on MRI are contoured by a radiologist, uploaded into the fusion system, and then displayed within the live MRI/US fused model. The urologist is then able to directly biopsy these targets. When compared to conventional TRUS biopsy, MRI/US fusion technology has been demonstrated to improve the detection of clinically significant cancer while reducing insignificant cancer detection. This technology, therefore, has the potential to diagnose prostate cancer primarily in men who would benefit from treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rajiv Jayadevan
- Department of Urology, University of California Los Angeles;
| | - Steve Zhou
- Department of Urology, University of California Los Angeles
| | | | - Merdie Delfin
- Department of Urology, University of California Los Angeles
| | | |
Collapse
|
30
|
Tosoian JJ, Salami SS, Nallandhighal S, Jones TA, Plouffe KR, Elkhoury FF, Morgan TM, Liu CJ, Kunju LP, Montgomery JS, Natarajan S, Sisk A, Tomlins SA, Palapattu GS, Marks LS. Molecular characterization of longitudinally tracked prostate cancer foci in men on active surveillance for low-risk disease. J Clin Oncol 2019. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2019.37.7_suppl.56] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
56 Background: The biological trajectory of Gleason score 6 (GS6) prostate cancer (PCa) in men on active surveillance (AS) is unknown. We herein evaluate the potential for high grade PCa to arise clonally from GS 6 disease and determine the capacity of tissue-based biomarkers to predict grade progression. Methods: Men on AS with GS6 PCa who underwent magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound (MRI/US) fusion biopsy on two occasions from 2012 through 2017 were enrolled. Tumor foci were tracked and re-sampled using the MRI/US fusion biopsy platform. ERG immunohistochemistry (IHC) and DNA/RNA next generation sequencing (NGS) were performed on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) initial and repeat biopsy specimens to assess tumor clonality and evaluate candidate molecular markers of PCa grade progression. Results: Sixty-seven men of median age 64 years (IQR 59-69) and PSA 4.9 ng/ml (IQR 3.3-6.4) underwent repeat sampling of a single tracked tumor focus using MRI/US fusion biopsy. The median interval to repeat biopsy was 11 months (IQR 6-13). On repeat biopsy, 31 (46%) men progressed to high-grade (GS≥7) disease (n = 24, GS 3+4 = 7; n = 7, GS ≥4+3 = 7). Among the 67 subjects, ERG IHC status was concordant between initial and repeat biopsy in 64 (96%). Of 134 total specimens obtained (67 initial + 67 repeat biopsies), ERG status determined by NGS was concordant with ERG status by IHC in 132 (99%). Comparing the initial biopsy specimens in men who did versus did not undergo grade progression on follow up biopsy, derived cell cycle progression (CCP) scores (median 57.3 vs. 44.0, p = 0.11) and genomic prostate scores (GPS; median 73.8 vs. 64.4, p = 0.15) were not significantly different. Similarly, expression of FOLH1, PCAT4, SCHLAP1, and SPINK1 on initial biopsy did not significantly differ among men who did and did not undergo grade progression. Conclusions: Use of MRI/US fusion biopsy facilitated resampling of the same clonal focus of cancer over time, with high concordance of ERG status determined by both IHC and NGS. Derived genomic classifiers and candidate individual gene expression markers measured on initial biopsy tissue were not significantly different between patients who progressed and those who did not.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Anthony Sisk
- University of California - Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
31
|
Simopoulos DN, Sisk AE, Priester A, Felker ER, Kwan L, Delfin MK, Reiter RE, Marks LS. Cancer core length from targeted biopsy: an index of prostate cancer volume and pathological stage. BJU Int 2019; 124:275-281. [PMID: 30694605 DOI: 10.1111/bju.14691] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To study the relationship of maximum cancer core length (MCCL), on targeted biopsy (TB) of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-visible index lesions, to volume of that tumour found at radical prostatectomy (RP). PATIENTS AND METHODS In all, 205 men undergoing fusion biopsy and RP were divided into two groups: 136 in whom the MCCL came from an index MRI-visible lesion (TB) and 69 in whom MCCL came from a non-targeted lesion (non-targeted biopsy [NTB]). MRI was 3-T multi-parametric and biopsy was via MRI-ultrasonography fusion. RESULTS In the TB group, MCCL correlated with volume of clinically significant index tumours (ρ = 0.44-0.60, P < 0.01). The correlation was similar for first and repeat biopsy and for transition and peripheral zone lesions (ρ = 0.42-0.49, P < 0.01). No correlations were found in the NTB group. TB MCCL (6-10 and >10 mm) and MRI lesion diameter (>20 mm) were independently associated with tumour volume. TB MCCLs >10 mm and Gleason scores >7 were each associated with pathological T3 disease (odds ratios 5.73 and 5.04, respectively), but MRI lesion diameter lesion was not. CONCLUSIONS MCCL on a TB from an MRI-visible lesion is an independent predictor of both cancer volume and pathological stage. This relationship does not exist for MCCL from a NTB core. Quantifying CCL on MRI-TBs may have a value, not previously described, to risk-stratify patients with prostate cancer before treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Demetrios N Simopoulos
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, CA,, USA
| | - Anthony E Sisk
- Department of Pathology, David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA,, USA
| | - Alan Priester
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, CA,, USA
| | - Ely R Felker
- Department of Radiology, Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Lorna Kwan
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, CA,, USA
| | - Merdie K Delfin
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, CA,, USA
| | - Robert E Reiter
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, CA,, USA
| | - Leonard S Marks
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, CA,, USA
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
van Luijtelaar A, Greenwood BM, Ahmed HU, Barqawi AB, Barret E, Bomers JGR, Brausi MA, Choyke PL, Cooperberg MR, Eggener S, Feller JF, Frauscher F, George AK, Hindley RG, Jenniskens SFM, Klotz L, Kovacs G, Lindner U, Loeb S, Margolis DJ, Marks LS, May S, Mcclure TD, Montironi R, Nour SG, Oto A, Polascik TJ, Rastinehad AR, De Reyke TM, Reijnen JS, de la Rosette JJMCH, Sedelaar JPM, Sperling DS, Walser EM, Ward JF, Villers A, Ghai S, Fütterer JJ. Focal laser ablation as clinical treatment of prostate cancer: report from a Delphi consensus project. World J Urol 2019; 37:2147-2153. [PMID: 30671638 PMCID: PMC6763411 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-019-02636-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/25/2018] [Accepted: 01/10/2019] [Indexed: 01/11/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To define the role of focal laser ablation (FLA) as clinical treatment of prostate cancer (PCa) using the Delphi consensus method. METHODS A panel of international experts in the field of focal therapy (FT) in PCa conducted a collaborative consensus project using the Delphi method. Experts were invited to online questionnaires focusing on patient selection and treatment of PCa with FLA during four subsequent rounds. After each round, outcomes were displayed, and questionnaires were modified based on the comments provided by panelists. Results were finalized and discussed during face-to-face meetings. RESULTS Thirty-seven experts agreed to participate, and consensus was achieved on 39/43 topics. Clinically significant PCa (csPCa) was defined as any volume Grade Group 2 [Gleason score (GS) 3+4]. Focal therapy was specified as treatment of all csPCa and can be considered primary treatment as an alternative to radical treatment in carefully selected patients. In patients with intermediate-risk PCa (GS 3+4) as well as patients with MRI-visible and biopsy-confirmed local recurrence, FLA is optimal for targeted ablation of a specific magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-visible focus. However, FLA should not be applied to candidates for active surveillance and close follow-up is required. Suitability for FLA is based on tumor volume, location to vital structures, GS, MRI-visibility, and biopsy confirmation. CONCLUSION Focal laser ablation is a promising technique for treatment of clinically localized PCa and should ideally be performed within approved clinical trials. So far, only few studies have reported on FLA and further validation with longer follow-up is mandatory before widespread clinical implementation is justified.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A van Luijtelaar
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
| | | | - H U Ahmed
- Department of Surgery, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - A B Barqawi
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Colorado Denver School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA
| | - E Barret
- L'Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris Descartes University, Paris, France
| | - J G R Bomers
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - M A Brausi
- Department of Urology, AUSL Modena, Modena, Italy
| | - P L Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - M R Cooperberg
- University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - S Eggener
- Department of Urology, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - J F Feller
- Desert Medical Imaging, Indian Wells, CA, USA
| | - F Frauscher
- Medizinische Universität Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
| | - A K George
- Urologic Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - R G Hindley
- Department of Urology, Basingstoke Hospital, Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Basingstoke, UK
| | - S F M Jenniskens
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - L Klotz
- Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - G Kovacs
- Interdisciplinary Brachytherapy Unit, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - U Lindner
- Department of Urology, Kaplan Medical Center, Rehovot, Israel
| | - S Loeb
- Department of Urology and Population Health, New York University and Manhattan Veterans Affairs Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - D J Margolis
- Department of Radiology, Ronald Reagan-UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - L S Marks
- Department of Urology, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - S May
- Desert Medical Imaging, Indian Wells, CA, USA
| | - T D Mcclure
- Department of Urology, New York Presbyterian-Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA
| | - R Montironi
- Section of Pathological Anatomy, Polytechnic University of the Marche Region, School of Medicine, United Hospitals, Ancona, Italy
| | - S G Nour
- Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - A Oto
- Department of Radiology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - T J Polascik
- Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA
| | | | - T M De Reyke
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J S Reijnen
- Department of Radiology, Sørlandet Hospital, Kristiansand, Norway
| | - J J M C H de la Rosette
- Department of Urology, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey.,Amsterdam UMC University Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J P M Sedelaar
- Department of Urology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | | | - E M Walser
- Department of Radiology, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, USA
| | - J F Ward
- Division of Surgery, Department of Urology, University of Texas, Houston, TX, USA
| | - A Villers
- Department of Urology, Lille University Medical Center, Lille, France
| | - S Ghai
- University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - J J Fütterer
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Jayadevan R, Marks LS. Exclusive MRI-targeted biopsy: not so fast. Lancet Oncol 2018; 20:9-10. [PMID: 30470503 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(18)30607-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/07/2018] [Accepted: 08/09/2018] [Indexed: 10/27/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Rajiv Jayadevan
- Department of Urology, Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA
| | - Leonard S Marks
- Department of Urology, Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
|
35
|
Salmasi A, Faiena I, Wu J, Sisk AE, Sachveda A, Vandel JJ, Chamie K, Marks LS, Reiter RE. Radical prostatectomy then and now: Surgical overtreatment of prostate cancer is declining from 2009 to 2016 at a tertiary referral center. Urol Oncol 2018; 36:401.e19-401.e25. [DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2018.06.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/01/2018] [Revised: 06/05/2018] [Accepted: 06/09/2018] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
|
36
|
|
37
|
Priester A, Wu H, Khoshnoodi P, Schneider D, Zhang Z, Asvadi NH, Sisk A, Raman S, Reiter R, Grundfest W, Marks LS, Natarajan S. Registration Accuracy of Patient-Specific, Three-Dimensional-Printed Prostate Molds for Correlating Pathology With Magnetic Resonance Imaging. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2018; 66:14-22. [PMID: 29993431 DOI: 10.1109/tbme.2018.2828304] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This investigation was performed to evaluate the registration accuracy between magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and pathology using three-dimensional (3-D) printed molds. METHODS Tissue-mimicking prostate phantoms were manufactured with embedded fiducials. The fiducials were used to measure and compare target registration error (TRE) between phantoms that were sliced by hand versus phantoms that were sliced within 3-D-printed molds. Subsequently, ten radical prostatectomy specimens were placed inside molds, scanned with MRI, and then sliced. The ex vivo scan was used to assess the true location of whole mount (WM) slides relative to in vivo MRI. The TRE between WM and in vivo MRI was measured using anatomic landmarks. RESULTS Manually sliced phantoms had a 4.1-mm mean TRE, whereas mold-sliced phantoms had a 1.9-mm mean TRE. Similarly, mold-assisted slicing reduced mean angular misalignment around the left-right (LR) anatomic axis from 10.7° to 4.5°. However, ex vivo MRI revealed that excised prostates were misaligned within molds, including a mean 14° rotation about the LR axis. The mean in-plane TRE was 3.3 mm using molds alone and 2.2 mm after registration was corrected with ex vivo MRI. CONCLUSION Patient-specific molds improved accuracy relative to manual slicing techniques in a phantom model. However, the registration accuracy of surgically resected specimens was limited by their imperfect fit within molds. This limitation can be overcome with the addition of ex vivo imaging. SIGNIFICANCE The accuracy of 3-D-printed molds was characterized, quantifying their utility for facilitating MRI-pathology registration.
Collapse
|
38
|
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW Options for prostate cancer management are rapidly expanding. The recent advent of MRI technology has led to guided prostate biopsies by radiologists working in-bore or by urologists using MR/US fusion technology. The resulting tumor visualization now provides the option of focal therapy. Currently available are highly directed energies - focused ultrasound (HIFU), cryotherapy, and laser - all offering the hope of curing prostate cancer with few side effects. RECENT FINDINGS MRI now enables visualization of many prostate cancers. MR/US fusion biopsy makes possible the targeted biopsy of suspicious lesions efficiently in the urology clinic. Several fusion devices are now commercially available. Focal therapy, a derivative of targeted biopsy, is reshaping the approach to treatment of some prostate cancers. Focal laser ablation, originally done in the MRI gantry (in-bore), promises to soon become feasible in a clinic setting (out-of-bore) under local anesthesia. Other focal therapy options, including HIFU and cryotherapy, are currently available. Herein are summarized outcomes data on focal therapy modalities. SUMMARY MRI-guided biopsy is optimizing prostate cancer diagnosis. Focal therapy, an outgrowth of guided biopsy, promises to become a well tolerated and effective approach to treating many men with prostate cancer while minimizing the risks of incontinence and impotence from radical treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fuad F. Elkhoury
- UCLA Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, Wasserman Bldg, Suite 331, UCLA Medical Plaza, Los Angeles, CA 90095, Phone: 310-794-8659, Fax: 310-794-8653
| | - Demetrios N. Simopoulos
- UCLA Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, Wasserman Bldg, Suite 331, UCLA Medical Plaza, Los Angeles, CA 90095, Phone: 310-794-8659, Fax: 310-794-8653
| | - Leonard S. Marks
- UCLA Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, Wasserman Bldg, Suite 331, UCLA Medical Plaza, Los Angeles, CA 90095, Phone: 310-794-8659, Fax: 310-794-8653
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Affiliation(s)
- Leonard S Marks
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Nassiri N, Chang E, Lieu P, Priester AM, Margolis DJA, Huang J, Reiter RE, Dorey FJ, Marks LS, Natarajan S. Focal Therapy Eligibility Determined by Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy. J Urol 2018; 199:453-458. [PMID: 28830754 PMCID: PMC5780241 DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2017.08.085] [Citation(s) in RCA: 43] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 08/10/2017] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE We assessed focal therapy eligibility in men who underwent multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and targeted biopsy with correlation to whole mount histology after radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS Subjects were selected from among the 454 men in whom targeted biopsy proven prostate cancer was derived from regions of interest on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging from 2010 to 2016. Focal therapy eligibility was limited to a maximum Gleason score of 4 + 3 in regions of interest with or without other foci of low risk prostate cancer (Gleason score 3 + 3 and less than 4 mm). Men who did not meet NCCN® intermediate risk criteria were classified as ineligible for focal therapy. Of the 454 men 64 underwent radical prostatectomy and biopsy findings were compared to final pathology findings. RESULTS Of the 454 men with a biopsy proven region of interest 175 (38.5%) were eligible for focal therapy. Fusion biopsy, which combined targeted and template biopsy, had 80.0% sensitivity (12 of 15 cases), 73.5% specificity (36 of 49) and 75.0% accuracy (48 of 64) for focal therapy eligibility. Targeted cores alone yielded 73.3% sensitivity (11 of 15 cases), 47.9% specificity (23 of 48) and 54.7% accuracy (35 of 64). Gleason score and extension across the midline differed in 4 and 9, respectively, of the 13 cases that showed discordant biopsy and whole mount histology. CONCLUSIONS Using intermediate risk eligibility criteria more than a third of men with a targeted biopsy proven lesion identified on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging would have been eligible for focal therapy. Eligibility determined by fusion biopsy was concordant with whole mount histology in 75% of cases. Improved selection criteria are needed to reliably determine focal therapy eligibility.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nima Nassiri
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California
| | - Edward Chang
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California
| | - Patricia Lieu
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California
| | - Alan M Priester
- Department of Bioengineering, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| | - Daniel J A Margolis
- Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell at New York Presbyterian, New York, New York
| | - Jiaoti Huang
- Department of Pathology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Robert E Reiter
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California
| | - Frederick J Dorey
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California
| | - Leonard S Marks
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California
| | - Shyam Natarajan
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California; Department of Bioengineering, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Abstract
Targeted prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) guidance is improving the accuracy of prostate cancer (CaP) diagnosis. This new biopsy technology is especially important for men undergoing active surveillance, improving patient selection for enrollment and enabling precise longitudinal monitoring. Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion biopsy allows for 3 functions not previously possible with US-guided biopsy: targeting of suspicious regions, template-mapping for systematic sampling, and tracking of cancer foci over time. This article reviews the evolving role of the new biopsy methods in active surveillance, including the UCLA Active Surveillance pathway, which has incorporated magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion biopsy from program inception as a possible model.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fuad F Elkhoury
- UCLA Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, Wasserman Bldg, Suite 331, UCLA Medical Plaza, Los Angeles, CA 90095
| | - Demetrios N Simopoulos
- UCLA Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, Wasserman Bldg, Suite 331, UCLA Medical Plaza, Los Angeles, CA 90095
| | - Leonard S Marks
- UCLA Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, Wasserman Bldg, Suite 331, UCLA Medical Plaza, Los Angeles, CA 90095.
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Affiliation(s)
- Leonard S Marks
- University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Golan R, Bernstein A, Sedrakyan A, Daskivich TJ, Du DT, Ehdaie B, Fisher B, Gorin MA, Grunberger I, Hunt B, Jiang HH, Kim HL, Marinac-Dabic D, Marks LS, McClure TD, Montgomery JS, Parekh DJ, Punnen S, Scionti S, Viviano CJ, Wei JT, Wenske S, Wysock JS, Rewcastle J, Carol M, Oczachowski M, Hu JC. Development of a Nationally Representative Coordinated Registry Network for Prostate Ablation Technologies. J Urol 2018; 199:1488-1493. [PMID: 29307684 DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2017.12.058] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 12/16/2016] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The accumulation of data through a prospective, multicenter coordinated registry network is a practical way to gather real world evidence on the performance of novel prostate ablation technologies. Urological oncologists, targeted biopsy experts, industry representatives and representatives of the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) convened to discuss the role, feasibility and important data elements of a coordinated registry network to assess new and existing prostate ablation technologies. MATERIALS AND METHODS A multiround Delphi consensus approach was performed which included the opinion of 15 expert urologists, representatives of the FDA and leadership from high intensity focused ultrasound device manufacturers. Stakeholders provided input in 3 consecutive rounds with conference calls following each round to obtain consensus on remaining items. Participants agreed that these elements initially developed for high intensity focused ultrasound are compatible with other prostate ablation technologies. Coordinated registry network elements were reviewed and supplemented with data elements from the FDA common study metrics. RESULTS The working group reached consensus on capturing specific patient demographics, treatment details, oncologic outcomes, functional outcomes and complications. Validated health related quality of life questionnaires were selected to capture patient reported outcomes, including the IIEF-5 (International Index of Erectile Function-5), the I-PSS (International Prostate Symptom Score), the EPIC-26 (Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite-26) and the MSHQ-EjD (Male Sexual Health Questionnaire for Ejaculatory Dysfunction). Group consensus was to obtain followup multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and prostate biopsy approximately 12 months after ablation with additional imaging or biopsy performed as clinically indicated. CONCLUSIONS A national prostate ablation coordinated registry network brings forth vital practice pattern and outcomes data for this emerging treatment paradigm in the United States. Our multiple stakeholder consensus identifies critical elements to evaluate new and existing energy modalities and devices.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ron Golan
- Department of Urology, New York Presbyterian-Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York
| | - Adrien Bernstein
- Department of Urology, New York Presbyterian-Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York
| | - Art Sedrakyan
- Department of Healthcare Policy and Research, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York
| | | | - Dongyi T Du
- Center for Devices and Radiological Health, United States Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland
| | - Behfar Ehdaie
- Urology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Benjamin Fisher
- Center for Devices and Radiological Health, United States Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland
| | - Michael A Gorin
- Department of Urology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Ivan Grunberger
- Division of Urology, New York Presbyterian-Brooklyn Methodist Hospital, Brooklyn, New York
| | - Bradley Hunt
- Center for Devices and Radiological Health, United States Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland
| | - Hongying H Jiang
- Center for Devices and Radiological Health, United States Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland
| | - Hyung L Kim
- Division of Urology, Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California
| | - Danica Marinac-Dabic
- Center for Devices and Radiological Health, United States Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland
| | - Leonard S Marks
- Department of Urology, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| | - Timothy D McClure
- Department of Urology, New York Presbyterian-Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York
| | | | - Dipen J Parekh
- Department of Urology, University of Miami, Miami, Florida
| | - Sanoj Punnen
- Department of Urology, University of Miami, Miami, Florida
| | | | - Charles J Viviano
- Center for Devices and Radiological Health, United States Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland
| | - John T Wei
- Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | - Sven Wenske
- Department of Urology, New York Presbyterian-Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York
| | - James S Wysock
- Department of Urology, New York University Langone Medical Center, New York, New York
| | - John Rewcastle
- Department of Urology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California
| | - Mark Carol
- SonaCare Medical, Charlotte, North Carolina
| | | | - Jim C Hu
- Department of Urology, New York Presbyterian-Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York.
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Jones TA, Chin J, Mcleod D, Barkin J, Pantuck A, Marks LS. High Intensity Focused Ultrasound for Radiorecurrent Prostate Cancer: A North American Clinical Trial. J Urol 2018; 199:133-139. [DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2017.06.078] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/17/2017] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Tonye A. Jones
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| | - Joseph Chin
- Division of Urology, London Health Sciences Center, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - David Mcleod
- Department of Surgery, Center for Prostate Cancer Disease Research, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences and Walter Reed National Medical Military Center, Bethesda, Maryland
| | | | - Allan Pantuck
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| | - Leonard S. Marks
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Calais J, Fendler WP, Eiber M, Gartmann J, Chu FI, Nickols NG, Reiter RE, Rettig MB, Marks LS, Ahlering TE, Huynh LM, Slavik R, Gupta P, Quon A, Allen-Auerbach MS, Czernin J, Herrmann K. Impact of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT on the Management of Prostate Cancer Patients with Biochemical Recurrence. J Nucl Med 2017; 59:434-441. [PMID: 29242398 DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.117.202945] [Citation(s) in RCA: 96] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/03/2017] [Accepted: 11/30/2017] [Indexed: 01/09/2023] Open
Abstract
In this prospective survey of referring physicians, we investigated whether and how 68Ga-labeled prostate-specific membrane antigen 11 (68Ga-PSMA-11) PET/CT affects the implemented management of prostate cancer patients with biochemical recurrence (BCR). Methods: We conducted a prospective survey of physicians (NCT02940262) who referred 161 patients with prostate cancer BCR (median prostate-specific antigen value, 1.7 ng/mL; range, 0.05-202 ng/mL). Referring physicians completed one questionnaire before the scan to indicate the treatment plan without 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT information (Q1; n = 101), one immediately after the scan to denote intended management changes (Q2; n = 101), and one 3-6 mo later to document the final implemented management (Q3; n = 56). The implemented management was also obtained via electronic chart review or patient contact (n = 45). Results: A complete documented management strategy (Q1 + Q2 + implemented management) was available for 101 of 161 patients (63%). Seventy-six of these (75%) had a positive 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT result. The implemented management differed from the prescan intended management (Q1) in 54 of 101 patients (53%). The postscan intended management (Q2) differed from the prescan intended management (Q1) in 62 of 101 patients (61%); however, these intended changes were not implemented in 29 of 62 patients (47%). Pelvic nodal and extrapelvic metastatic disease on 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT (PSMA T0N1M0 and PSMA T0N1M1 patterns) was significantly associated with implemented management changes (P = 0.001 and 0.05). Conclusion: Information from 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT brings about management changes in more than 50% of prostate cancer patients with BCR (54/101; 53%). However, intended management changes early after 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT frequently differ from implemented management changes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jeremie Calais
- Ahmanson Translational Imaging Division, Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, California
| | - Wolfgang P Fendler
- Ahmanson Translational Imaging Division, Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, California
| | - Matthias Eiber
- Ahmanson Translational Imaging Division, Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, California
| | - Jeannine Gartmann
- Ahmanson Translational Imaging Division, Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, California
| | - Fang-I Chu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, California
| | - Nicholas G Nickols
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, California
| | - Robert E Reiter
- Department of Urology, UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, California; and
| | - Matthew B Rettig
- Department of Urology, UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, California; and
| | - Leonard S Marks
- Department of Urology, UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, California; and
| | | | - Linda M Huynh
- Department of Urology, UC Irvine Health, Irvine, California
| | - Roger Slavik
- Ahmanson Translational Imaging Division, Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, California
| | - Pawan Gupta
- Ahmanson Translational Imaging Division, Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, California
| | - Andrew Quon
- Ahmanson Translational Imaging Division, Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, California
| | - Martin S Allen-Auerbach
- Ahmanson Translational Imaging Division, Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, California
| | - Johannes Czernin
- Ahmanson Translational Imaging Division, Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, California
| | - Ken Herrmann
- Ahmanson Translational Imaging Division, Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, California
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Loeb S, Shin SS, Broyles DL, Wei JT, Sanda M, Klee G, Partin AW, Sokoll L, Chan DW, Bangma CH, van Schaik RHN, Slawin KM, Marks LS, Catalona WJ. Prostate Health Index improves multivariable risk prediction of aggressive prostate cancer. BJU Int 2017; 120:61-68. [PMID: 27743489 PMCID: PMC5392379 DOI: 10.1111/bju.13676] [Citation(s) in RCA: 57] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To examine the use of the Prostate Health Index (PHI) as a continuous variable in multivariable risk assessment for aggressive prostate cancer in a large multicentre US study. MATERIALS AND METHODS The study population included 728 men, with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels of 2-10 ng/mL and a negative digital rectal examination, enrolled in a prospective, multi-site early detection trial. The primary endpoint was aggressive prostate cancer, defined as biopsy Gleason score ≥7. First, we evaluated whether the addition of PHI improves the performance of currently available risk calculators (the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial [PCPT] and European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer [ERSPC] risk calculators). We also designed and internally validated a new PHI-based multivariable predictive model, and created a nomogram. RESULTS Of 728 men undergoing biopsy, 118 (16.2%) had aggressive prostate cancer. The PHI predicted the risk of aggressive prostate cancer across the spectrum of values. Adding PHI significantly improved the predictive accuracy of the PCPT and ERSPC risk calculators for aggressive disease. A new model was created using age, previous biopsy, prostate volume, PSA and PHI, with an area under the curve of 0.746. The bootstrap-corrected model showed good calibration with observed risk for aggressive prostate cancer and had net benefit on decision-curve analysis. CONCLUSION Using PHI as part of multivariable risk assessment leads to a significant improvement in the detection of aggressive prostate cancer, potentially reducing harms from unnecessary prostate biopsy and overdiagnosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stacy Loeb
- Department of Urology and Population Health, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | | | | | - John T Wei
- Department of Urology, University of Michigan School of Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Martin Sanda
- Department of Urology, Emory University and Emory Healthcare, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - George Klee
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Alan W Partin
- Department of Urology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Lori Sokoll
- Department of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Daniel W Chan
- Department of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Chris H Bangma
- Department of Urology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Ron H N van Schaik
- Department of Clinical Chemistry, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Kevin M Slawin
- Vanguard Urologic Institute and Texas Prostate Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Leonard S Marks
- Department of Urology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - William J Catalona
- Department of Urology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Simopoulos DN, Natarajan S, Jones TA, Fendler WP, Sisk AE, Marks LS. Targeted Prostate Biopsy Using 68Gallium PSMA-PET/CT for Image Guidance. Urol Case Rep 2017; 14:11-14. [PMID: 28607878 PMCID: PMC5458645 DOI: 10.1016/j.eucr.2017.05.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/18/2017] [Revised: 05/03/2017] [Accepted: 05/10/2017] [Indexed: 01/14/2023] Open
Abstract
Prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA) scanning is a sensitive method of prostate cancer detection. In a 71 y.o. man with a PSA of 49 (6%F), 4 negative MRI studies and 6 negative biopsies over an 8 year interval, a 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT scan showed a PSMA-avid spot in the prostate. Using image fusion technology, the lesion was target-biopsied and Gleason 3 + 4 = 7 (cancer core length of 12 mm) was identified. This case may herald a new application for PSMA scanning and prostate cancer imaging.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Demetrios N Simopoulos
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, 300 Stein Plaza, 3rd Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA
| | - Shyam Natarajan
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, 300 Stein Plaza, 3rd Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA
| | - Tonye A Jones
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, 300 Stein Plaza, 3rd Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA
| | - Wolfgang P Fendler
- Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, David Geffen School of Medicine, 10833 Le Conte Avenue, 200 Medical Plaza, Suite B114-61, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA
| | - Anthony E Sisk
- Department of Pathology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, 10833 LeConte Avenue, A3-240 CHS, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA
| | - Leonard S Marks
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, 300 Stein Plaza, 3rd Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Jones TA, Marks LS. Re: A Pilot Study to Evaluate the Role of Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Cancer Screening in the General Population. Eur Urol 2017; 71:986-987. [DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.02.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/15/2017] [Accepted: 02/07/2017] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
|
49
|
Salmasi A, Said JW, Raman S, Shindel AW, McCullough D, Bailey H, Rothney M, Marks LS, Febbo PG, Reiter RE. A 17-gene panel for prediction of adverse surgical pathology in the setting of MRI-guided prostate biopsy. J Clin Oncol 2017. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2017.35.15_suppl.5063] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
5063 Background: A 17 gene panel (Oncotype Dx Genomic Prostate Score, GPS) has been validated as an independent predictor of adverse pathology (AP, defined as pathological GS 4+3 or higher and/or pT3+) in men treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer (PCa). Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (mpMRI) may help guide prostate biopsies. We explored synergies between GPS and mpMRI to aid in PCa management decisions. Methods: A cohort of men with NCCN Low and Intermediate-Risk PCa who were managed with RP was identified from a clinical database. Patients were required to have had a simultaneous mpMRI-guided and systematic biopsy and to have undergone RP within 6 months. Biopsy tissue of the highest Gleason pattern was used for calculation of GPS. The primary endpoint was AP. Secondary endpoints included the range of GPS within UCLA prostate MRI risk groups and median GPS when there was discrepancy between MRI and systematic biopsy Gleason Score (GS). Logistic regression models were fit to evaluate the relationship between GPS (per 20 units) and AP. Results: 134 men met criteria for the primary endpoint. Median age was 62 years (range 46-77). NCCN Low & Intermediate-Risk PCa was present in 16%, and 84% of men, respectively. Biopsy GS 3+3/3+4/4+3 was present in 19%, 67%, and 13%, respectively. In a univariable model, GPS was associated with AP (OR 3.8, 95% CI 2.1 to 7.4, p < 0.001). After adjustment for highest biopsy GS and clinical T-stage, GPS remained significantly associated with AP (OR 3.4, 95% CI 1.8 to 6.8, p = 0.0004). A wide and overlapping distribution of GPS was noted across UCLA MRI prostate risk groups, indicating that GPS provides information that is distinct from what can be determined from mpMRI. When there was a discrepancy between mpMRI and systematic biopsy GS, mpMRI targeted lesions with higher GS had higher median GPS (33, range 13-70) than systematic biopsies with higher GS (median GPS 25, range 15-55). Conclusions: GPS provides independent and complementary prognostic information to mpMRI-guided biopsies. The combination of mpMRI for biopsy guidance and GPS for molecular analysis may optimize prediction of AP and improve patient selection for treatment versus surveillance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Jonathan W. Said
- David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Steven Raman
- Department of Radiology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
| | | | | | | | | | - Leonard S. Marks
- Department of Urology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
50
|
Golan R, Bernstein AN, McClure TD, Sedrakyan A, Patel NA, Parekh DJ, Marks LS, Hu JC. Partial Gland Treatment of Prostate Cancer Using High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound in the Primary and Salvage Settings: A Systematic Review. J Urol 2017; 198:1000-1009. [PMID: 28433640 DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2017.03.137] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/23/2017] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Advances in prostate imaging, biopsy and ablative technologies have been accompanied by growing enthusiasm for partial gland ablation, particularly using high-intensity focused ultrasound, to treat prostate cancer. Preserving noncancerous prostate tissue and minimizing damage to the neurovascular bundles and external urethral sphincter may improve functional outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS A systematic review was performed following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines using a combination of MeSH® terms, free text search and examination of relevant bibliographies using MEDLINE® and Embase® from the inception of each database through October 10, 2016. We excluded studies describing exclusively whole gland ablation, case reports and series where treatment was followed by immediate resection. RESULTS A total of 13 studies that enrolled 543 patients were included. Of the studies 11 were performed in the primary setting and 2 in the salvage setting. Median followup ranged from 6 months to 10.6 years. Rates of posttreatment erectile dysfunction and urinary incontinence ranged from 0% to 48% and 0% to 50%, respectively, with definitions varying by study. Overall there were 254 reported complications. Marked heterogeneity between studies limited the ability to pool results regarding functional and oncologic outcomes. A total of 76 patients (14%) subsequently received further oncologic treatment. CONCLUSIONS Early evidence suggests that partial gland ablation is a safe treatment option for men with localized disease. Longer term data are needed to evaluate oncologic efficacy and functional outcomes, and will aid in identifying the optimal candidates for therapy. Standardization of outcomes definitions will allow for better comparison between studies and among treatment modalities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ron Golan
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York
| | - Adrien N Bernstein
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York
| | - Timothy D McClure
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York
| | - Art Sedrakyan
- Department of Healthcare Policy and Research, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York
| | - Neal A Patel
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York
| | - Dipen J Parekh
- Department of Urology, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida
| | - Leonard S Marks
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California
| | - Jim C Hu
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York.
| |
Collapse
|