Biopsy core length in white versus African descendant prostate cancer patients

Abstract

Objective: To explore whether distinct prostate cancer (PCa) prognoses between ethnicities could be explained by diverse characteristics in the prostate biopsy.

Methods: Clinical, prostate biopsy and surgical single-institution data of whites and African descendants with similar access to the health system who underwent radical prostatectomy whole gland histopathology within 60 days after biopsy from 2010 to 2011 and followed for 5 years minimum were compared.

Results: Among 203 included patients, 153 (75.4%) were whites and 50 (24.6%) were African descendants. The mean patients’ age was 63.7 (± 6.8) years. Digital rectal examination (DRE) was suspected of cancer in 45.2% of the patients. The prostate biopsy core length was smaller in African descendants than in whites, overall 11.0 ± 3.2 vs 12.0 ± 2.9 mm, p = 0.037, and without neoplasia, 10.4 ± 3.8 vs 11.7 ± 3.1 mm, p = 0.038, respectively. Also, suspicious DRE showed smaller biopsy core length, overall 11.1 ± 3.2 mm vs 12.4 ± 2.6, p = 0.003, cancer positive 12.0 ± 4.8 mm vs 13.3 ± 3.7, p = 0.022 and negative 10.6 ± 3.6 mm vs 12.2 ± 3.0, p = 0.002. On 81 months median follow-up, more African descendants were lost to follow-up (10%, n = 5 vs 3.9%, n = 6) and the biochemical recurrence rate was the same between the groups (33.3%).

Conclusion: In a PCa population with similar access to the health system, prostate biopsy core length in African descendant men is significantly smaller than in whites. This finding is new and may add to the controversial argument of PCa having a worse prognosis in African descendant patients.

Keywords:

• Prostatic neoplasms
• African
• White
• ethnicity
• biopsy
• core length

Acknowledgment

To the involved institution(s), the patients and those that provided and cared for study patients.

Ethical approval

Research involving Human Participants and/or Animals: The local research ethics committee approved the protocol.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

“National Council for Scientific and Technological Development” – CNPq, Research Productivity: 304747/2018-1.