Can Prostate-Specific Antigen Density Be an Index to Distinguish Patients Who Can Omit Repeat Prostate Biopsy in Patients with Negative Magnetic Resonance Imaging?

References

• Kasivisvanathan V, Rannikko AS, Borghi M, et al. MRI-targeted or standard biopsy for prostate-cancer diagnosis. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(19):1767–1777. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa180199329552975
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van der Leest M, Cornel E, Israel B, et al. Head-to-head Comparison of transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy versus multiparametric prostate resonance imaging with subsequent magnetic resonance-guided biopsy in biopsy-naive men with elevated prostate-specific antigen: a large prospective multicenter clinical study. Eur Urol. 2019;75(4):570–578. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2018.11.02330477981
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rouviere O, Puech P, Renard-Penna R, et al. Use of prostate systematic and targeted biopsy on the basis of multiparametric MRI in biopsy-naive patients (MRI-FIRST): a prospective, multicentre, paired diagnostic study. Lancet Oncol. 2019;20(1):100–109. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30569-230470502
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, et al. EAU-ESTRO-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Part 1: screening, Diagnosis, and Local Treatment with Curative Intent. Eur Urol. 2017;71(4):618–629. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2016.08.00327568654
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenkrantz AB, Verma S, Choyke P, et al. Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Targeted Biopsy in Patients with a Prior Negative Biopsy: a Consensus Statement by AUA and SAR. J Urol. 2016;196(6):1613–1618. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2016.06.07927320841
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mottet N, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E, et al. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer-2020 Update. Part 1: screening, Diagnosis, and Local Treatment with Curative Intent. Eur Urol. 2021;79(2):243–262.33172724
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falagario UG, Jambor I, Lantz A, et al. Combined use of prostate-specific antigen density and magnetic resonance imaging for prostate biopsy decision planning: a retrospective multi-institutional study using the Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging Outcome Database (PROMOD). Eur Urol Oncol. 2020. doi:10.1016/j.euo.2020.08.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oishi M, Shin T, Ohe C, et al. Which patients with negative magnetic resonance imaging can safely avoid biopsy for prostate cancer? J Urol. 2019;201(2):268–276. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2018.08.04630189186
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuru TH, Wadhwa K, Chang RT, et al. Definitions of terms, processes and a minimum dataset for transperineal prostate biopsies: a standardization approach of the Ginsburg Study Group for Enhanced Prostate Diagnostics. BJU Int. 2013;112(5):568–577. doi:10.1111/bju.1213223773772
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahmed HU, El-Shater Bosaily A, Brown LC, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet. 2017;389(10071):815–822. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32401-128110982
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vargas HA, Hotker AM, Goldman DA, et al. Updated prostate imaging reporting and data system (PIRADS v2) recommendations for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer using multiparametric MRI: critical evaluation using whole-mount pathology as standard of reference. Eur Radiol. 2016;26(6):1606–1612. doi:10.1007/s00330-015-4015-626396111
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Washino S, Okochi T, Saito K, et al. Combination of prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) score and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density predicts biopsy outcome in prostate biopsy naive patients. BJU Int. 2017;119(2):225–233.26935594
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Distler FA, Radtke JP, Bonekamp D, et al. The value of PSA density in cmbination with PI-RADS for the accuracy of prostate cancer prediction. J Urol. 2017;198(3):575–582. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2017.03.13028373135
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Druskin SC, Tosoian JJ, Young A, et al. Combining Prostate Health Index density, magnetic resonance imaging and prior negative biopsy status to improve the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2018;121(4):619–626. doi:10.1111/bju.1409829232037
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perlis N, Al-Kasab T, Ahmad A, et al. Defining a cohort that may not require repeat prostate biopsy based on PCA3 score and magnetic resonance imaging: the dual negative effect. J Urol. 2018;199(5):1182–1187. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2017.11.07429175542
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bangma CH, Roemeling S, Schroder FH. Overdiagnosis and overtreatment of early detected prostate cancer. World J Urol. 2007;25(1):3–9. doi:10.1007/s00345-007-0145-z17364211
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scattoni V, Zlotta A, Montironi R, Schulman C, Rigatti P, Montorsi F. Extended and saturation prostatic biopsy in the diagnosis and characterisation of prostate cancer: a critical analysis of the literature. Eur Urol. 2007;52(5):1309–1322. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2007.08.00617720304
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kulkarni GS, Al-Azab R, Lockwood G, et al. Evidence for a biopsy derived grade artifact among larger prostate glands. J Urol. 2006;175(2):505–509. doi:10.1016/S0022-5347(05)00236-316406982
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Porten SP, Whitson JM, Cowan JE, et al. Changes in prostate cancer grade on serial biopsy in men undergoing active surveillance. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(20):2795–2800. doi:10.1200/JCO.2010.33.013421632511
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson JE, Hayen A, Landau A, et al. Medium-term oncological outcomes for extended vs saturation biopsy and transrectal vs transperineal biopsy in active surveillance for prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2015;115(6):884–891. doi:10.1111/bju.1285824989062
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crawford ED, Rove KO, Barqawi AB, et al. Clinical-pathologic correlation between transperineal mapping biopsies of the prostate and three-dimensional reconstruction of prostatectomy specimens. Prostate. 2013;73(7):778–787. doi:10.1002/pros.2262223169245
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bott SR, Henderson A, Halls JE, Montgomery BS, Laing R, Langley SE. Extensive transperineal template biopsies of prostate: modified technique and results. Urology. 2006;68(5):1037–1041. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2006.05.03317095067
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Takenaka A, Hara R, Ishimura T, et al. A prospective randomized comparison of diagnostic efficacy between transperineal and transrectal 12-core prostate biopsy. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2008;11(2):134–138. doi:10.1038/sj.pcan.450098517533394
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cerruto MA, Vianello F, D’Elia C, Artibani W, Novella G. Transrectal versus transperineal 14-core prostate biopsy in detection of prostate cancer: a comparative evaluation at the same institution. Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2014;86(4):284–287. doi:10.4081/aiua.2014.4.28425641452
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Onik G, Barzell W. Transperineal 3D mapping biopsy of the prostate: an essential tool in selecting patients for focal prostate cancer therapy. Urol Oncol. 2008;26(5):506–510. doi:10.1016/j.urolonc.2008.03.00518774464
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee CU, Sung SH, Jang CT, et al. Cancer location in upgrading and detection after transperineal template-guided mapping biopsy for patients in active surveillance and negative transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsy. Urol Int. 2019;103(3):262–269. doi:10.1159/00050152731269509
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Song W, Kang M, Jeong BC, et al. The clinical utility of transperineal template-guided saturation prostate biopsy for risk stratification after transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy. Investig Clin Urol. 2019;60(6):454–462. doi:10.4111/icu.2019.60.6.454
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tewes S, Mokov N, Hartung D, et al. Standardized reporting of prostate MRI: comparison of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) Version 1 and Version 2. PLoS One. 2016;11(9):e0162879. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.016287927657729
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polanec S, Helbich TH, Bickel H, et al. Head-to-head comparison of PI-RADS v2 and PI-RADS v1. Eur J Radiol. 2016;85(6):1125–1131. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2016.03.02527161062
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Han HH, Park JW, Na JC, Chung BH, Kim CS, Ko WJ. Epidemiology of prostate cancer in South Korea. Prostate Int. 2015;3(3):99–102. doi:10.1016/j.prnil.2015.06.00326473152
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee HY, Kim DK, Doo SW, et al. Time trends for prostate cancer incidence from 2003 to 2013 in South Korea: an age-period-cohort analysis. Cancer Res Treat. 2020;52(1):301–308. doi:10.4143/crt.2019.19431401823
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar