Mp74-01 a Novel Biopsy Scheme for Prostate Cancer: Targeted and Regional Systematic Biopsy

You have accessJournal of UrologyProstate Cancer: Detection & Screening VI (MP74), Moderated Poster 741 May 2024MP74-01 A NOVEL BIOPSY SCHEME FOR PROSTATE CANCER: TARGETED AND REGIONAL SYSTEMATIC BIOPSY Yang He, Yu Fan, Yi Liu, Kai Zhang, and Qian Zhang Yang HeYang He , Yu FanYu Fan , Yi LiuYi Liu , Kai ZhangKai Zhang , and Qian ZhangQian Zhang View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0001008632.59099.b9.01AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: To explore a novel biopsy scheme for prostate cancer (PCa), and test the detection rate and pathological agreement of standard systematic (SB) + targeted (TB) biopsy and novel biopsy scheme. METHODS: Positive needles were collected from 194 patients who underwent SB+TB followed by radical prostatectomy (RP). Our novel biopsy scheme, targeted and regional systematic biopsy (TrSB) was defined as TB+ regional SB (4 SB-needles closest to the TB-needles). The McNemar test was utilized to compare the detection rate performance for clinical significant PCa (csPCa) and clinical insignificant PCa (ciPCa). Moreover, the accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were investigated. The agreement between the different biopsy schemes GG and RP GG were assessed. The concordance between the biopsy and the RP GG was evaluated using weighted κ coefficient analyses. RESULTS: In this study, the overall detection rate for csPCa was 83.5% (162 of 194) when TB and SB were combined. TrSB showed better NPV than TB (97.0% vs. 74.4%). Comparing to STB, the TB-detection rate of csPCa had a significant difference (p<0.01), while TrSB showed no significant difference (p>0.999). For ciPCa, the overall detection rate was 16.5% (32 of 194). TrSB showed better PPV (96.6% vs. 83.3%) and NPV (97.6% vs. 92.9%) than TB. Comparing to STB, the detection rate of both schemes showed no significant difference (p=0.077 and p=0.375). All three schemes GG showed poor agreement with RP GG (TB: 43.3%, TrSB: 46.4%, STB: 45.9%). Using weighted κ, all three schemes showed no difference (TB: 0.48, TrSB: 0.51, STB: 0.51). In our subgroup analysis (PI-RADS=4/5, n=154), all three schemes almost showed no difference (Weighted κ: TB-0.50, TrSB -0.51, STB-0.50). CONCLUSIONS: Our novel biopsy scheme TrSB (TB+4 closest SB needles) may reduce 8 cores of biopsy compared with STB (standard SB+TB), which also showed better csPCa detection rate than TB only, but the same as STB. The pathological agreement between three different biopsy schemes (TB/TrSB/STB) GG and RP GG showed no difference. Source of Funding: This work was supported by National High Level Hospital Clinical Research Funding (Interdepartmental Research Project of Peking University First Hospital), research code: 2022CR16/ 2023IR27 © 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 211Issue 5SMay 2024Page: e1192 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Metrics Author Information Yang He More articles by this author Yu Fan More articles by this author Yi Liu More articles by this author Kai Zhang More articles by this author Qian Zhang More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...