July 16, 2020 — BMC Urology
Abstract
Background
To investigate the value of using contrast-enhanced transrectal ultrasound (CETRUS) to reduce unnecessary collection of biopsies during prostate cancer diagnosis and its utility in predicting biochemical recurrence in patients with localized prostate cancer.
Methods
This was a prospective study of suspected prostate cancer patients who were evaluated with CETRUS followed by a prostate biopsy. Prostate blood flow via CETRUS was graded using a 5-point scale. The relationship between CETRUS score and biopsy outcome was then analyzed for all patients; univariate and multi-variate analyses were used to determine the probable prognostic factors for biochemical recurrence in patients with localized prostate cancer that underwent a radical prostatectomy.
Results
A total of 347 patients were enrolled in the study. Prostate cancer was found in 164 patients. A significant positive correlation (r = 0.69, p < 0.001) was found between CETRUS scores and prostate cancer incidence. Using CETRUS scores ≥2 as the threshold for when to biopsy could have safely reduced the number of biopsies taken overall by 12.1% (42/347) and spared 23.0% (42/183) of patients from undergoing an unnecessary biopsy. 77 patients with localized prostate cancer underwent a radical prostatectomy. The median follow-up time was 30 months (range: 8–56 months) and 17 of these 77 patients exhibited biochemical recurrence during the follow-up period. 3-year biochemical recurrence-free survival rates were 86% for patients with low CETRUS scores (≤ 3) and 59% for patients with high scores (> 3; p = 0.015). Multivariate Cox regression analysis indicated that CETRUS score was an independent predictor of biochemical recurrence (HR: 7.02; 95% CI: 2.00–24.69; p = 0.002).
Conclusions
CETRUS scores may be a useful tool for reducing the collection unnecessary biopsy samples during prostate cancer diagnosis and are predictive of biochemical recurrence in patients with localized prostate cancer following a radical prostatectomy.
Authors: Hong-wei Zhao 1.2, Jian Li 3, Jia-Zheng Cao 4, Juan Lin 5, Zhu Wang 6, Jian-yao Lv 6, Jin-huan Wei 2, Zhen-hua Chen 2, Hao-hua Yao 2, Yi-hui Pan 2, Zhen-li Gao 1, Jun-hang Luo 2, Wei Chen 2, Lei Shi 1, Yong Fang 2
1. Department of Urology, Affiliated Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital, Qingdao University, Yantai, 264000, Shandong, P. R. China; 2. Department of Urology, First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, No.58 ZhongShan 2nd Road, Guangzhou, 510080, Guangdong, P. R. China; 3. State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Department of Ultrasound, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, Guangdong, P. R. China; 4. Department of Urology, Jiangmen Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Jiangmen, 529000, Guangdong, P. R. China; 5. Department of Pediatrics, Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, 510630, Guangdong, P. R. China; 6. Department of Ultrasound, First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, 510080, Guangdong, P. R. China
Read full text at: BMC Urology volume 20, Article number: 100 (2020); https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-020-00659-6
