Background: Histopathological discrepancies between biopsy and radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens may lead to unnecessary, excessive, or incomplete treatment in prostate cancer (PCa) patients. Objectives: To compare the upgrading rates of International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grades and tumor laterality in patients that underwent standard 12-core transrectal ultrasound-guided standard prostate biopsy (SPB) versus multiparametric magnetic resonance-guided fusion prostate biopsy (FPB) for PCa. Methods: This retrospective study included 152 patients that underwent prostate biopsy and RP in our clinic. The patients were divided into 2 groups: Group A (n = 90) included patients that underwent SPB and Group B (n = 62) included patients that underwent FPB (targeted biopsy + standard biopsy). Upgrading of ISUP grades, tumor laterality, and upgrading of tumor laterality were compared between the 2 groups. Upgrading of tumor laterality defined as detection of tumor at both lobes in RP pathology while it was at unilateral lobe in biopsy pathology. Results: ISUP grade 1 was the most common histopathology in both groups. The ISUP upgrading rate on final pathology was significantly lower in the FPB group compared to the SPB group (22.7 vs. 37.7%; p < 0.048). Similarly, the upgrading rate of tumor laterality was lower in the FPB group compared to the SPB group (37.7 vs. 9.7%; p < 0.001). Conclusion: The results suggested that FPB can provide more accurate results compared to SPB.

Keywords:
Prostate, Biopsy, Fusion, Upgrade, Histopathology
1.
Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012.
Int J Cancer
. 2015 Mar;136(5):E359–86.
2.
Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, Ferlay J, Ward E, Forman D. Global cancer statistics.
CA Cancer J Clin
. 2011 Mar-Apr;61(2):69–90.
3.
Etzioni R, Gulati R, Cooperberg MR, Penson DM, Weiss NS, Thompson IM. Limitations of basing screening policies on screening trials: The US Preventive Services Task Force and Prostate Cancer Screening.
Med Care
. 2013 Apr;51(4):295–300.
4.
Loeb S, Vellekoop A, Ahmed HU, Catto J, Emberton M, Nam R, et al. Systematic review of complications of prostate biopsy.
Eur Urol
. 2013 Dec;64(6):876–92.
5.
Cohen MS, Hanley RS, Kurteva T, Ruthazer R, Silverman ML, Sorcini A, et al. Comparing the Gleason prostate biopsy and Gleason prostatectomy grading system: the Lahey Clinic Medical Center experience and an international meta-analysis.
Eur Urol
. 2008 Aug;54(2):371–81.
6.
Kayano PP, Carneiro A, Castilho TM, Sivaraman A, Claros OR, Baroni RH, et al. Comparison of Gleason upgrading rates in transrectal ultrasound systematic random biopsies versus US-MRI fusion biopsies for prostate cancer.
Int Braz J Urol
. 2018 Nov-Dec;44(6):1106–13.
7.
Ahmed HU, Kirkham A, Arya M, Illing R, Freeman A, Allen C, et al. Is it time to consider a role for MRI before prostate biopsy? 
Nat Rev Clin Oncol
. 2009 Apr;6(4):197–206.
8.
Choi MS, Choi YS, Yoon BI, Kim SJ, Cho HJ, Hong SH, et al. The Clinical Value of Performing an MRI before Prostate Biopsy.
Korean J Urol
. 2011 Aug;52(8):572–7.
9.
Lotan Y, Haddad AQ, Costa DN, Pedrosa I, Rofsky NM, Roehrborn CG. Decision analysis model comparing cost of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging vs. repeat biopsy for detection of prostate cancer in men with prior negative findings on biopsy.
Urol Oncol
. 2015 Jun;33(6):266.e9–16.
10.
de Rooij M, Crienen S, Witjes JA, Barentsz JO, Rovers MM, Grutters JP. Cost-effectiveness of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and MR-guided targeted biopsy versus systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy in diagnosing prostate cancer: a modelling study from a health care perspective.
Eur Urol
. 2014 Sep;66(3):430–6.
11.
Kuru TH, Roethke MC, Rieker P, Roth W, Fenchel M, Hohenfellner M, et al. Histology core-specific evaluation of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) standardised scoring system of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) of the prostate.
BJU Int
. 2013 Dec;112(8):1080–7.
12.
Delongchamps NB, Rouanne M, Flam T, Beuvon F, Liberatore M, Zerbib M, et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for the detection and localization of prostate cancer: combination of T2-weighted, dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted imaging.
BJU Int
. 2011 May;107(9):1411–8.
13.
Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL, Cornud F, Haider MA, Macura KJ, et al. PI-RADS Prostate Imaging – Reporting and Data System: 2015, Version 2.
Eur Urol
. 2016 Jan;69(1):16–40.
14.
Epstein JI, Allsbrook WC Jr, Amin MB, Egevad LL; ISUP Grading Committee. The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma.
Am J Surg Pathol
. 2005 Sep;29(9):1228–42.
15.
Epstein JI, Egevad L, Amin MB, Delahunt B, Srigley JR, Humphrey PA; Grading Committee. The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma: Definition of Grading Patterns and Proposal for a New Grading System.
Am J Surg Pathol
. 2016 Feb;40(2):244–52.
16.
Briganti A, Larcher A, Abdollah F, Capitanio U, Gallina A, Suardi N, et al. Updated nomogram predicting lymph node invasion in patients with prostate cancer undergoing extended pelvic lymph node dissection: the essential importance of percentage of positive cores.
Eur Urol
. 2012 Mar;61(3):480–7.
17.
Tosco L, Briganti A, D’amico AV, Eastham J, Eisenberger M, Gleave M, et al. Systematic Review of Systemic Therapies and Therapeutic Combinations with Local Treatments for High-risk Localized Prostate Cancer.
Eur Urol
. 2019 Jan;75(1):44–60.
18.
Matoso A, Epstein JI. Defining clinically significant prostate cancer on the basis of pathological findings.
Histopathology
. 2019 Jan;74(1):135–45.
19.
Pourmand G, Gooran S, Hossieni SR, Guitynavard F, Safavi M, Sharifi A, et al. Correlation of Preoperative and Radical Prostatectomy Gleason Score: Examining the Predictors of Upgrade and Downgrade Results.
Acta Med Iran
. 2017 Apr;55(4):249–53.
20.
Borkowetz A, Platzek I, Toma M, Renner T, Herout R, Baunacke M, et al. Direct comparison of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) results with final histopathology in patients with proven prostate cancer in MRI/ultrasonography-fusion biopsy.
BJU Int
. 2016 Aug;118(2):213–20.
21.
Lendínez-Cano G, Alonso-Flores J, Beltrán-Aguilar V, Cayuela A, Salazar-Otero S, Bachiller-Burgos J. Comparison of pathological data between prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimen in patients with low to very low risk prostate cancer.
Actas Urol Esp
. 2015 Oct;39(8):482–7.
22.
Flood TA, Schieda N, Keefe DT, Morash C, Bateman J, Mai KT, et al. Perineural invasion on biopsy is associated with upstaging at radical prostatectomy in Gleason score 3 + 4 = 7 prostate cancer.
Pathol Int
. 2016 Nov;66(11):629–32.
23.
D’Elia C, Cerruto MA, Cioffi A, Novella G, Cavalleri S, Artibani W. Upgrading and upstaging in prostate cancer: from prostate biopsy to radical prostatectomy.
Mol Clin Oncol
. 2014 Nov;2(6):1145–9.
24.
Baco E, Ukimura O, Rud E, Vlatkovic L, Svindland A, Aron M, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging-transectal ultrasound image-fusion biopsies accurately characterize the index tumor: correlation with step-sectioned radical prostatectomy specimens in 135 patients.
Eur Urol
. 2015 Apr;67(4):787–94.
25.
Pereira RA, Costa RS, Muglia VF, Silva FF, Lajes JS, Dos Reis RB, et al. Gleason score and tumor laterality in radical prostatectomy and transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate: a comparative study.
Asian J Androl
. 2015 Sep-Oct;17(5):815–20.
26.
Dell’Atti L. Can transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate with extended 14-core scheme improve the predictive accuracy of Gleason score and tumor site in prostate cancer treatment?
J BUON
. 2015 Sep-Oct;20(5):1239–43.
27.
Velez E, Fedorov A, Tuncali K, Olubiyi O, Allard CB, Kibel AS, et al. Pathologic correlation of transperineal in-bore 3-Tesla magnetic resonance imaging-guided prostate biopsy samples with radical prostatectomy specimen.
Abdom Radiol (NY)
. 2017 Aug;42(8):2154–9.
28.
Zhu G, Wang Q. Comparisons between magnetic resonance/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy and standard biopsy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: A prospective cohort study.
Medicine (Baltimore)
. 2018 Sep;97(36):e11962.
29.
Zhao Y, Deng FM, Huang H, Lee P, Lepor H, Rosenkrantz AB, et al. Prostate Cancers Detected by Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted Biopsies Have a Higher Percentage of Gleason Pattern 4 Component and Are Less Likely to Be Upgraded in Radical Prostatectomies.
Arch Pathol Lab Med
. 2019 Jan;143(1):86–91.
© 2019 S. Karger AG, Basel
2019
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.