Search

The COVID‐19 pandemic is impacting all urological cancer services. On March 19th the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) provided pragmatic guidance for prostate cancer diagnostic services (Table 1).(1)

Objectives To assess whether targeted cognitive freehand-assisted transperineal biopsies using a PrecisionpointTM device still require additional systematic biopsies to avoid missing clinically significant prostate cancer, and to investigate the benefit of a quadrant-only biopsy approach to analyse whether a quadrant or extended target of the quadrant containing the target only would have been equivalent to systematic biopsy. Patients and methods Patients underwent combined systematic mapping and targeted transperineal prostate biopsies at a single institution. Biopsies were performed using the Precisionpoint device (Perineologic, Cumberland, MD, USA) under either local anaesthetic (58%, 163/282), i.v. sedation (12%, 34/282) or general anaesthetic (30%, 85/282). A mean (range) of 24 (5-42) systematic and 4.2 (1-11) target cores were obtained. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans were reported using the Likert scale. Clinically significant cancer was defined as Gleason 7 or above. Histopathological results were correlated with the presence of an MRI abnormality within a spatial quadrant and the other adjoining or non-adjoining (opposite) quadrants. Histological concordance with radical prostatectomy specimens was analysed. Results A total of 282 patients were included in this study. Their mean (range) age was 66.8 (36-80) years, median (range) prostate-specific antigen level 7.4 (0.91-116) ng/mL and mean prostate volume 45.8 (13-150) mL. In this cohort, 82% of cases (230/282) were primary biopsies and 18% (52/282) were patients on surveillance. In all, 69% of biopsies (195/282) were identified to have clinically significant disease (Gleason ≥3 + 4). Any cancer (Gleason ≥3 + 3) was found in 84% (237/282) of patients. Of patients with clinically significant disease, the target biopsies alone picked up 88% (171/195), with systematic biopsy picking up the additional 12% (24/195) that the target biopsies missed. This altered with Likert score; 73% of Likert score 3 disease was detected by target biopsy, 92% of Likert score 4 and 100% of Likert score 5. Target biopsies with additional same-quadrant-only systematic cores picked up 75% (18/24) of significant cancer that was missed on target only, found in the same quadrant as the target. Conclusion Systematic biopsy is still an important tool when evaluating all patients referred for prostate biopsy, but the need is decreased with increasing suspicion on MRI. Patients with very high suspicion of prostate cancer (Likert score 5) may not require systematic cores, unless representative surrounding biopsies are required for other specific treatments (e.g. focal therapy, or operative planning). More prospective studies are needed to evaluate this in full.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: A LATP service using PrecisionPoint™ was newly started in July 2019, with procedures performed by both surgeon and nurse practitioners. Initial indications were: repeat biopsy, anterior prostate lesions, and Active Surveillance patients. Service was expanded in March 2020 to all prostate pathway patients according to British Association of Urology COVID guidance. METHODS: All patients underwent prebiopsy MRI and dedicated image-review meetings. Biopsies were performed in PIRADS 3-5, or PSAD>0.15. Systematic Ginsburg protocol biopsies were performed for all patients (each zone sent separately), and PIRADS 3-5 lesions were targeted with ≥3 cores (also sent separately). Alpha-blockers were started for patients with Bladder Outlet Obstruction. No antibiotics were used unless patients were immunocompromised or had a previous history of urinary sepsis. A prospective database at point of care was created detailing patient demographics, MRI and biopsy characteristics. Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) are collected. Histology and complications are also reported. RESULTS: 750 consecutive patients are analysed. Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (Gl≥3+4) in PIRADS 1-2, 3, 4, 5 groups was 25%, 40%, 59%, 92% respectively. Systematic biopsy alone detected clinically significant cancer in 36%, whereas systematic plus targeted biopsy achieved 63%. Of Active Surveillance patients;40% with Gl 3+3 were upgraded, and 49% with Gl3+4 were upgraded to Gl≥4+3. n=5 (0.6%) experienced vasovagal episodes causing delayed discharge. Only n=5 patients were readmitted (0.6%): 2 urinary tract infection, 2 acute urinary retention, 1 urinary sepsis. PROMs demonstrated majority favourable results regarding pain (98%), discomfort (97%), embarrassment (96%) and further repeat biopsies (89%). CONCLUSIONS: We have set up a safe, effective, antibiotic free LATP biopsy service, with high cancer detection rates and low complication rates. PROMs data suggests this is well tolerated by patients.

Background Transrectal prostate biopsy (TRUSBx) holds a risk of prostate biopsy related sepsis. We discuss our step-wise strategies aiming to reduce this risk, including targeted antimicrobials and switching to a freehand transperineal approach (FHTPBx). Subjects and methods This longitudinal cohort study included three groups. Group A underwent TRUSBx with empirical augmented antimicrobial prophylaxis; Group B underwent TRUSBx with targeted antimicrobial prophylaxis, based on rectal-swab cultures/sensitivity; Group C underwent FHTPBx with empirical antimicrobial prophylaxis. Post biopsy sepsis, defined according to the surviving sepsis campaign and confirmed with blood or urinary cultures, were determined and rates between groups were analysed using fisher's exact test. Results Of all 1501 patients, 23 developed post biopsy sepsis; Group A (12/609, 2.0%), B (9/403, 2.2%), C (2/489, 0.4%). Targeted antimicrobials did not reduce the risk of post biopsy sepsis following TRUSBx (A vs B, 2.0% vs 2.2%; p = 0.82). Patients with antimicrobial-resistant rectal flora had an increased post biopsy sepsis rate following TRUSBx despite targeted antimicrobials (9.1% vs 1.1%, p = 0.003). Switching to FHTPBx reduced the risk of developing post biopsy sepsis (A vs C, 2% vs 0.4%, p = 0.03; B vs C, 2.2% vs 0.4%, p = 0.03). Conclusions Targeted antimicrobials based on rectal swab culture failed to reduce the overall risk of post biopsy sepsis, while FHTPBx nearly eliminated this risk. We recommend the use of transperineal prostate biopsies for all patients as the most effective method to reduce the risk of sepsis.

To determine the risk of disease progression and conversion to active treatment following a negative biopsy while on active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer (PCa).Men on an AS programme at a single tertiary hospital (London, UK) between 2003 and 2018 with confirmed low-intermediate-risk PCa, Gleason Grade Group3, clinical stageT3 and a diagnostic prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of20 ng/mL. This cohort included men diagnosed by transrectal ultrasonography guided (12-14 cores) or transperineal (median 32 cores) biopsy. Multivariate Cox hazards regression analysis was undertaken to determine (i) risk of upgrading, (ii) clinical or radiological suspicion of disease progression, and (iii) transitioning to active treatment. Suspicion of disease progression was defined as any biopsy upgrading,30% positive cores, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) Likert score3/T3 or PSA level of20 ng/mL. Conversion to treatment included radical or hormonal treatment.Among the 460 eligible patients, 23% had negative follow-up biopsy findings. The median follow-up was 62 months, with one to two repeat biopsies and two MRIs per patient during that period. Negative biopsy findings at first repeat biopsy were associated with decreased risk of converting to active treatment (hazard ration [HR] 0.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.09-0.37; P 0.001), suspicion of disease progression (HR 0.56, 95% CI: 0.34-0.94; P = 0.029), and upgrading (HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.23-0.99; P = 0.047). Data are limited by fewer men with multiple follow-up biopsies.A negative biopsy finding at the first scheduled follow-up biopsy among men on AS for PCa was strongly associated with decreased risk of subsequent upgrading, clinical or radiological suspicion of disease progression, and conversion to active treatment. A less intense surveillance protocol should be considered for this cohort of patients.

Background The routine clinical use of serum prostatic specific antigen (PSA) testing has allowed earlier detection of low-grade prostate cancer (PCa) with more favourable characteristics, leading to increased acceptance of management by active surveillance (AS). AS aims to avoid over treatment in men with low and intermediate-risk PCa and multiple governing bodies have described several AS protocols. This study provides a descriptive profile of the Guy’s and St Thomas NHS Foundation Trust (GSTT) AS cohort as a platform for future research in AS pathways in PCa. Methods Demographic and baseline characteristics were retrospectively collected in a database for patients at the GSTT AS clinic with prospective collection of follow-up data from 2012. Seven hundred eighty-eight men being monitored at GSTT with histologically confirmed intermediate-risk PCa, at least 1 follow-up appointment and diagnostic characteristics consistent with AS criteria were included in the profile. Descriptive statistics, Kaplan-Meier survival curves and multivariable Cox proportion hazards regression models were used to characterize the cohort. Discussion A relatively large proportion of the cohort includes men of African/Afro-Caribbean descent (22%). More frequent use of magnetic resonance imaging and trans-perineal biopsies at diagnosis was observed among patients diagnosed after 2012. Those who underwent trans-rectal ultrasound diagnostic biopsy received their first surveillance biopsy 20 months earlier than those who underwent trans-perineal diagnostic biopsy. At 3 years, 76.1% men remained treatment free. Predictors of treatment progression included Gleason score 3 + 4 (Hazard ratio (HR): 2.41, 95% Confidence interval (CI): 1.79–3.26) and more than 2 positive cores taken at biopsy (HR: 2.65, CI: 1.94–3.62). A decreased risk of progressing to treatment was seen among men diagnosed after 2012 (HR: 0.72, CI: 0.53–0.98). Conclusion An organised biopsy surveillance approach, via two different AS pathways according to the patient’s diagnostic method, can be seen within the GSTT cohort. Risk of patients progressing to treatment has decreased in the period since 2012 compared with the prior period with more than half of the cohort remaining treatment free at 5 years, highlighting that the fundamental aims of AS at GSTT are being met. Thus, this cohort is a good resource to investigate the AS treatment pathway.

The COVID‐19 pandemic is impacting all urological cancer services. On March 19th the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) provided pragmatic guidance for prostate cancer diagnostic services (Table 1).(1)

Jonah Rusere, Advanced Nurse Practitioner for South East London Accountable Cancer Network, outlines an opportunity for urology nurses to make a difference to prostate cancer pathways