Prostate Saturation Biopsy in the Reevaluation of Microfocal Prostate Cancer

Abstract

We evaluated the ability of an extended, 32-core repeat transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsy protocol to improve the characterization of low volume, well differentiated disease in men with a diagnosis of potentially insignificant microfocal prostate cancer, as defined by 1 single focus positive core of 10 with less than 5 mm of Gleason score 6 or less tumor on primary biopsy. A total of 35 consecutive patients, who were 62 to 75 years old, had a median serum prostate specific antigen of 8 ng/ml (range 0.5 to 14) and a diagnosis of minimal prostate cancer, and were willing to consider observation with delayed treatment at progression, were offered repeat saturation prostate biopsy with a median of 32 cores (range 18 to 36) under local anesthesia. This biopsy was to determine whether more extensive prostate sampling would confirm or disprove the initial diagnosis of microfocal, well differentiated prostate cancer. The procedure was aborted in 1 patient because of massive rectal hemorrhage. Another patient had acute prostatitis with gram-negative sepsis. Of 34 evaluable biopsy sets 11 (32%) were negative for cancer, suggesting that tumor detected at the primary biopsy was probably of low volume and amenable to observation with delayed treatment. Of the biopsies 23 (68%) were positive, 17 were at multiple sites and 7 were upgraded to Gleason score 7 or greater. These patients were then considered to have significant tumors and were offered active treatment. This study is to our knowledge the first to describe the clinical use of prostate saturation biopsies for re-evaluating potentially insignificant prostate cancer. Of patients with minimal disease on standard 10-core biopsy, results show that this technique may be helpful for distinguishing the 30% who probably have minimal disease based on negative repeat saturation biopsy from the 70% who almost certainly have a significant tumor, as characterized by multiple positive cores, with or without an increased Gleason score. The latter patients should be offered active therapy.