Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ British Journal of U...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
British Journal of Urology
Article . 2021 . Peer-reviewed
License: CC BY NC ND
Data sources: Crossref
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
British Journal of Urology
Article
License: CC BY NC ND
Data sources: UnpayWall
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
versions View all 5 versions
addClaim

The current recommendation for the management of isolated high‐grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia

Authors: Juan Morote; Iván Schwartzmann; Anna Celma; Sarai Roche; Inés M. de Torres; Richard Mast; Maria E. Semidey; +4 Authors

The current recommendation for the management of isolated high‐grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia

Abstract

Abstract Objective To analyse the current predictive value of isolated high‐grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN) for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection in repeat biopsies. Patients and Methods A cohort of 293 men with isolated HGPIN detected in previous biopsies performed without multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), and who underwent repeat biopsy within 1 to 3 years, was analysed. Pre‐repeat biopsy mpMRI and guided biopsies to suspicious lesions (Prostate Imaging – Reporting and Data System [PI‐RADS] ≥3) and/or and systematic biopsies were performed. Persistent prostate cancer (PCa) suspicion, defined as sustained serum prostate‐specific antigen level >4 ng/mL and/or abnormal digital rectal examination, was present in 248 men (84.6%), and was absent in 45 men (15.4%). A control group of 190 men who had no previous HGPIN, atypical small acinar proliferation or HGPIN with atypia who were scheduled to undergo repeat biopsy due to persistent PCa suspicion were also analysed. csPCa was defined as tumours of Grade Group ≥2. Results In the subset of 45 men with isolated HGPIN, in whom PCa suspicion disappeared, only one csPCa (2.2%) and one insignificant PCa (iPCa) were detected. csPCa was detected in 34.7% of men with persistent PCa suspicion and previous HGPIN, and in 28.4% of those without previous HGPIN ( P =0.180). iPCa was detected in 12.1% and 6.3%, respectively ( P =0.039). Logistic regression analysis showed that the risk of csPCa detection was not predicted by previous HGPIN: odds ratio (OR) 1.369 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.894–2.095; P =0.149); however, previous HGPIN increased the risk of iPCa detection: OR 2.043 (95% CI 1.016–4.109; P =0.006). Conclusion The risk of csPCa in men with isolated HGPIN, in whom PCa suspicion disappears, is extremely low. Moreover, in those men in whom PCa suspicion persists, the risk of csPCa is not influenced by the previous finding of HGPIN. However, previous HGPIN increases the risk of iPCa detection. Therefore, repeat prostate biopsy should not be recommended solely because of a previous HGPIN.

Country
Spain
Keywords

Male, Prostatic Intraepithelial Neoplasia, Urologic Neoplasms, Multiparametric MRI, Clinically significant prostate cancer, Prostate, Prostatic Neoplasms, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, High-grade intraepithelial neoplasia, Insignificant prostate cancer, Humans, Female, Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Repeat prostate biopsy

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    11
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
11
Top 10%
Average
Top 10%
Green
hybrid