Search

Introduction Prostate cancer has traditionally been diagnosed by an elevation in PSA or abnormal exam leading to a systematic transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided biopsy. This diagnostic pathway underdiagnoses clinically significant disease while over diagnosing clinically insignificant disease. In this review, we aim to provide an overview of the recent literature regarding the role of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) in the management of prostate cancer. Materials and Methods A thorough literature review was performed using PubMed to identify articles discussing use of mpMRI of the prostate in management of prostate cancer. Conclusion The incorporation of mpMRI of the prostate addresses the shortcomings of the prostate biopsy while providing several other advantages. mpMRI allows some men to avoid an immediate biopsy and permits visualization of areas likely to harbor clinically significant cancer prior to biopsy to facilitate use of MR-targeted prostate biopsies. This allows for reduction in diagnosis of clinically insignificant disease as well as improved detection and better characterization of higher risk cancers, as well as the improved selection of patients for active surveillance. In addition, mpMRI can be used for selection and monitoring of patients for active surveillance and treatment planning during surgery and focal therapy. United States Department of Health & Human Services National Institutes of Health (NIH) - USA ; Doris Duke Charitable Foundation (DDCF) ; American Association for Dental Research ; Colgate-Palmolive Company ; Roche Holding ; Genentech

Estimation of accurate attenuation maps for whole-body positron emission tomography (PET) imaging in simultaneous PET-MRI systems is a challenging problem as it affects the quantitative nature of the modality. In this study, we aimed to improve the accuracy of estimated attenuation maps from MRI Dixon contrast images by training an augmented generative adversarial network (GANs) in a supervised manner. We augmented the GANs by perturbing the non-linear deformation field during image registration between MRI and the ground truth CT images. We acquired the CT and the corresponding PET-MR images for a cohort of 28 prostate cancer patients. Data from 18 patients (2160 slices and later augmented to 270,000 slices) was used for training the GANs and others for validation. We calculated the error in bone and soft tissue regions for the AC μ-maps and the reconstructed PET images. For quantitative analysis, we use the average relative absolute errors and validate the proposed technique on 10 patients. The DL-based MR methods generated the pseudo-CT AC μ-maps with an accuracy of 4.5% more than standard MR-based techniques. Particularly, the proposed method demonstrates improved accuracy in the pelvic regions without affecting the uptake values. The lowest error of the AC μ-map in the pelvic region was 1.9% for μ-mapGAN + aug compared with 6.4% for μ-mapdixon, 5.9% for μ-mapdixon + bone, 2.1% for μ-mapU-Net and 2.0% for μ-mapU-Net + aug. For the reconstructed PET images, the lowest error was 2.2% for PETGAN + aug compared with 10.3% for PETdixon, 8.7% for PETdixon + bone, 2.6% for PETU-Net and 2.4% for PETU-Net + aug.. The proposed technique to augment the training datasets for training of the GAN results in improved accuracy of the estimated μ-map and consequently the PET quantification compared to the state of the art.

Background Infection is a complication of TRUS prostate biopsy, despite the use of antimicrobial prophylaxis. Worryingly the rate of infectious complications following TRUS biopsy has been shown to be increasing. We aimed to determine the rate, severity, risk factors, standard patterns of care and microbiology resistance profiles associated with TRUS biopsy sepsis. Methods A retrospective case–control study was conducted. Using electronic coding all patients who presented to Cabrini Hospital with sepsis following a TRUS biopsy from 2009 to 2013 were identified. Validated cases were matched to controls in a ratio of 1:3. Eligible controls were required to have undergone a TRUS biopsy at the same surgical institution as the case and in the closest period of time. Demographic, procedural and patient related data-points were recorded for all patients using hospital and urologist records. Univariate logistic regression models were constructed and used to determine risk factors associated with infection. Results 71 cases developed sepsis following TRUS biopsy and were matched to 213 controls. The average rate of sepsis over the 5-year study period was 1.5 %. A SOFA score ≥ 2 was identified in 28 % of cases. We found a high prevalence of antimicrobial resistant E. coli, with 61 % of blood culture isolates classified as Multidrug resistant organisms. Eight different prophylactic antimicrobial regimens were identified with 33 % of cases receiving ineffective antimicrobial prophylaxis. Statistically significant risk factors included previous antimicrobial use and prior international travel within the six months prior to biopsy. Conclusions TRUS biopsy is an elective procedure and as such needs to be associated with minimal morbidity. The patterns of care surrounding periprocedural variables for TRUS biopsies were non-uniform and diverse. A wide variety of different prophylaxis regimens and bowel preparation routines were recorded. Patients with risk factors for sepsis may represent a better target population for intervention with alternative preventative strategies. Alternative preventative options include augmented prophylaxis, tailored prophylaxis or the TP biopsy approach either as a first line biopsy modality or based on epidemiological risk factors.

Prostate cancer is the second most common urological malignancy to be associated with paraneoplastic syndromes after renal cell carcinoma. These syndromes tend to occur in the setting of late stage and aggressive tumors with poor overall outcomes. Recognition of these syndromes is clinically important as it might lead to the detection of underlying malignancy and impact on the treatment options available. The literature features around 100 cases of paraneoplastic syndromes associated with prostate cancer and these include endocrine manifestations, neurological entities, dermatological conditions, and other syndromes. Over 70% of cases document the syndrome as the initial clinical manifestation of prostate cancer, while in just under 20% the syndrome was an initial sign of disease progression to the castrate-resistant state. The vast majority of cases involved advanced metastatic malignancy. The syndromes generally resolve upon institution of treatment for the underlying prostate cancer, but some syndromes require specific therapies. Some syndromes are associated with serum markers that are readily detectable and demonstration of these putative markers within prostate cancer tissue at an individual level would firmly link the paraneoplastic syndrome with its underlying prostatic malignancy. The causes of paraneoplastic syndromes in prostate cancer are incompletely understood, and further research into their biology might shed more light on the complex molecular mechanisms that underpin prostate cancer and its lethal potential.

Health officials are warning that overuse of antibiotics and increasing antibiotic resistance mean that these drugs could soon become useless. Urologists have to take some responsibility as we continue to perform prostate biopsy sampling using a transrectal approach, which increases the possibility of bacterial infection.