7 results on '"Padhani, A.R."'
Search Results
2. Diagnostic yields in patients with suspected prostate cancer undergoing MRI as the first-line investigation in routine practice.
- Author
-
Sokhi, H.K., Padhani, A.R., Patel, S., and Pope, A.
- Subjects
- *
ENDORECTAL ultrasonography , *PROSTATE cancer patients , *PROSTATE biopsy , *PROSTATE-specific antigen , *SECONDARY care (Medicine) , *PROSTATE cancer - Abstract
Aim: To document cancer yields of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-directed biopsies in men with suspected prostate cancer referred to secondary care.Materials and Methods: Men with suspected cancer undergoing multiparametric prostate MRI as the first-line investigation were included in the present study. Systematic transrectal prostate biopsies with/without cognitive targeted biopsies were performed. Diagnostic yields of International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) ≥2 cancers by the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) category were recorded. Impacts of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density on biopsy results and yields of non-targeted biopsies in MRI non-suspicious prostate sextants assessed.Results: Of 262 men (90.5% biopsy naive), 86 (33%) MRI examinations were negative (PI-RADS 1-2) and 176 (67%) positive (PI-RADS 3: 8%; PI-RADS 4: 21%; PI-RADS 5: 38%). Two hundred and thirteen of 262 patients underwent a biopsy. ISUP ≥2 cancer detection rates were 8% (5/61) for PI-RADS 1-2, 18% (3/17) for PI-RADS 3, 49% (22/45) for PI-RADS 4, and 80% (72/90) for PI-RADS 5. Proportions of ISUP ≥2 increased with higher PSA densities in positive patients (%ISUP ≥2 for PSA density groups <0.12, 0.12 to <0.15 and ≥ 0.15 was 0%, 0%, 25% for PI-RADS 3, 21%, 33%, 68% for PI-RADS 4 and 40%, 83%, 89% for PI-RADS 5 respectively). ISUP ≥2 cancers were twice as likely in tumour adjacent sextants (52% versus 24%), without upgrading of gland level histology from insignificant to clinically significant prostate cancer by the sampling of normal-appearing tumour non-adjacent sextants.Conclusions: One third of men can avoid biopsy after negative MRI. Cancer detection rates increase with PSA density values within positive MRI suspicion categories. Sampling normal-appearing tumour non-adjacent sextants may be unnecessary for whole-gland therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]- Published
- 2020
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
3. A0726 - A new approach to data integration with AI to enhance the specificity of prostate cancer diagnosis.
- Author
-
Moreira Da Silva, N.S., Vasdev, N., Budd, J., Yeung, M., Giganti, F., Davies, L., Burn, P.R., Hindley, R.G., Ibrahim, M., Bradley, A.J., Maskell, G., Andreou, A., Liyanage, S., Persad, R., Aning, J., Barrett, T.J., Hinton, M.D.B., Padhani, A.R., Sala, E., and Rix, A.W.
- Subjects
- *
CANCER diagnosis , *DATA integration , *PROSTATE cancer , *ARTIFICIAL intelligence - Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
4. A0065 - Targeted with perilesional biopsy should be considered as the new standard for the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer. A systemic review & meta-analysis.
- Author
-
Sanguedolce, F., Tedde, A., Lauwers, C.N.G., Panarello, M., Basile, G., Gallioli, A., Berquin, C., Pecoraro, A., Robalino, J., Bravo, A., Massimo, M., Baboudjian, M., Schoots, I.G., Padhani, A.R., Palou, J., and Breda, A.
- Subjects
- *
PROSTATE cancer , *BIOPSY , *DIAGNOSIS - Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
5. What experts think about prostate cancer management during the COVID-19 pandemic: report from The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2021
- Author
-
Fabio Turco, Andrew Armstrong, Gerhardt Attard, Tomasz M. Beer, Himisha Beltran, Anders Bjartell, Alberto Bossi, Alberto Briganti, Rob G. Bristow, Muhammad Bulbul, Orazio Caffo, Kim N. Chi, Caroline Clarke, Noel Clarke, Ian D. Davis, Johann de Bono, Ignacio Duran, Ros Eeles, Eleni Efstathiou, Jason Efstathiou, Christopher P. Evans, Stefano Fanti, Felix Y. Feng, Karim Fizazi, Mark Frydenberg, Dan George, Martin Gleave, Susan Halabi, Daniel Heinrich, Celestia Higano, Michael S. Hofman, Maha Hussain, Nicholas James, Rob Jones, Ravindran Kanesvaran, Raja B. Khauli, Laurence Klotz, Raya Leibowitz, Christopher Logothetis, Fernando Maluf, Robin Millman, Alicia K. Morgans, Michael J. Morris, Nicolas Mottet, Hind Mrabti, Declan G. Murphy, Vedang Murthy, William K. Oh, Ngozi Ekeke Onyeanunam, Piet Ost, Joe M. O'Sullivan, Anwar R. Padhani, Christopher Parker, Darren M.C. Poon, Colin C. Pritchard, Danny M. Rabah, Dana Rathkopf, Robert E. Reiter, Mark Rubin, Charles J. Ryan, Fred Saad, Juan Pablo Sade, Oliver Sartor, Howard I. Scher, Neal Shore, Iwona Skoneczna, Eric Small, Matthew Smith, Howard Soule, Daniel Spratt, Cora N. Sternberg, Hiroyoshi Suzuki, Christopher Sweeney, Matthew Sydes, Mary-Ellen Taplin, Derya Tilki, Bertrand Tombal, Levent Türkeri, Hiroji Uemura, Hirotsugu Uemura, Inge van Oort, Kosj Yamoah, Dingwei Ye, Almudena Zapatero, Silke Gillessen, Aurelius Omlin, Tilki, Derya, Turco, F., Armstrong, A., Attard, G., Beer, T.M., Beltran, H., Bjartell, A., Bossi, A., Briganti, A., Bristow, R.G., Bulbul, M., Caffo, O., Chi, K.N., Clarke, C.S., Clarke, N., Davis, I.D., de Bono, J., Duran, I., Eeles, R., Efstathiou, E., Efstathiou, J., Evans, C.P., Fanti, S., Feng, F.Y., Fizazi, K., Frydenberg, M., George, D., Gleave, M., Halabi, S., Heinrich, D., Higano, C., Hofman, M.S., Hussain, M., James, N., Jones, R., Kanesvaran, R., Khauli, R.B., Klotz, L., Leibowitz, R., Logothetis, C., Maluf, F., Millman, R., Morgans, A.K., Morris, M.J., Mottet, N., Mrabti, H., Murphy, D.G., Murthy, V., Oh, W.K., Ekeke, O.N., Ost, P., O'Sullivan, J.M., Padhani, A.R., Parker, C., Poon, D.M.C., Pritchard, C.C., Rabah, D.M., Rathkopf, D., Reiter, R.E., Rubin, M., Ryan, C.J., Saad, F., Sade, J.P., Sartor, O., Scher, H.I., Shore, N., Skoneczna, I., Small, E., Smith, M., Soule, H., Spratt, D.E., Sternberg, C.N., Suzuki, H., Sweeney, C., Sydes, M.R., Taplin, M.-E., Tombal, B., Türkeri, L., Uemura, H., van Oort, I., Yamoah, K., Ye, D., Zapatero, A., Gillessen, S., Omlin, A., Koç University Hospital, School of Medicine, Acibadem University Dspace, UCL - SSS/IREC/CHEX - Pôle de chirgurgie expérimentale et transplantation, and UCL - (SLuc) Service d'urologie
- Subjects
Male ,COVID-19 Vaccines ,Prostate cancer ,Urology ,COVID-19 boost injection ,COVID-19 pandemic ,COVID-19 vaccine ,Prostate cancer management ,Telemedicine ,COVID-19 ,Prostatic Neoplasms ,Androgen Antagonists ,610 Medicine & health ,Urology and nephrology ,SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being ,Urological cancers Radboud Institute for Molecular Life Sciences [Radboudumc 15] ,Humans ,Pandemics - Abstract
Patients with advanced prostate cancer (APC) may be at greater risk for severe illness, hospitalisation, or death from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to male gender, older age, potential immunosuppressive treatments, or comorbidities. Thus, the optimal management of APC patients during the COVID-19 pandemic is complex. In October 2021, during the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2021, the 73 voting members of the panel members discussed and voted on 13 questions on this topic that could help clinicians make treatment choices during the pandemic. There was a consensus for full COVID-19 vaccination and booster injection in APC patients. Furthermore, the voting results indicate that the expert's treatment recommendations are influenced by the vaccination status: the COVID-19 pandemic altered management of APC patients for 70% of the panellists before the vaccination was available but only for 25% of panellists for fully vaccinated patients. Most experts (71%) were less likely to use docetaxel and abiraterone in unvaccinated patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. For fully vaccinated patients with high-risk localised prostate cancer, there was a consensus (77%) to follow the usual treatment schedule, whereas in unvaccinated patients, 55% of the panel members voted for deferring radiation therapy. Finally, there was a strong consensus for the use of telemedicine for monitoring APC patients. Patient summary: In the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2021, the panellists reached a consensus regarding the recommendation of the COVID-19 vaccine in prostate cancer patients and use of telemedicine for monitoring these patients., NA
- Published
- 2022
6. Prostate MRI: Who, when, and how? Report from a UK consensus meeting.
- Author
-
Kirkham, A.P.S., Haslam, P., Keanie, J.Y., McCafferty, I., Padhani, A.R., Punwani, S., Richenberg, J., Rottenberg, G., Sohaib, A., Thompson, P., Turnbull, L.W., Kurban, L., Sahdev, A., Clements, R., Carey, B.M., and Allen, C.
- Subjects
- *
DIAGNOSIS , *BIOPSY , *PROSTATE cancer , *HEALTH outcome assessment , *RADIOLOGISTS , *MAGNETIC resonance imaging - Abstract
The current pathway for men suspected of having prostate cancer [transrectal biopsy, followed in some cases by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for staging] results in over-diagnosis of insignificant tumours, and systematically misses disease in the anterior prostate. Multiparametric MRI has the potential to change this pathway, and if performed before biopsy, might enable the exclusion of significant disease in some men without biopsy, targeted biopsy in others, and improvements in the performance of active surveillance. For the potential benefits to be realized, the setting of standards is vital. This article summarizes the outcome of a meeting of UK radiologists, at which a consensus was achieved on (1) the indications for MRI, (2) the conduct of the scan, (3) a method and template for reporting, and (4) minimum standards for radiologists. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]
- Published
- 2013
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
7. Tumour staging using magnetic resonance imaging in clinically localised prostate cancer: relationship to biochemical outcome after neo-adjuvant androgen deprivation and radical radiotherapy
- Author
-
Jackson, A.S.N., Parker, C.C., Norman, A.R., Padhani, A.R., Huddart, R.A., Horwich, A., Husband, J.E., and Dearnaley, D.P.
- Subjects
- *
PROSTATE cancer , *MAGNETIC resonance imaging of cancer , *ANDROGENS , *RADIOTHERAPY - Abstract
Abstract: Aims: To evaluate the prognostic significance of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) tumour stage in clinically localised prostate cancer. Materials and methods: Between 1988 and 1999, 199 men with clinically localised prostate cancer (T1–T4, N0/Nx, M0) were treated with neo-adjuvant androgen deprivation and radical radiotherapy, and were staged using MRI. Concordance between clinical tumour (cT) stage, as determined by digital rectal examination, and MRI tumour (mT) stage was assessed. Univariate and multivariate analyses using the Cox proportional hazards model were used to study the prognostic role of cT stage and mT stage in addition to established prognostic factors. Results: Of these 199 patients, 103 (52%) were upstaged on MRI, seven (3%) were downstaged, and in 89 (45%) cT and mT stages were concordant. With median follow-up of 3.8 years, 5-year freedom from prostate-specific antigen (PSA) failure was 48% (95% confidence interval (CI) 39–56%). On univariate analysis, freedom from PSA failure was associated with mT stage (P=0.009) as well as Gleason score (P<0.001) and initial PSA (P<0.001), but not cT stage (P=0.449). On multivariate analysis, Gleason score (P=0.001), initial PSA (P<0.001), but not mT stage (P=0.112) remained independent determinants of freedom from PSA failure. For the subgroup of 149 patients with cT1–2 disease, mT stage was a significant predictor of increased risk of PSA failure on univariate analysis (P=0.005), but not multivariate analysis (P=0.19). Conclusion: Freedom from PSA failure was more closely associated with mT stage than cT stage. Future studies are warranted to determine whether mT stage is an independent determinant of treatment outcome. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]
- Published
- 2005
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
Catalog
Discovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.