Current attitudes to testicular prosthesis insertion during radical orchidectomy—An international perspective

Objectives This study aimed to assess current international clinician practices, attitudes and barriers related to testicular prosthesis implantation in patients with testicular cancer at the time of radical inguinal orchidectomy. Methods An international online survey of urologists who perform radical orchidectomy for testicular cancer was developed. The recruitment process used social media and the emailing lists of national urological societies. Responses were collected between 10 February 2021 and 31 May 2021. The primary outcome was the proportion of urologists who always offered testicular prosthesis implantation to patients undergoing radical orchidectomy. Secondary outcomes included the reasons for not offering testicular prosthesis implantation. Results A total of 393 respondents took part in the online survey; of these, the majority were from the UK (66%), with the remaining international respondents (34%) from six different continents. Urologists (53%) reported they always offer testicular prosthesis implantation. Of those that offered testicular prosthesis implantation, 28% did so as a secondary procedure after radical orchidectomy, rather than the time of radical orchidectomy (72%). The most frequently selected reasons for not offering testicular prosthesis implantation included concerns about delaying chemotherapy (41%), infection (33%), impaired cosmesis (17%) and lack of availability (17%). Conclusion Despite evidence confirming the safety and the psychological benefit of testicular prosthesis implantation during radical orchidectomy, current international practice suggests just over half of urologists always offer this to their patients. Increased clinician awareness of the low risk of complications and high patient satisfaction may act to reduce the perceived barriers in offering testicular prosthesis implantation

Accuracy of Transperineal Targeted Prostate Biopsies, Visual Estimation and Image Fusion in Men Needing Repeat Biopsy in the PICTURE Trial

PURPOSE: To evaluate detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) using MRI-targeted biopsies, and compare visual-estimation to image-fusion targeting, in patients requiring repeat prostate biopsies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospective, ethics-committee approved, registered PICTURE trial enrolling 249 consecutive patients (11th/January/2012-29th/January/2014). Men underwent an mpMRI and were blinded to its results. All underwent transperineal template prostate mapping (TTPM) biopsies. In 200 with a lesion, this was preceded by visual-estimation and image-fusion targeted biopsies. For the primary endpoint, csPCa was defined as Gleason >/=4+3 and/or any grade of cancer length >/=6mm. Other definitions of csPCa were also evaluated. RESULTS: Mean (SD) age was 62.6 (7) years, median (IQR) PSA 7.17ng/ml (5.25, 10.09), mean primary lesion size 0.37cc (SD1.52), with mean 4.3 (SD2.3) targeted cores per lesion (visual-estimation and image-fusion combined) and mean 48.7 (SD12.3) TTPM-biopsy cores. TTPM-biopsies detected 97 (48.5%) cases of csPCa and 85 (42.5%) insignificant cancers. Overall, mpMRI-targeted biopsies detected 81 (40.5%) csPCa and 63 (31.5%) insignificant cancers. Eighteen (9%) with csPCa on MRI-targeted biopsies were benign or clinically insignificant on TTPM-biopsy. Thirty-four (17%) had csPCa detected on TTPM-biopsy but not on MRI-targeted biopsies; approximately half of these were present in non-targeted areas. csPCa was found with visual-estimation and image-fusion in 53/169 (31.3%) and 48/169 (28.4%) (McNemar's test, p=0.5322). Visual-estimation missed 23 (13.6%) csPCa detected by image-fusion; image-fusion missed 18 (10.8%) csPCa that visual-estimation detected. CONCLUSIONS: MRI-targeted biopsies are accurate at detection of csPCa and reducing over-diagnosis of insignificant cancers. To maximise detection both visual-estimation and image-fusion targeted biopsies are required

Immunohistochemical biomarker validation in highly selective needle biopsy microarrays derived from mpMRI‐characterized prostates

INTRODUCTION: Diagnosing prostate cancer routinely involves tissue biopsy and increasingly image guided biopsy using multiparametric MRI (mpMRI). Excess tissue after diagnosis can be used for research to improve the diagnostic pathway and the vertical assembly of prostate needle biopsy cores into tissue microarrays (TMAs) allows the parallel immunohistochemical (IHC) validation of cancer biomarkers in routine diagnostic specimens. However, tissue within a biopsy core is often heterogeneous and cancer is not uniformly present, resulting in needle biopsy TMAs that suffer from highly variable cancer detection rates that complicate parallel biomarker validation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The prostate cores with the highest tumor burden (in terms of Gleason score and/or maximum cancer core length) were obtained from 249 patients in the PICTURE trial who underwent transperineal template prostate mapping (TPM) biopsy at 5 mm intervals preceded by mpMRI. From each core, 2 mm segments containing tumor or benign tissue (as assessed on H&E pathology) were selected, excised and embedded vertically into a new TMA block. TMA sections were then IHC‐stained for the routinely used prostate cancer biomarkers PSA, PSMA, AMACR, p63, and MSMB and assessed using the h‐score method. H‐scores in patient matched malignant and benign tissue were correlated with the Gleason grade of the original core and the MRI Likert score for the sampled prostate area. RESULTS: A total of 2240 TMA cores were stained and IHC h‐scores were assigned to 1790. There was a statistically significant difference in h‐scores between patient matched malignant and adjacent benign tissue that is independent of Likert score. There was no association between the h‐scores and Gleason grade or Likert score within each of the benign or malignant groups. CONCLUSION: The construction of highly selective TMAs from prostate needle biopsy cores is possible. IHC data obtained through this method are highly reliable and can be correlated with imaging. IHC expression patterns for PSA, PSMA, AMACR, p63, and MSMB are distinct in malignant and adjacent benign tissue but did not correlate with mpMRI Likert scor

Transperineal Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsy versus Transperineal Template Prostate Mapping Biopsy in the Detection of Localised Radio-recurrent Prostate Cancer

AIMS: Multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) may identify radio-recurrent intra-prostatic cancer accurately. We aimed to compare visually directed MRI-targeted biopsies (MRI-TB) to an accurate reference standard - transperineal prostate mapping (TPM) biopsies with 5 mm sampling - in the detection of clinically significant cancer in men with biochemical failure after radiotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective registry analysis between 2006 and 2014 identified 77 men who had undergone mpMRI followed by MRI-TB and TPM. Clinical significance was set at two definitions of disease. Definition 1 was Gleason ≥ 4+3 and/or maximum cancer core length ≥ 6 mm. Definition 2 was Gleason ≥ 3+4 and/or maximum cancer core length ≥ 4 mm. RESULTS: Of the 77 patients included, the mean age was 70 years (range 61-82; standard deviation 5.03). The median prostate-specific antigen (PSA) at the time of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) was 14 ng/ml (interquartile range 7.83-32.50). The most frequent EBRT dose given was 74 Gy over 37 fractions. Eight patients had iodine-seed implant brachytherapy or high dose rate brachytherapy. Neoadjuvant/adjuvant hormonal therapy use was reported in 38. The time from EBRT to biochemical recurrence was a median of 60 months (interquartile range 36.75-85.00). The median PSA at the time of mpMRI was 4.68 ng/ml (interquartile range 2.68-7.60). The median time between mpMRI and biopsy was 2.76 months (interquartile range 1.58-4.34). In total, 2392 TPM and 381 MRI-TB cores were taken with 18% and 50% cancer detection, respectively. Detection rates of definition 1 clinically significant cancer were 52/77 (68%) versus 55/77 (71%) for MRI-TB and TPM, respectively. MRI-TB was more efficient requiring 1 core versus 2.8 cores to detect definition 2 cancer. CONCLUSION: MRI-TB seems to have encouraging detection rates for clinically significant cancer with fewer cores compared with TPM, although TPM had higher detection rates for smaller lower grade lesions

Intraprostatic Cancer Recurrence following Radical Radiotherapy on Transperineal Template Mapping Biopsy: Implications for Focal Ablative Salvage Therapy

Background: Men who fail external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) are usually placed on delayed hormone therapy. Some of these men have localised recurrence that might be suitable for further local therapy. We aimed to describe patterns of recurrence, and suitability for focal ablative therapy, in those undergoing transperineal template prostate-mapping (TTPM) biopsies. / Method: 145 consecutive patients (December 2007-May 2014) referred with suspicion of recurrence due to rising PSA after EBRT or brachytherapy who underwent TTPM-biopsies. Suitability for focal ablative therapy required the cancer to be either unifocal or unilateral, or bilateral/multifocal with one dominant index lesion and secondary lesions with Gleason score 3+3=6 with no more than 3mm cancer core involvement. / Results: The mean age was 70.7 (SD 5.8) years. Median PSA at time of TTPM-biopsy was 4.5 (IQR 2.5–7.7). Overall, 75.9% (110/145) were suitable for a form of focal salvage treatment; 40.7% (59/145) were suitable for quadrant ablation, 14.5% (21/145) hemiablation, 14.5% (21/145) bilateral focal ablation and 6.2% (9/145) for index lesion ablation. / Conclusion: Three quarters of patients who have localised radio-recurrent prostate cancer may be suitable for focal ablative therapy to the prostate based on transperineal template prostate mapping biopsies