Back to Authors

Kwast, Theodorus van der

0000-0001-8640-5786

Mayo Clinic

for the PRIME Study Group Collaborators

Citations 5

Biparametric vs Multiparametric MRI for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis
Ng, Alexander , Asif, Aqua , Gómez‐Gómez, Enrique , Budäus, Lars, Barrett, Tristan , Radtke, Jan Philipp , Kesch, Claudia, Pham, Tho, Tewari, Ash , Cabello, M.A. Rodríguez , Mynderse, Lance A. , Borghi, Marcelo, Boesen, Lars , Singh, Paras B. , Renard‐Penna, Raphaële , Leow, Jeffrey J. , Pecoraro, Martina , Giannarini, Gianluca , Perlis, Nathan , López-Ruiz, Daniel, Rossiter, Marimo , Khetrapal, Pramit , Chan, Vinson Wai‐Shun , Haider, Aiman , Clarke, Caroline S. , Dickinson, Louise , Mitra, Anita, Margolis, Daniel J. A., Takwoingi, Yemisi , Emberton, Mark , Allen, Clare, Moore, Caroline M. , Kasivisvanathan, Veeru , Collaborators, PRIME Study Group, Briganti, Alberto , Evangelista, Alex, Freeman, Alex , Kirkham, Alex, Zlotta, Alexandre R. , Grey, Alistair, Ryan, Andrew, Borrelli, Antonella , Andrews, Antonette, Finelli, Antonio , Sancho, Arturo Platas, Baring, Ashley, Roy, Ashoke, Issa, Balqiisa, Israël, Bas , González, Carolina Aulló, English, Caroline, Zuiani, Chiara , Amate, Cristina, Yong, Daniel , Rozze, Davide, Lomas, Derek J. , Cannoletta, Donato , Chang, Eileen Wang, Chun, Felix, Zussino, Gaia , Antoch, Gerald , Gandaglia, Giorgio, Sauter, Guido , Thevarajah, Harini, Sorrell, Harriet, McBain, Hazel, Reis, Henning , Pita, Hernando Ríos , Potyka, Ingrid , Collavino, Jeanlou, Koshy, Jincy, Weng, Jing Yi , Withington, John, Egmond, Joke van, Piper, Jon, O’Brien, Jonathan , Rosa, José Valero, Sanz, Juan Luis , Quesada, Juan Mesa, Jannusch, Kai , Corr, Kateri , Haines, Kenneth, Umutlu, Lale , Quarta, Leonardo, Casarotto, Letizia, Gimeno, Linda , Moretti, Lucas, Laschena, Ludovica , Drewes, Lukas, Ostos, Manuel Sanchez, Peris, M., Volpacchio, Mariano , Prentice, Mark, Graefen, Markus , Soligo, Matteo, Boschheidgen, Matthias , Singhera, M., Wenzel, Mike, Fatterpekar, Monali, Al‐Nader, Mulham , Kachanov, Mykyta , Shaida, Nadeem , Muirhead, Nicola , Vasdev, Nikhil , Sanmugalingam, Nimalan , Nørgaard, Nis , Vicente, Pete, Incze, Peter , Ryan, Philip, Rouvier, Philippe , Mead, Phoebe, Mozer, Pierre, Viana, Públio César Cavalcante , Jiménez, Rafael E. , Novotta, Réka, Huang, Richard, O’Sullivan, Richard, Jepsen, Rikke Karlin , Frese, Robert, Clow, Rosemary, Al‐Monajjed, Rouvier , Lewis, Sara , Cashman, Sophia, Pizzolitto, Stefano, Lelie, S., Lindner, Sydney, Al‐Hammouri, Tarek , Sánchez, Teresa González, Reid, Thomas, McClure, Timothy, Maurer, Tobias , Peruzzi, Valeria, Tan, Wei Phin, Nahas, William Carlos, Chong, Yew Lam, Agarwal, Ridhi , Panebianco, Valeria , Girometti, Rossano , Ghai, Sangeet , COBELLI, Francesco DE , Pham, Tho, Taneja, Samir S. , Hu, Jim C. , Dias, Adriano Basso , Falkenbach, Fabian , Kastner, Christof , Schimmöller, Lars , Nathan, Arjun , Punwani, Shonit , Brew‐Graves, Chris , Brembilla, Giorgio , Margolis, Daniel , Giganti, Francesco , Collaborators, PRIME Study Group, Crestani, Alessandro , Sciarra, Alessandro , Evangelista, Alex, Kirkham, Alex P. S. , Grey, Alistair, Blanca, Ana , Bjartell, Anders , Tong, Angela , Warren, Anne Y. , Ciardi, Antonio , Rannikko, Antti , Stabile, Armando , Villers, Arnauld A. , Issa, Balqiisa, Hadaschik, Boris Alexander , English, Caroline L, Lee, Chau Hung , Caris, Christien T.M. , Stempel, Conrad von , Rozze, Davide, Messina, Emanuele , Chun, Felix, Gandaglia, Giorgio, Robert, G. , Caglič, Iztok , Theysohn, Jens Matthias , Grummet, Jeremy , Koshy, Jincy, Wilkinson, John, Withington, John, Egmond, Joke van, Deeks, Jonathan J , O'Brien, Jonathan, Quesada, Juan Mesa, Quarta, Leonardo , Orecchia, Luca , Moretti, Lucas, Rooij, Maarten de , Bicchetti, Marco , Gatti, Marco , Peris, María de los Desamparados Esteban, Roethke, Matthias Claudius , Monte, Maurizio Del, Wenzel, Mike, Takahashi, Naoki , Fleshner, Neil , Albers, Peter , Mead, Phoebe, Visschere, Pieter De , Huang, Richard, Shah, Syed Ahmar , Sanchez, Teresa González, Bathala, Tharakeswara K , Kwast, Theodorus van der , Reid, Thomas, Løgager, Vibeke , Prabhu, Vinay , Wagaskar, Vinayak Gorakhnath , Tan, Wei Phin, Nahas, William Carlos, Witjes, Wim P.J. , Chong, Yew Lam

JAMA | September 10, 2025 | Volume: 334 | Issue: 13 | Pages: 1170

10.1001/jama.2025.13722 Get It

Importance Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), with or without prostate biopsy, has become the standard of care for diagnosing clinically significant prostate cancer. Resource capacity limits widespread adoption. Biparametric MRI, which omits the gadolinium contrast sequence, is a shorter and cheaper alternative offering time-saving capacity gains for health systems globally. Objective To assess whether biparametric MRI is noninferior to multiparametric MRI for diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants A prospective, multicenter, within-patient, noninferiority trial of biopsy-naive men from 22 centers (12 countries) with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer (elevated prostate-specific antigen [PSA] level and/or abnormal digital rectal examination findings) from April 2022 to September 2023, with the last follow-up conducted on December 3, 2024. Interventions Participants underwent multiparametric MRI, comprising T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted, and dynamic contrast–enhanced (DCE) sequences. Radiologists reported abbreviated biparametric MRI first (T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted), blinded to the DCE sequence. After unblinding, radiologists reported the full multiparametric MRI. Patients underwent a targeted biopsy with or without systematic biopsy if either biparametric MRI or multiparametric MRI was suggestive of clinically significant prostate cancer. Main outcomes and measures The primary outcome was the proportion of men with clinically significant prostate cancer. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of men with clinically insignificant cancer. The noninferiority margin was 5%. Results Of 555 men recruited, 490 were included for primary outcome analysis. Median age was 65 (IQR, 59-70) years and median PSA level was 5.6 (IQR, 4.4-8.0) ng/mL. The proportion of patients with abnormal digital rectal examination findings was 12.7%. Biparametric MRI was noninferior to multiparametric MRI, detecting clinically significant prostate cancer in 143 of 490 men (29.2%), compared with 145 of 490 men (29.6%) (difference, −0.4 [95% CI, −1.2 to 0.4] percentage points; P = .50). Biparametric MRI detected clinically insignificant cancer in 45 of 490 men (9.2%), compared with 47 of 490 men (9.6%) with the use of multiparametric MRI (difference, −0.4 [95% CI, −1.2 to 0.4] percentage points). Central quality control demonstrated that 99% of scans were of adequate diagnostic quality. Conclusion and relevance In men with suspected prostate cancer, provided image quality is adequate, an abbreviated biparametric MRI scan, with or without targeted biopsy, could become the new standard of care for prostate cancer diagnosis. With approximately 4 million prostate MRIs performed globally annually, adopting biparametric MRI could substantially increase scanner throughput and reduce costs worldwide. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04571840
Reporting Practices and Resource Utilization in the Era of Intraductal Carcinoma of the Prostate
Gandhi, Jatin , Smith, Steven C. , Paner, Gladell P. , McKenney, Jesse K. , Sekhri, Radhika , Osunkoya, Adeboye O. , Baras, Alexander S. , Cheville, John C. , Jiménez, Rafael E. , Trpkov, Kiril , Colecchia, Maurizio , Ro, Jae Y. , Montironi, Rodolfo , Hes, Ondřej , Hirsch, Michelle S. , Netto, George J. , Fine, Samson W. , Sirohi, Deepika , Kaushal, Seema , Robinson, Brian D. , Kweldam, Charlotte F. , Humphrey, Peter A. , Hansel, Donna E. , Schultz, Luciana , Przybycin, Christopher G. , Mehra, Rohit , Kunju, Lakshmi P., Aron, Manju , Kuroda, Naoto , Tavora, Fabio, Grignon, David J. , Epstein, Jonathan I. , Reuter, Victor E. , Amin, Mahul B. , Távora, Fábio , Robinson, Brian D. , Trpkov, Kiril , Marzo, Angelo M. De , Menon, Santosh , Williamson, Sean R. , Sangoi, Ankur R. , Magi‐Galluzzi, Cristina , Shah, Rajal B. , Kryvenko, Oleksandr N. , Kench, James G. , Kwast, Theodorus van der

American Journal of Surgical Pathology | December 24, 2019 | Volume: 44 | Issue: 5 | Pages: 673-680

10.1097/pas.0000000000001417 Get It

Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) has been recently recognized by the World Health Organization classification of prostatic tumors as a distinct entity, most often occurring concurrently with invasive prostatic adenocarcinoma (PCa). Whether documented admixed with PCa or in its rare pure form, numerous studies associate this entity with clinical aggressiveness. Despite increasing clinical experience and requirement of IDC-P documentation in protocols for synoptic reporting, the specifics of its potential contribution to assessment of grade group (GG) and cancer quantitation of PCa in both needle biopsies (NBx) and radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens remain unclear. Moreover, there are no standard guidelines for incorporating basal cell marker immunohistochemistry (IHC) in the diagnosis of IDC-P, either alone or as part of a cocktail with AMACR/racemase. An online survey containing 26 questions regarding diagnosis, reporting practices, and IHC resource utilization, focusing on IDC-P, was undertaken by 42 genitourinary subspecialists from 9 countries. The degree of agreement or disagreement regarding approaches to individual questions was classified as significant majority (>75%), majority (51% to 75%), minority (26% to 50%) and significant minority (≤25%). IDC-P with or without invasive cancer is considered a contraindication for active surveillance by the significant majority (95%) of respondents, although a majority (66%) also agreed that the clinical significance/behavior of IDC-P on NBx or RP with PCa required further study. The majority do not upgrade PCa based on comedonecrosis seen only in the intraductal component in NBx (62%) or RP (69%) specimens. Similarly, recognizable IDC-P with GG1 PCa was not a factor in upgrading in NBx (78%) or RP (71%) specimens. The majority (60%) of respondents include readily recognizable IDC-P in assessment of linear extent of PCa at NBx. A significant majority (78%) would use IHC to confirm or exclude intraductal carcinoma if other biopsies showed no PCa, while 60% would use it to confirm IDC-P with invasive PCa in NBx if it would change the overall GG assignment. Nearly half (48%, a minority) would use IHC to confirm IDC-P for accurate Gleason pattern 4 quantitation. A majority (57%) report the percentage of IDC-P when present, in RP specimens. When obvious Gleason pattern 4 or 5 PCa is present in RP or NBx, IHC is rarely to almost never used to confirm the presence of IDC-P by the significant majority (88% and 90%, respectively). Most genitourinary pathologists consider IDC-P to be an adverse prognostic feature independent of the PCa grade, although recommendations for standardization are needed to guide reporting of IDC-P vis a vis tumor quantitation and final GG assessment. The use of IHC varies widely and is performed for a multitude of indications, although it is used most frequently in scenarios where confirmation of IDC-P would impact the GG assigned. Further study and best practices recommendations are needed to provide guidance with regards to the most appropriate indications for IHC use in scenarios regarding IDC-P.
A propensity score analysis of radical cystectomy versus bladder-sparing trimodal therapy in the setting of a multidisciplinary bladder cancer clinic.
Kulkarni, Girish S. , Wei, Yanliang, Bhindi, Bimal , Satkunasivam, Raj , Kuk, Cynthia, Erlich, Annette, Fleshner, Neil , Jewett, Michael A.S. , Bashir, Shaheena, Zlotta, Alexandre R. , Hermanns, Thomas , Boström, Peter J. , Li, Kathy K , Templeton, Arnoud J. , Sridhar, Srikala S , Kwast, Theodorus van der , Chung, Peter W M , Bristow, Robert Glen , Milosevic, Michael , Warde, Padraig Richard

Journal of Clinical Oncology | September 6, 2018 | Volume: 35 | Issue: 15_suppl | Pages: e16003-e16003

10.1200/jco.2017.35.15_suppl.e16003 Get It

e16003 Background: Multidisciplinary management improves complex treatment decision making in cancer care, but its impact for bladder cancer (BC) has not been documented. While radical cystectomy (RC) is currently viewed as the standard of care for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC), radiotherapy-based, bladder-sparing trimodal therapy (TMT) combining transurethral resection of bladder tumor, chemotherapy for radiation sensitization and external beam radiotherapy has emerged as a valid treatment option. In the absence of randomized studies, we compared the oncological outcomes between patients managed by RC or TMT using a propensity-score matched cohort analysis. Methods: Patients seen in our multidisciplinary bladder cancer clinic (MDBCC) from 2008 to 2013 were retrospectively reviewed. Those who received TMT for MIBC were identified and matched (for gender, cT and cN stage, ECOG status, Charlson comorbidity score, treatment date, age, CIS, hydronephrosis) using propensity scores, to patients who underwent RC. Overall survival and disease-specific survival (DSS) were assessed with Cox Proportional hazards modeling and competing risk analysis, respectively. Results: 112 patients with MIBC were included after matching, 56 treated with TMT and 56 by RC. Median age was 68.0 years and 29.5% were cT3/cT4. At a median follow up of 4.51 years, there were 20 (35.7%) deaths (13 from BC) in the RC group and 22 (39.3%) deaths (13 from BC) in the TMT group. 5 year DSS was 73.2% and 76.6%, in the RC and TMT groups, respectively (p = 0.49). Salvage cystectomy was performed in 6/56 TMT patients (10.7%). Conclusions: In the setting of a MDBCC, TMT yielded survival outcomes similar to matched RC patients. Appropriately selected MIBC patients should be offered the opportunity to discuss various treatment options including organ-sparing TMT.
Utility of Pathology Imagebase for standardisation of prostate cancer grading
Egevad, Lars , Delahunt, Brett , Bostwick, David G., Cheville, John C. , Evans, Andrew , Fine, Samson W. , Grignon, David J. , Humphrey, Peter A. , Hörnblad, Jonas, Iczkowski, Kenneth A. , Kench, James G. , Leite, Kátia Ramos Moreira , McKenney, Jesse K. , Pan, Chin‐Chen , Samaratunga, Hemamali , Srigley, John R., Takahashi, Hiroyuki , True, Lawrence D. , Tsuzuki, Toyonori , Varma, Murali , Zhou, Ming , Clements, Mark , McKenney, Jesse K , Pan, Chin-Chen , Tsuzuki, Toyonori , Samaratunga, Hemamali , Berney, Daniel M. , Compérat, Éva , Kristiansen, Glen , Magi‐Galluzzi, Cristina , OXLEY, JON D. , Kwast, Theodorus van der

Histopathology | January 23, 2018 | Volume: 73 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 8-18

10.1111/his.13471 Get It

AimsDespite efforts to standardise grading of prostate cancer, even among experts there is still a considerable variation in grading practices. In this study we describe the use of Pathology Imagebase, a novel reference image library, for setting an international standard in prostate cancer grading.Methods and resultsThe International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) recently launched a reference image database supervised by experts. A panel of 24 international experts in prostate pathology reviewed independently microphotographs of 90 cases of prostate needle biopsies with cancer. A linear weighted kappa of 0.67 (95% confidence interval = 0.62–0.72) and consensus was reached in 50 cases. The interobserver weighted kappa varied from 0.48 to 0.89. The highest level of agreement was seen for Gleason score (GS) 3 + 3 = 6 (ISUP grade 1), while higher grades and particularly GS 4 + 3 = 7 (ISUP grade 3) showed considerable disagreement. Once a two‐thirds majority was reached, images were moved automatically into a public database available for all ISUP members at www.isupweb.org. Non‐members are able to access a limited number of cases.ConclusionsIt is anticipated that the database will assist pathologists to calibrate their grading and, hence, decrease interobserver variability. It will also help to identify instances where definitions of grades need to be clarified.
LSD1-Mediated Epigenetic Reprogramming Drives CENPE Expression and Prostate Cancer Progression
Liang, Yi , Ahmed, Musaddeque , Guo, Haiyang , Soares, Fraser , Hua, Junjie T. , Gao, Shuai , Lu, Catherine , Poon, Christine , Han, Wanting , Langstein, Jens , Ekram, Muhammad B. , Takhar, Mandeep, Erho, Nicholas , Karnes, R. Jeffrey , Chadwick, Dianne, Boutros, Paul C. , Arrowsmith, C.H. , Feng, Felix Y. , Joshua, Anthony M. , Zoubeidi, Amina , Cai, Changmeng , He, Housheng Hansen , Boutros, Paul C , He, Housheng Hansen , Ahmed, Musaddeque , Li, Brian , Davicioni, Elai , Kwast, Theodorus van der

Cancer Research | September 15, 2017 | Volume: 77 | Issue: 20 | Pages: 5479-5490

10.1158/0008-5472.can-17-0496 Get It

Abstract Androgen receptor (AR) signaling is a key driver of prostate cancer, and androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) is a standard treatment for patients with advanced and metastatic disease. However, patients receiving ADT eventually develop incurable castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Here, we report that the chromatin modifier LSD1, an important regulator of AR transcriptional activity, undergoes epigenetic reprogramming in CRPC. LSD1 reprogramming in this setting activated a subset of cell-cycle genes, including CENPE, a centromere binding protein and mitotic kinesin. CENPE was regulated by the co-binding of LSD1 and AR to its promoter, which was associated with loss of RB1 in CRPC. Notably, genetic deletion or pharmacological inhibition of CENPE significantly decreases tumor growth. Our findings show how LSD1-mediated epigenetic reprogramming drives CRPC, and they offer a mechanistic rationale for its therapeutic targeting in this disease. Cancer Res; 77(20); 5479–90. ©2017 AACR.