Steven Abboud
National Institutes of Health
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Steven Abboud.
Urology | 2016
Michele Fascelli; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Sandeep Sankineni; Anna M. Brown; Arvin K. George; Richard Ho; Thomas Frye; Amichai Kilchevsky; Raju Chelluri; Steven Abboud; M. Minhaj Siddiqui; Maria J. Merino; Bradford J. Wood; Peter L. Choyke; Peter A. Pinto; Baris Turkbey
OBJECTIVE To validate the use of biparametric (T2- and diffusion-weighted) magnetic resonance imaging (B-MRI) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) or PSA density (PSAD) in a biopsy-naive cohort at risk for prostate cancer (PCa). METHODS All patients (n = 59) underwent PSA screening and digital rectal exam prior to a B-MRI followed by MRI or transrectal ultrasound fusion-guided targeted biopsy. Previously reported composite formulas incorporating screen positive lesions (SPL) on B-MRI and PSA or PSAD were developed to maximize PCa detection. For PSA, a patient was considered screen positive if PSA level + 6 × (the number of SPL) >14. For PSAD, screening was positive if PSAD × 14 + (the number of SPL) >4.25. These schemes were employed in this new test set to validate the initial formulas. Performance assessment of these formulas was determined for all cancer detection and for tumors with Gleason ≥3 + 4. RESULTS Screen positive lesions on B-MRI had the highest sensitivity (95.5%) and negative predictive value of 71.4% compared with PSA and PSAD. B-MRI significantly improved sensitivity (43.2-72.7%, P = .0002) when combined with PSAD. The negative predictive value of PSA increased with B-MRI, achieving 91.7% for B-MRI and PSA for Gleason ≥3 + 4. Overall accuracies of the composite equations were 81.4% (B-MRI and PSA) and 78.0% (B-MRI and PSAD). CONCLUSION Validation with a biopsy-naive cohort demonstrates the parameter SPL performed better than PSA or PSAD alone in accurately detecting PCa. The combined use of B-MRI, PSA, and PSAD resulted in improved accuracy for detecting clinically significant PCa.
The Journal of Urology | 2015
Ardeshir R. Rastinehad; Steven Abboud; Arvin K. George; Thomas Frye; Richard Ho; Raju Chelluri; Michele Fascelli; Joanna Shih; Robert Villani; Eran Ben-Levi; Oksana Yaskiv; Baris Turkbey; Peter L. Choyke; Maria J. Merino; Bradford J. Wood; Peter A. Pinto
PURPOSE As the adoption of magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion guided biopsy expands, the reproducibility of outcomes at expert centers becomes essential. We sought to validate the comprehensive NCI (National Cancer Institute) experience with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and fusion guided biopsy in an external, independent, matched cohort of patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS We compared 620 patients enrolled in a prospective trial comparing systematic biopsy to fusion guided biopsy at NCI to 310 who underwent a similar procedure at Long Island Jewish Medical Center. The propensity score, defined as the probability of being treated outside NCI, was calculated using the estimated logistic regression model. Patients from the hospital were matched 1:1 for age, prostate specific antigen, magnetic resonance imaging suspicion score and prior negative biopsies. Clinically significant disease was defined as Gleason 3 + 4 or greater. RESULTS Before matching we found differences between the cohorts in age, magnetic resonance imaging suspicion score (each p <0.001), the number of patients with prior negative biopsies (p = 0.01), and the overall cancer detection rate and the cancer detection rate by fusion guided biopsy (each p <0.001). No difference was found in the rates of upgrading by fusion guided biopsy (p = 0.28) or upgrading to clinically significant disease (p = 0.95). A statistically significant difference remained in the overall cancer detection rate and the rate by fusion guided biopsy after matching. On subgroup analysis we found a difference in the overall cancer detection rate and the rate by fusion guided biopsy (p <0.001 and 0.003) in patients with prior negative systematic biopsy but no difference in the 2 rates (p = 0.39 and 0.51, respectively) in biopsy naïve patients. CONCLUSIONS Improved detection of clinically significant cancer by magnetic resonance imaging and fusion guided biopsy is reproducible by an experienced multidisciplinary team consisting of dedicated radiologists and urologists.
PLOS ONE | 2016
Richard Ho; M. Minhaj Siddiqui; Arvin K. George; Thomas Frye; Amichai Kilchevsky; Michele Fascelli; Nabeel A. Shakir; Raju Chelluri; Steven Abboud; Annerleim Walton-Diaz; Sandeep Sankineni; Maria J. Merino; Baris Turkbey; Peter L. Choyke; Bradford J. Wood; Peter A. Pinto
Objectives To evaluate the utility of preoperative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MP-MRI) in predicting biochemical recurrence (BCR) following radical prostatectomy (RP). Materials/Methods From March 2007 to January 2015, 421 consecutive patients with prostate cancer (PCa) underwent preoperative MP-MRI and RP. BCR-free survival rates were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify clinical and imaging variables predictive of BCR. Logistic regression was performed to generate a nomogram to predict three-year BCR probability. Results Of the total cohort, 370 patients met inclusion criteria with 39 (10.5%) patients experiencing BCR. On multivariate analysis, preoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) (p = 0.01), biopsy Gleason score (p = 0.0008), MP-MRI suspicion score (p = 0.03), and extracapsular extension on MP-MRI (p = 0.03) were significantly associated with time to BCR. A nomogram integrating these factors to predict BCR at three years after RP demonstrated a c-index of 0.84, outperforming the predictive value of Gleason score and PSA alone (c-index 0.74, p = 0.02). Conclusion The addition of MP-MRI to standard clinical factors significantly improves prediction of BCR in a post-prostatectomy PCa cohort. This could serve as a valuable tool to support clinical decision-making in patients with moderate and high-risk cancers.
Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2016
Thomas Frye; Steven Abboud; Richard Ho; Michele Fascelli; Raju Chelluri; Arvin K. George; Peter L. Choyke; Baris Turkbey; Bradford J. Wood; Peter A. Pinto
115 Background: Active surveillance (AS) is an established option for men with prostate cancer. Studies have shown that multiparametric-MRI along with MRI-TRUS fusion-guided biopsy (FB) may better assess risk in patients eligible for AS, compared to 12-core biopsy, due to improved detection of clinically significant cancers. The objective is to evaluate the performance of expanded criteria eligibility in men on AS being monitored with MRI-TRUS guided biopsy. Methods: Men on AS were included if they had mp-MRI and pathology data for 2 or more FB sessions. FB procedures consisted of targeted biopsies and random 12 core biopsies. Men participated in AS with low and intermediate risk prostate cancer, Gleason score ≤ 3+4=7 with no restriction on percent core involvement or number of cores positive. Progression was defined by patients with initial Gleason 3+3=6 to any Gleason 4, and Gleason 3+4=7 disease progressing to a primary Gleason 4 or higher. Results: 124 men on AS met study criteria. Low risk men had a ...
The Journal of Urology | 2015
Annerleim Walton Diaz; Steven Abboud; Arvin K. George; Raju Chelluri; Michele Fascelli; Richard Ho; Thomas Frye; Sandeep Sankineni; Maria J. Merino; Baris Turkbey; Bradford J. Wood; Peter L. Choyke; Peter A. Pinto
Scholars Program, a public-private partnership supported jointly by the NIH and generous contributions to the Foundation for the NIH from Pfizer Inc., The Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, The Alexandria Real Estate Equities, Inc. and Mr. and Mrs. Joel S. Marcus, and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, as well as other private donors. For a complete list, please visit the Foundation website at: http://fnih.org/work/education-training-0/ medical-research-scholars-program
Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2015
Michele Fascelli; Thomas Frye; Arvin K. George; Steven Abboud; Raju Chelluri; Richard Ho; Sandeep Sankineni; Maria J. Merino; Baris Turkbey; Peter L. Choyke; Bradford J. Wood; Peter A. Pinto
44 Background: Central gland (CG) prostate cancers (CaP) are reported with lesser incidence and smaller tumor volume compared to the peripheral zone (PZ). Index tumor lesions defined by highest grade may be missed when in the CG. MRI/US fusion-guided biopsy allows targeting of lesions, potentially identifying cancer outside the traditional TRUS biopsy template. Methods: Retrospective review of 1,003 patients who underwent multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) found 2,119 suspicious lesions. Targets were biopsied and stratified by zonal distribution, CG or PZ. Cancer detection rates (CDR) were tabulated by location and correlated with PSA, Gleason score, prostate volume and MRI suspicion. Results: Fusion-guided biopsy targeted lesions in the central (711, 34%) or peripheral (1408, 66%) prostatic zones. CDR was similar between zones: 35.2% CG compared to 33.6% PZ (Table). CDR of clinically significant disease (Gleason >4+3) was similar in the CG and PZ despite higher prostate volume in those with CG lesions. In contr...
The Journal of Urology | 2016
Raju Chelluri; Amichai Kilchevsky; Arvin K. George; Abhinav Sidana; Thomas Frye; Daniel Su; Michele Fascelli; Richard Ho; Steven Abboud; Baris Turkbey; Maria J. Merino; Peter L. Choyke; Bradford J. Wood; Peter A. Pinto
The Journal of Urology | 2015
Michele Fascelli; Thomas Frye; Arvin K. George; Steven Abboud; Raju Chelluri; Richard Ho; Annerleim Walton Diaz; Sandeep Sankineni; Maria J. Merino; Baris Turkbey; Peter L. Choyke; Bradford J. Wood; Peter A. Pinto
Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2015
Steven Abboud; Ardeshir R. Rastinehad; Arvin K. George; Thomas Frye; Richard Ho; Nabeel Shakir; Raju Chelluri; Michele Fascelli; Annerleim Walton-Diaz; Sandeep Sankineni; Baris Turkbey; Peter L. Choyke; Maria J. Merino; Peter A. Pinto
Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2017
Arvin K. George; Anthony N. Hoang; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Annerleim Walton-Diaz; Ardeshir R. Rastinehad; M. Minhaj Siddiqui; Nabeel Shakir; Richard Ho; Michele Fascelli; Steven Abboud; Raju Chelluri; Maria J. Merino; Peter L. Choyke; Baris Turkbey; Bradford J. Wood; Peter A. Pinto