Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Sep 11.
Published in final edited form as: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2014 Aug 5;17(4):325–331. doi: 10.1038/pcan.2014.28

Table 3.

Associations between imaging and procedural variables on baseline and progression bone biopsies and tumor yield.

Imaging and Procedural
Variables		 Number of
Biopsies1 		Percent Positive
Cores
Median (q1-q3)		 Odds Ratio (95%
CI)		 P-
Value
Lesion location
   Pelvis
   Femur or spine
27
12
50% (0%-100%)
42% (29%-78%)
1.10 (0.40-3.03)
Reference

0.86
Lesion size (cm3)
   ≤ 8.8
   > 8.8
20
19
42% (0%-67%)
75% (3%-100%)
0.39 (0.15-1.01)
Reference
0.05
Quantitative attenuation (HU)
   ≤ 400
   > 400
10
29
65% (50%-100%)
40% (0%-75%)
1.77 (0.60-5.24)
Reference
0.30
Qualitative attenuation
   Sclerotic
   Mixed or lytic
23
16
50% (20%-100%)
50% (13%-78%)
1.17 (0.45-3.04)
Reference
0.74
Distance from skin to lesion
edge (cm)
   < 6.1
   ≥ 6.1
18
21
71% (40%-100%)
33% (0-50%)
2.98 (1.16-7.64)
Reference
0.02
Distance from cortex to lesion
edge (cm)
   < 1.5
   ≥ 1.5
19
20
50% (20%-80%)
50% (13-100%)
0.92 (0.36-2.35)
Reference
0.86
Radionuclide bone scan
correlate
   Marked uptake
   Moderate uptake
   Mild or no uptake

14
16
9

67% (50%-100%)
50% (0%-90%)
33% (20%-33%)

4.54 (1.26-16.42)
1.93 (0.57-6.46)
Reference

0.06
Location of lesion sampling
   Center
   Periphery or both
16
23
65% (27%-100%)
50% (0%-75%)
1.97 (0.75-5.2)
Reference
0.17
Needle gauge1
   11
   13, 14 or 18
12
9
45% (13%-84%)
25% (0%-50%)
1.46 (0.39-5.49)
Reference
0.58
1

There were a total of 39 baseline and progression biopsies, however needle gauge had missing information as detailed in Table 1.