Role of magnetic resonance imaging before initial biopsy: comparison of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted and systematic biopsy for significant prostate cancer detection

Multi-parametric MRI zone-specific diagnostic model performance compared with experienced radiologists for detection of prostate cancer

OBJECTIVES

Compare the performance of zone-specific multi-parametric-MRI (mp-MRI) diagnostic models in prostate cancer detection with experienced radiologists.

METHODS

A single-centre, IRB approved, prospective STARD compliant 3 T MRI test dataset of 203 patients was generated to test validity and generalisability of previously reported 1.5 T mp-MRI diagnostic models. All patients included within the test dataset underwent 3 T mp-MRI, comprising T2, diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging followed by transperineal template ± targeted index lesion biopsy. Separate diagnostic models (transition zone (TZ) and peripheral zone (PZ)) were applied to respective zones. Sensitivity/specificity and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC) were calculated for the two zone-specific models. Two radiologists (A and B) independently Likert scored test 3 T mp-MRI dataset, allowing ROC analysis for each radiologist for each prostate zone.

RESULTS

Diagnostic models applied to the test dataset demonstrated a ROC-AUC = 0.74 (95% CI 0.67-0.81) in the PZ and 0.68 (95% CI 0.61-0.75) in the TZ. Radiologist A/B had a ROC-AUC = 0.78/0.74 in the PZ and 0.69/0.69 in the TZ. Radiologists A and B each scored 51 patients in the PZ and 41 and 45 patients respectively in the TZ as Likert 3. The PZ model demonstrated a ROC-AUC = 0.65/0.67 for the patients Likert scored as indeterminate by radiologist A/B respectively, whereas the TZ model demonstrated a ROC-AUC = 0.74/0.69.

CONCLUSION

Zone-specific mp-MRI diagnostic models demonstrate generalisability between 1.5 and 3 T mp-MRI protocols and show similar classification performance to experienced radiologists for prostate cancer detection. Results also indicate the ability of diagnostic models to classify cases with an indeterminate radiologist score.

KEY POINTS

• MRI diagnostic models had similar performance to experienced radiologists for classification of prostate cancer. • MRI diagnostic models may help radiologists classify tumour in patients with indeterminate Likert 3 scores.

Salvage cryoablation for local recurrence of prostatic cancer after curative therapy

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy of salvage cryotherapy for intra-prostatic and local extraprostatic recurrences after curative treatment of prostate adenocarcinoma.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

Twenty-eight men (mean age, 69±6 [SD] years; range: 51-82 years) treated with cryoablation for prostatic (N=21) or extraprostatic (N=7) recurrent prostate cancer after radiotherapy with or without associated prostatectomy were included. Technical success, complication and recurrences were reported. Biological recurrence was defined as an elevation ≥2ng/mL of prostate specific antigen (PSA) serum level after the treatment.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up was 18 months. Among the 21 patients with intraprostatic recurrence, 14 had successful cryotherapy with a mean decrease in serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels of -5.7±2.6 (SD) ng/mL (range: -2.1 to -16.9ng/mL). Four patients (19%) had early progression and three patients (14%) had delayed biological recurrence (mean time: 15 months). Among the 7 patients with extraprostatic recurrence, 2/7 (291%) had successful cryotherapy with a decrease in PSA serum level of -2.7±1.6 (SD) ng/mL (range: -0.5--5.5ng/mL) and 4/7 (57%) had early biological recurrence after cryotherapy that required androgen deprivation therapy, whereas 1/7 (4%) was lost to follow-up. No major complications were observed for both intra- and extraprostatic recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Salvage cryoablation of locally recurrent prostate cancer after curative treatment is feasible and safe when the half prostate is treated. It could delay initiation of androgen deprivation therapy in these patients.

A comparison of magnetic resonance imaging techniques used to secure biopsies in prostate cancer patients

Introduction: Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common diagnosed malignancy among the male population in the United States. The incidence is increasing with an estimated amount of 175.000 cases in 2019. Areas covered: Primarily, PCa is generally detected by an elevated or rising serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and digital rectal examination (DRE) followed by pathological examination. Histopathology ultimately confirms the presence of PCa and determines a Gleason score. However, PSA and DRE have low specificity and sensitivity, respectively. Subsequently, accurate assessment of the aggressiveness of PCa is essential to prevent overdiagnosis and thus overtreatment of low-risk or indolent cancers. By visualizing PCa suspicious lesions and sampling them during the targeted biopsy, it is likely that the diagnostic accuracy of significant PCa improves. This article reviews the current imaging techniques used to secure biopsies in patients with a suspicion of PCa. The advantages and limitations of each technique are described. Expert opinion: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and subsequent-targeted biopsy have improved the diagnostic accuracy of PCa detection in men with an elevated or rising serum PSA. Prostate lesions visible on mpMRI are easily targeted during either in-bore MRI-guided biopsy, cognitive fusion biopsy or MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy.

The primacy of multiparametric MRI in men with suspected prostate cancer

Background

Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) became recognised in investigating those with suspected prostate cancer between 2010 and 2012; in the USA, the preventative task force moratorium on PSA screening was a strong catalyst. In a few short years, it has been adopted into daily urological and oncological practice. The pace of clinical uptake, born along by countless papers proclaiming high accuracy in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer, has sparked much debate about the timing of mpMRI within the traditional biopsy-driven clinical pathways. There are strongly held opposing views on using mpMRI as a triage test regarding the need for biopsy and/or guiding the biopsy pattern.

Objective

To review the evidence base and present a position paper on the role of mpMRI in the diagnosis and management of prostate cancer.

Methods

A subgroup of experts from the ESUR Prostate MRI Working Group conducted literature review and face to face and electronic exchanges to draw up a position statement.

Results

This paper considers diagnostic strategies for clinically significant prostate cancer; current national and international guidance; the impact of pre-biopsy mpMRI in detection of clinically significant and clinically insignificant neoplasms; the impact of pre-biopsy mpMRI on biopsy strategies and targeting; the notion of mpMRI within a wider risk evaluation on a patient by patient basis; the problems that beset mpMRI including inter-observer variability.

Conclusions

The paper concludes with a set of suggestions for using mpMRI to influence who to biopsy and who not to biopsy at diagnosis.

Key Points

• Adopt mpMRI as the first, and primary, investigation in the workup of men with suspected prostate cancer.

• PI-RADS assessment categories 1 and 2 have a high negative predictive value in excluding significant disease, and systematic biopsy may be postponed, especially in men with low-risk of disease following additional risk stratification.

• PI-RADS assessment category lesions 4 and 5 should be targeted; PI-RADS assessment category lesion 3 may be biopsied as a target, as part of systematic biopsies or may be observed depending on risk stratification.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00330-019-06166-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Prostate MRI, with or without MRI-targeted biopsy, and systematic biopsy for detecting prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), with or without MRI-targeted biopsy, is an alternative test to systematic transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy in men suspected of having prostate cancer. At present, evidence on which test to use is insufficient to inform detailed evidence-based decision-making.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of the index tests MRI only, MRI-targeted biopsy, the MRI pathway (MRI with or without MRI-targeted biopsy) and systematic biopsy as compared to template-guided biopsy as the reference standard in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer as the target condition, defined as International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade 2 or higher. Secondary target conditions were the detection of grade 1 and grade 3 or higher-grade prostate cancer, and a potential change in the number of biopsy procedures.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive systematic literature search up to 31 July 2018. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, eight other databases and one trials register.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered for inclusion any cross-sectional study if it investigated one or more index tests verified by the reference standard, or if it investigated the agreement between the MRI pathway and systematic biopsy, both performed in the same men. We included only studies on men who were biopsy naïve or who previously had a negative biopsy (or a mix of both). Studies involving MRI had to report on both MRI-positive and MRI-negative men. All studies had to report on the primary target condition.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias using the QUADAS-2 tool. To estimate test accuracy, we calculated sensitivity and specificity using the bivariate model. To estimate agreement between the MRI pathway and systematic biopsy, we synthesised detection ratios by performing random-effects meta-analyses. To estimate the proportions of participants with prostate cancer detected by only one of the index tests, we used random-effects multinomial or binary logistic regression models. For the main comparisions, we assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

The test accuracy analyses included 18 studies overall.MRI compared to template-guided biopsy: Based on a pooled sensitivity of 0.91 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.83 to 0.95; 12 studies; low certainty of evidence) and a pooled specificity of 0.37 (95% CI: 0.29 to 0.46; 12 studies; low certainty of evidence) using a baseline prevalence of 30%, MRI may result in 273 (95% CI: 249 to 285) true positives, 441 false positives (95% CI: 378 to 497), 259 true negatives (95% CI: 203 to 322) and 27 (95% CI: 15 to 51) false negatives per 1000 men. We downgraded the certainty of evidence for study limitations and inconsistency.MRI-targeted biopsy compared to template-guided biopsy: Based on a pooled sensitivity of 0.80 (95% CI: 0.69 to 0.87; 8 studies; low certainty of evidence) and a pooled specificity of 0.94 (95% CI: 0.90 to 0.97; 8 studies; low certainty of evidence) using a baseline prevalence of 30%, MRI-targeted biopsy may result in 240 (95% CI: 207 to 261) true positives, 42 (95% CI: 21 to 70) false positives, 658 (95% CI: 630 to 679) true negatives and 60 (95% CI: 39 to 93) false negatives per 1000 men. We downgraded the certainty of evidence for study limitations and inconsistency.The MRI pathway compared to template-guided biopsy: Based on a pooled sensitivity of 0.72 (95% CI: 0.60 to 0.82; 8 studies; low certainty of evidence) and a pooled specificity of 0.96 (95% CI: 0.94 to 0.98; 8 studies; low certainty of evidence) using a baseline prevalence of 30%, the MRI pathway may result in 216 (95% CI: 180 to 246) true positives, 28 (95% CI: 14 to 42) false positives, 672 (95% CI: 658 to 686) true negatives and 84 (95% CI: 54 to 120) false negatives per 1000 men. We downgraded the certainty of evidence for study limitations, inconsistency and imprecision.Systemic biopsy compared to template-guided biopsy: Based on a pooled sensitivity of 0.63 (95% CI: 0.19 to 0.93; 4 studies; low certainty of evidence) and a pooled specificity of 1.00 (95% CI: 0.91 to 1.00; 4 studies; low certainty of evidence) using a baseline prevalence of 30%, systematic biopsy may result in 189 (95% CI: 57 to 279) true positives, 0 (95% CI: 0 to 63) false positives, 700 (95% CI: 637 to 700) true negatives and 111 (95% CI: 21 to 243) false negatives per 1000 men. We downgraded the certainty of evidence for study limitations and inconsistency.Agreement analyses: In a mixed population of both biopsy-naïve and prior-negative biopsy men comparing the MRI pathway to systematic biopsy, we found a pooled detection ratio of 1.12 (95% CI: 1.02 to 1.23; 25 studies). We found pooled detection ratios of 1.44 (95% CI 1.19 to 1.75; 10 studies) in prior-negative biopsy men and 1.05 (95% CI: 0.95 to 1.16; 20 studies) in biopsy-naïve men.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Among the diagnostic strategies considered, the MRI pathway has the most favourable diagnostic accuracy in clinically significant prostate cancer detection. Compared to systematic biopsy, it increases the number of significant cancer detected while reducing the number of insignificant cancer diagnosed. The certainty in our findings was reduced by study limitations, specifically issues surrounding selection bias, as well as inconsistency. Based on these findings, further improvement of prostate cancer diagnostic pathways should be pursued.

Magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound image fusion guidance of prostate biopsies: current status, challenges and future perspectives

The use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis is rapidly evolving to try to overcome the limitations of the current diagnostic pathway using systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsies (TRUS_bx) for all men with clinical suspicion of PCa. Prostate mpMRI allows for high quality lesion detection and characterization and has been shown to improve detection of significant PCa with a more accurate Gleason score grading. Suspicious lesions can be stratified by suspicion and sampled by selective MRI-guided targeted biopsies (TBx) for improved diagnostic accuracy. Several TBx methods have been established and include MRI/TRUS image fusion biopsies (cognitive or software-assisted) and in-bore biopsies, but none have yet proven superior in clinical practice. However, while MRI in-bore biopsy is not routinely used due to its costs and limited availability, MRI/TRUS image fusion is rapidly embraced as it allows skilled urologists to perform TBx in an outpatient clinic. Furthermore, it gives the operator the advantage of adding TBx to the systematic standard biopsy scheme, which is the currently recommended approach. With the anticipated increased future use of prebiopsy mpMRI, a more widespread implementation of MRI/TRUS image fusion platforms is concurrently expected in clinical practice. Therefore, the objective of this review is to assess the current status, challenges and future perspectives of prostate MRI/TRUS image fusion biopsies.

Multi-parametric MRI-based radiomics signature for discriminating between clinically significant and insignificant prostate cancer: Cross-validation of a machine learning method

PURPOSE

To evaluate the performance of a multi-parametric MRI (mp-MRI)-based radiomics signature for discriminating between clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) and insignificant PCa (ciPCa).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two hundred and eighty patients with pathology-proven PCa were enrolled and were randomly divided into training and test cohorts. Eight hundred and nineteen radiomics features were extracted from mp-MRI for each patient. The minority group in the training cohort was balanced via the synthetic minority over-sampling technique (SMOTE) method. We used minimum-redundancy maximum-relevance (mRMR) selection and the LASSO algorithm for feature selection and radiomics signature building. The classification performance of the radiomics signature for csPCa and ciPCa was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis in the training and test cohorts.

RESULTS

Nine features were selected for the radiomics signature building. Significant differences in the radiomics signature existed between the csPCa and ciPCa groups in both the training and test cohorts (p < 0.01 for both). The AUC, sensitivity and specificity of the radiomics signature were 0.872 (95% CI: 0.823-0.921), 0.883, and 0.753, respectively, in the training cohort, and 0.823 (95% CI: 0.669-0.976), 0.841, and 0.727, respectively, in the test cohort.

CONCLUSION

Mp-MRI-based radiomics signature have the potential to noninvasively discriminate between csPCa and ciPCa.

Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System Steering Committee: PI-RADS v2 Status Update and Future Directions

CONTEXT

The Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) v2 analysis system for multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) detection of prostate cancer (PCa) is based on PI-RADS v1, accumulated scientific evidence, and expert consensus opinion.

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the accuracy, strengths and weaknesses of PI-RADS v2, discuss pathway implications of its use and outline opportunities for improvements and future developments.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

For this consensus expert opinion from the PI-RADS steering committee, clinical studies, systematic reviews, and professional guidelines for mpMRI PCa detection were evaluated. We focused on the performance characteristics of PI-RADS v2, comparing data to systems based on clinicoradiologic Likert scales and non-PI-RADS v2 imaging only. Evidence selections were based on high-quality, prospective, histologically verified data, with minimal patient selection and verifications biases.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

It has been shown that the test performance of PI-RADS v2 in research and clinical practice retains higher accuracy over systematic transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) biopsies for PCa diagnosis. PI-RADS v2 fails to detect all cancers but does detect the majority of tumors capable of causing patient harm, which should not be missed. Test performance depends on the definition and prevalence of clinically significant disease. Good performance can be attained in practice when the quality of the diagnostic process can be assured, together with joint working of robustly trained radiologists and urologists, conducting biopsy procedures within multidisciplinary teams.

CONCLUSIONS

It has been shown that the test performance of PI-RADS v2 in research and clinical practice is improved, retaining higher accuracy over systematic TRUS biopsies for PCa diagnosis.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and MRI-directed biopsies using the Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System improves the detection of prostate cancers likely to cause harm, and at the same time decreases the detection of disease that does not lead to harms if left untreated. The keys to success are high-quality imaging, reporting, and biopsies by radiologists and urologists working together in multidisciplinary teams.

Prostate cancer heterogeneity: texture analysis score based on multiple magnetic resonance imaging sequences for detection, stratification and selection of lesions at time of biopsy

OBJECTIVE

To undertake an early proof-of-concept study on a novel, semi-automated texture-based scoring system in order to enhance the association between magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) lesions and clinically significant prostate cancer (SPCa).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

With ethics approval, 536 imaging volumes were generated from 20 consecutive patients who underwent multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) at time of biopsy. Volumes of interest (VOIs) included zonal anatomy segmentation and suspicious MRI lesions for cancer (Likert Scale score >2). Entropy (E), measuring heterogeneity, was computed from VOIs and plotted as a multiparametric score defined as the entropy score (ES) = E ADC + E K^trans + E Ve + E T2WI. The reference test that was used to define the ground truth comprised systematic saturation biopsies coupled with MRI-targeted sampling. This generated 422 cores in all that were individually labelled and oriented in three-dimensions. Diagnostic accuracy for detection of SPCa, defined as Gleason score ≥3 + 4 or >3 mm of any grade of cancer on a single core, was assessed using receiver operating characteristics, correlation, and descriptive statistics. The proportion of cancerous lesions detected by ES and visual scoring (VS) were statistically compared using the paired McNemar test.

RESULTS

Any cancer (Gleason score 6-8) was found in 12 of the 20 (60%) patients, with a median PSA level of 8.22 ng/mL. SPCa (mean [95% confidence interval, CI] ES = 17.96 [0.72] NATural information unit [NAT]) had a significantly higher ES than non-SPCa (mean [95% CI] ES = 15.33 [0.76] NAT). The ES correlated with Gleason score (r_s = 0.568, P = 0.033) and maximum cancer core length (ρ = 0.781; P < 0.001). The area under the curve for the ES (0.89) and VS (0.91) were not significantly different (P = 0.75) for the detection of SPCa amongst MRI lesions. Best ES estimated numerical threshold of 16.61 NAT led to a sensitivity of 100% and negative predictive value of 100%. The proportion of MRI lesions that were found to be positive for SPCa using this ES threshold (54%) was significantly higher (P < 0.001) than using the VS (24% of score 3, 4, 5) in a paired analysis using the McNemar test. In all, 53% of MRI lesions would have avoided biopsy sampling without missing significant disease.

CONCLUSION

Capturing heterogeneity of prostate cancer across multiple MRI sequences with the ES yielded high performances for the detection and stratification of SPCa. The ES outperformed the VS in predicting positivity of lesions, holding promise in the selection of targets for biopsy and calling for further understanding of this association.

Controversies in MR targeted biopsy: alone or combined, cognitive versus software-based fusion, transrectal versus transperineal approach?

PURPOSE

To review the evidence addressing current controversies around prostate biopsy. Specific questions explored were (1) mpMRI targeted (TgBx) alone versus combined with systematic (SBx) biopsy; (2) cognitive versus software-based targeted biopsy; (3) transrectal or transperineal route (TP).

METHODS

We performed a literature search of peer-reviewed English language articles using PubMed and the words "prostate" AND "biopsy". Web search was implemented by manual search.

RESULTS

Prostate mpMRI is revolutionizing prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis, and TgBx improves the detection of clinically significant (cs) PCa compared to SBx alone. The utility of combining SBx-TgBx is variable, but in non-expert centres the two should be combined to overcome learning curve-limitations. Whether SBx should be maintained in expert centres depends on what rate of missed cancer the urological community and patients are prone to accept; this has implications for insignificant cancer diagnosis as well. TgBx may be more precise using a software-based-approach despite cognitive TgBx proved non-inferior in some studies, and may be used for large accessible lesions. TP-biopsies are feasible in an in-office setting. Avoidance of the rectum and accessibility of virtually all prostate areas are attractive features. However, this has to be balanced with local setting and resources implications. Ongoing trials will shed light on unsolved issues.

CONCLUSION

The prostate biopsy strategy should be tailored to local expertise, needs and resources availability. Targeted biopsy enhance the ratio between cs and insignificant cancer diagnosis, although some csPCa might be missed. Software-based TgBx are likely to be more precise, especially for new users, although the additional cost might be not justified in all cases. TPBx have ideal attributes for performing TgBx and avoiding infection, although this has resources implications.

Effectiveness of the «cognitive» biopsy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer in patients with a previous negative biopsy

INTRODUCTION

Evaluation of the effectiveness of cognitive biopsy (CB) in patients with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer (PC), and at least one negative biopsy (TRB).

MATERIAL AND METHOD

Retrospective study of 144 patients with at least one previous TRB and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The MRI nodules were classified based on PI-RADS v2 grouping pZa, pZpl and pZpm as the peripheral zone(PZ), Tza, Tzp and CZ as the transitional zone (TZ), and the AS zones as the anterior zone (AZ). A biopsy was indicated for nodules ≥PI-RADS 3. Uni and multivariate analysis was undertaken (logistic regression) to identify variables relating to a PI-RADS 3 tumour on biopsy.

RESULTS

The median age was 67 (IQR: 62-72) years, the median PSA was 8.2 (IQR: 6.2-12) ng/ml. A nodule was identified on MRI in the PZ in 97 (67.4%) cases, in the TZ in 29 (20.1%), and in the AZ in 41 (28.5%). PC was diagnosed on biopsy in 64 (44%) patients. The cancer rate in the PI-RADS 3 lesions was 17.5% (7/40), in the PI-RADS 4 47.3% (35/73), and in the PI-RADS 5 lesions it was 73.3% (22/29) (p=.0001). Multivariable analysis with variables that could influence the biopsy result in patients with PI-RADS 3: None (age, PSA, number of previous biopsies, rectal examination, PSAD, prostate volume or number of extracted cylinders) behaved as an independent tumour predictor.

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnostic performance of CB in patients with at least one previous negative biopsy was 44%, increasing according to the PI-RADS grade, and low in PI-RADS 3. No clinical variable predictive of cancer was found in patients with PI-RADS 3.

Magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound fusion image-guided prostate biopsy: Current status of the cancer detection and the prospects of tailor-made medicine of the prostate cancer

Multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has been increasingly used to diagnose clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) because of its growing availability and its ability to combine anatomical and functional data. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) fusion imaging provides MRI information with TRUS images for prostate biopsies. This technique combines the superior sensitivity of MRI for targeting suspicious lesions with the practicality and familiarity of TRUS. MRI-TRUS fusion image-guided prostate biopsy is performed with different types of image registration (rigid vs. elastic) and needle tracking methods (electromagnetic tracking vs. mechanical position encoders vs. image-based software tracking). A systematic review and meta-analysis showed that MRI-targeted biopsy detected csPCa at a significantly higher rate than did TRUS-guided biopsy, while it detected significantly fewer cases of insignificant PCas. In addition to the high accuracy of MRI-targeted biopsy for csPCa, localization of csPCa is accurate. The ability to choose the route of biopsy (transperineal vs. transrectal) is required, depending on the patients' risk and the location and size of suspicious lesions on mpMRI. Fusion image-guided prostate biopsy has the potential to allow precise management of prostate cancer, including active surveillance, radical treatment, and focal therapy.

Diagnostic Accuracy of a Rapid Biparametric MRI Protocol for Detection of Histologically Proven Prostate Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the performance of a rapid, low cost, noncontrast MRI examination as a secondary screening tool in detection of clinically significant prostate cancer.

METHODS

In this prospective single institution study, 129 patients with elevated prostate-specific antigen levels or abnormal digital rectal examination findings underwent MRI with an abbreviated biparamatric MRI protocol consisting of high-resolution axial T2- and diffusion-weighted images. Index lesions were classified according to modified Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System (mPI-RADS) version 2.0. All patients underwent standard transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy after MRI with the urologist being blinded to MRI results. Subsequently, all patients with suspicious lesions (mPI-RADS 3, 4, or 5) underwent cognitively guided targeted biopsy after discussion of MRI results with the urologist. Sensitivity and negative predictive value for identification of clinically significant prostate cancer (Gleason score 3+4 and above) were determined.

RESULTS

Rapid biparametric MRI discovered 176 lesions identified in 129 patients. Rapid MRI detected clinically significant cancers with a sensitivity of 95.1% with a negative predictive value of 95.1% and positive predictive value of 53.2%, leading to a change in management in 10.8% of the patients. False negative rate of biparametric (bp) MRI was 4.7%.

CONCLUSION

We found that a bp-MRI examination can detect clinically significant lesions and changed patient management in 10.8% of the patients. A rapid MRI protocol can be used as a useful secondary screening tool in men presenting with suspicion of prostate cancer.

Distribution of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System score and diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy: comparison of an Asian and European cohort

Background

This study aimed to compare the distribution of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score and the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsy and systematic biopsy between a Chinese and a Dutch cohort.

Materials and methods

Our study includes 316 men from Shanghai Changhai Hospital, China, and 266 men from the Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. All men had a suspicion for prostate cancer (PCa) and were offered an multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) scan.

Results

The distribution of the PI-RADS score was different between the two cohorts (P = 0.008). In the Chinese cohort of PI-RADS ≥3, the detection rate for high-grade PCa (Gleason ≥7) was 37.3% by systematic biopsy and 35.5% by MRI-targeted biopsy. The sensitivity of systematic biopsy was 0.80 for PCa and 0.75 for high-grade PCa. MRI-targeted biopsy achieved slightly higher sensitivity for PCa (0.82) and high-grade PCa (0.76). In the Dutch cohort of PI-RADS ≥3, the high-grade PCa detection rate was 44.4% and 54.5% for systematic biopsy and MRI-targeted biopsy. The sensitivity of systematic biopsy was 0.93 for PCa and 0.81 for high-grade PCa. By MRI-targeted biopsy, the sensitivity was 0.85 for PCa and 0.97 for high-grade PCa.

Conclusions

The distribution of the PI-RADS score was different with more PI-RADS 4/5 in the Chinese cohort. Applying a PI-RADS ≥3 cutoff resulted in a favorable overall sensitivity. MRI-targeted biopsy showed a higher sensitivity in the detection of high-grade PCa than systematic biopsy. The sensitivity of MRI-targeted biopsy and systematic biopsy for both PCa and high-grade PCa in the Dutch cohort was superior to those in the Chinese cohort.

Prediction of prostate cancer by deep learning with multilayer artificial neural network

INTRODUCTION

To predict the rate of prostate cancer detection on prostate biopsy more accurately, the performance of deep learning using a multilayer artificial neural network was investigated.

METHODS

A total of 334 patients who underwent multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging before ultrasonography guided transrectal 12-core prostate biopsy were enrolled in the analysis. Twenty-two non-selected variables, as well as selected ones by least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (Lasso) regression analysis and by stepwise logistic regression analysis, were input into the constructed multilayer artificial neural network (ANN) programs; 232 patients were used as training cases of ANN programs and the remaining 102 patients were for the test to output the probability of prostate cancer existence, accuracy of prostate cancer prediction, and area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve with the learned model.

RESULTS

With any prostate cancer objective variable, Lasso and stepwise regression analyses selected 12 and nine explanatory variables, respectively, from 22. Using trained ANNs with multiple hidden layers, the accuracy of predicting any prostate cancer in test samples was about 5-10% higher compared to that with logistic regression analysis (LR). The area under the curves (AUC) with multilayer ANN were significantly larger on inputting variables that were selected by the stepwise LR compared with the AUC with LR. The ANN had a higher net benefit than LR between prostate cancer probability cutoff values of 0.38 and 0.6.

CONCLUSIONS

ANN accurately predicted prostate cancer without biopsy marginally better than LR. However, for clinical application, ANN performance may still need improvement.

Risk of upgrading from prostate biopsy to radical prostatectomy pathology: Is magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsy more accurate?

Background: This study compared magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsy (MRI-GB) and transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy (TRUS-GB) with the final histology of the radical prostatectomy (RP) specimen.

Methods: Our subjects were 229 patients with prostate cancer (PCa), proven histopathologically using MRI-GB or TRUS-GB, who underwent RP at our center between December 2015 and December 2016. The main group included 92 patients who underwent MRI-GB and the control group included 137 patients who underwent 12-core TRUS-GB. Histological findings for RP specimens were compared with those from biopsies. We also evaluated predictors of upgraded Gleason score (GS), using uni- and multivariate analyses.

Results: Upgraded GS between biopsy and RP specimen occurred to 22.7% (52/229) of the cohort overall. In univariate analysis, prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) (P<0.001), prostate volume (PV) < 30 ml (P<0.001), biopsy modality (P=0.027), biopsy GS (P=0.032) and measured MRI lymph node metastasis (P=0.018) were prognostic factors. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed PV < 30 ml (P<0.001) and biopsy modality (P=0.001) were independent predictors of upgraded GS.

Conclusions: MRI-GB may enhance the diagnostic accuracy of prostate cancer detection in final histopathology with lower rate of upgraded GS than TRUS-GB. Also, PV < 30 ml and biopsy modality were independent predictors of upgraded GS.

Prostate Cancers Detected by Magnetic Resonance Imaging–Targeted Biopsies Have a Higher Percentage of Gleason Pattern 4 Component and Are Less Likely to Be Upgraded in Radical Prostatectomies

Context.—

In Gleason score (GS) 7 prostate cancers, the quantity of Gleason pattern 4 (GP 4) is an important prognostic factor and influences treatment decisions. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)–targeted biopsy has been increasingly used in clinical practice.

Objective.—

To investigate whether MRI-targeted biopsy may detect GS 7 prostate cancer with greater GP 4 quantity, and whether it improves biopsy/radical prostatectomy GS concordance.

Design.—

A total of 243 patients with paired standard and MRI-targeted biopsies with cancer in either standard or targeted or both were studied, 65 of whom had subsequent radical prostatectomy. The biopsy findings, including GS and tumor volume, were correlated with the radical prostatectomy findings.

Results.—

More prostate cancers detected by MRI-targeted biopsy were GS 7 or higher. Mean GP 4 percentage in GS 7 cancers was 31.0% ± 29.3% by MRI-targeted biopsy versus 25.1% ± 29.5% by standard biopsy. A total of 122 of 218 (56.0%) and 96 of 217 (44.2%) prostate cancers diagnosed on targeted biopsy and standard biopsy, respectively, had a GP 4 of 10% or greater (P = .01). Gleason upgrading was seen in 12 of 59 cases (20.3%) from MRI-targeted biopsy and in 24 of 57 cases (42.1%) from standard biopsy (P = .01). Gleason upgrading correlated with the biopsy cancer volume inversely and GP 4 of 30% or less in standard biopsy. Such correlation was not found in MRI-targeted biopsy.

Conclusions.—

Magnetic resonance imaging–targeted biopsy may detect more aggressive prostate cancers and reduce the risk of Gleason upgrading in radical prostatectomy. This study supports a potential role for MRI-targeted biopsy in the workup of prostate cancer and inclusion of percentage of GP 4 in prostate biopsy reports.

Beyond transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsies: available techniques and approaches

OBJECTIVES

Recent advances have led to the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) alone or with fusion to transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) images for guiding biopsy of the prostate. Our group sought to develop consensus recommendations regarding MRI-guided prostate biopsy based on currently available literature and expert opinion.

METHODS

The published literature on the subject of MRI-guided prostate biopsy was reviewed using standard search terms and synthesized and analyzed by four different subgroups from among the authors. The literature was grouped into four categories-MRI-guided biopsy platforms, robotic MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy, template mapping biopsy and transrectal MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy. Consensus recommendations were developed using the Oxford Center for Evidence Based Medicine criteria.

RESULTS

There is limited high level evidence available on the subject of MRI-guided prostate biopsy. MRI guidance with or without TRUS fusion can lead to fewer unnecessary biopsies, help identify high-risk (Gleason ≥ 3 + 4) cancers that might have been missed on standard TRUS biopsy and identify cancers in the anterior prostate. There is no apparent significant difference between MRI biopsy platforms. Template mapping biopsy is perhaps the most accurate method of assessing volume and grade of tumor but is accompanied by higher incidence of side effects compared to TRUS biopsy.

CONCLUSIONS

Magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsies are feasible and better than traditional ultrasound-guided biopsies for detecting high-risk prostate cancer and anterior lesions. Judicious use of MRI-guided biopsy could enhance diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer while limiting diagnosis of insignificant cancer.

[Active surveillance in prostate cancer: Assessment of MRI in the selection and follow-up of patients]

AIM

To evaluate the contribution of multiparametric MRI (MRI) and targeted biopsies (TB) in the selection and follow-up of patients under active surveillance (AS).

METHODS

A single-center, retrospective cohort study on 131 patients in AS, with following criteria:≤cT2 stage, PSA≤15ng/mL, Gleason score≤6,≤3 positive biopsies and maximum tumor length≤5mm. Patients' selection and follow-up was performed by the combination of systemic biopsies (SB) and mpMRI±TB. Reclassification was defined by a Gleason score>6 and/or a maximum tumor length>5mm.

RESULTS

Overall, 29 patients (22.1 %) were reclassified. Reclassification free survival rate was 93 % and 70 % at 1 year and 4 years respectively. Reclassification independent risk factors were: PSA density>0.15ng/mL/cm³ (RR=2.75), PSA doubling time<3 years (RR=9.28), suspicious lesion on MRI diagnosis (RR=2.79) and occurrence of MRI progression during follow-up (RR=2). Sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of MRI to assess progression for reclassification were 61 %, 69 %, 45 % and 81 %, respectively.

CONCLUSION

For patients under AS, mpMRI decreases reclassification rates over time through better initial detection of significant cancers. Its high NPV makes it an efficient monitoring tool to distinguish patients with low risk of reclassification.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

MR-Guided Prostate Interventions

Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed noncutaneous cancer and second leading cause of death in men. Many patients with clinically organ-confined prostate cancer undergo definitive treatment of the whole gland, including radical prostatectomy, radiation therapy, and cryosurgery. Active surveillance is a growing alternative option for patients with documented low-volume and low-grade prostate cancer. However, many patients are wanting a less morbid focal treatment alternative. With recent advances in software and hardware of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), multiparametric MRI of the prostate has been shown to improve the accuracy in detecting and characterizing clinically significant prostate cancer. Targeted biopsy is increasingly utilized to improve the yield of MR detected, clinically significant prostate cancer and to decrease in detection of indolent prostate cancer. MR-guided targeted biopsy techniques include cognitive MR fusion transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) biopsy, in-bore transrectal targeted biopsy using robotic transrectal device, and in-bore direct MR-guided transperineal biopsy with a software based transperineal grid template. In addition, advances in MR-compatible thermal ablation technology allow accurate focal or regional delivery of thermal ablative energy to the biopsy-proved, MRI-detected tumor. MR-guided ablative treatment options include cryoablation, laser ablation, and high-intensity focused ultrasound with real-time or near simultaneous monitoring of the ablation zone. We present a contemporary review of MR-guided techniques for prostatic interventions.

Cancer detection rate of prebiopsy MRI with subsequent systematic and targeted biopsy are superior to non-targeting systematic biopsy without MRI in biopsy naïve patients: a retrospective cohort study

Background

To determine whether prebiopsy multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) with subsequent systematic plus targeted biopsies for suspicious lesions improve prostate cancer detection compared with standard non-targeting systematic biopsies without mpMRI in biopsy-naïve patients.

Methods

Patients who underwent their first prostate biopsy due to suspicion of prostate cancer were analyzed retrospectively to compare the biopsy outcomes between patients who received prebiopsy mpMRI (215 patients) and those who did not (281 patients). mpMRI was performed to determine pre-biopsy likelihood of the presence of prostate cancer using a three-point scale (1 = low level of suspicion, 2 = equivocal, and 3 = high level of suspicion). Systematic biopsies were performed in both groups. Targeted biopsies were added for a high level of suspicious lesions on mpMRI. All biopsies were performed by transperineal biopsy technique. After biopsy, Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System ver. 2 (PIRADS-2) scoring was performed to describe the mpMRI findings and predictive value of PIRADS-2 was evaluated.

Results

The detection rate of total and clinically significant prostate cancer was significantly higher in patients who received prebiopsy mpMRI than in those who did not (55.3 and 46.0% vs. 42.0 and 35.2%, respectively; p = 0.004 and p = 0.016). The clinically insignificant prostate cancer detection rate was similar between the two groups (9.3% vs. 6.8%; p = 0.32). Of 86 patients who underwent systematic plus targeted biopsy in the MRI cohort and were diagnosed with prostate cancer, seven patients were detected by addition of targeted biopsy whereas 29 patients were missed by targeted biopsy but detected by systematic biopsy. There was a correlation between the PIRADS-2 and prostate cancer detection rate, and a receiver-operator curve analysis yielded an area under the curve of 0.801 (p <  0.0001).

Conclusions

Prebiopsy mpMRI with subsequent systematic plus targeted biopsies for suspicious lesions can yield a higher cancer detection rate than non-targeting systematic biopsies. PIRADS-2 scoring is useful for predicting the biopsy outcome.

[Pathology findings after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer in patients eligible for active surveillance: Contribution of multiparametric MRI to treatment decision]

OBJECTIVES

To analyze, in patients with prostate cancer (PC) potentially eligible for active surveillance (AS), whether multiparametric-MRI (mp-MRI) predicts presence of clinically significant cancer on radical prostatectomy (RP) specimen.

METHODS

We identified 77 men with PC eligible for AS (PSA≤15ng/mL, stage≤T2a, Gleason score≤6, up to 3 positive cores, maximal cancer core length≤5mm) who underwent RP between 01/2008 and 08/2015. All patients had prebiopsy mp-MRI followed by systematic±targeted biopsies. For each patient, the likelihood of the presence of cancer on mp-MRI was assigned using Likert scale (1 to 5). The predictive factors for the presence of significant cancer on RP specimen (Gleason score≥7 and/or tumoral maximal diameter>10mm) were evaluated using logistic regression.

RESULTS

Median age was 61 and median PSA was 6.7ng/mL. Overall, 49 (64%) patients had a positive mp-MRI (score≥3). Clinically significant cancer on RP specimen was found in 45 (58%) patients (69% in MRI-positive patients vs 39% in MRI-negative patients). In multivariate analysis, a positive MRI was a predictive factor for the presence of significant cancer on the surgical specimen (OR=3.0; CI95% [1.01-8.88]; P=0.04), as was age (OR=1.17; CI95% [1.05-1.31]; P=0.004) and PSAD (OR=1.10; CI95% [1.01-1.20]; P=0.02).

CONCLUSION

Mp-MRI is a useful exam for selecting patients eligible for AS even if the situation remains unclear after prostate biopsies including targeted biopsies. Upon confirmation by further studies, mp-MRI should be considered as an independent criterion before entering an AS program.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

MRI-Targeted or Standard Biopsy for Prostate-Cancer Diagnosis

BACKGROUND

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), with or without targeted biopsy, is an alternative to standard transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy for prostate-cancer detection in men with a raised prostate-specific antigen level who have not undergone biopsy. However, comparative evidence is limited.

METHODS

In a multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial, we assigned men with a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer who had not undergone biopsy previously to undergo MRI, with or without targeted biopsy, or standard transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy. Men in the MRI-targeted biopsy group underwent a targeted biopsy (without standard biopsy cores) if the MRI was suggestive of prostate cancer; men whose MRI results were not suggestive of prostate cancer were not offered biopsy. Standard biopsy was a 10-to-12-core, transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy. The primary outcome was the proportion of men who received a diagnosis of clinically significant cancer. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of men who received a diagnosis of clinically insignificant cancer.

RESULTS

A total of 500 men underwent randomization. In the MRI-targeted biopsy group, 71 of 252 men (28%) had MRI results that were not suggestive of prostate cancer, so they did not undergo biopsy. Clinically significant cancer was detected in 95 men (38%) in the MRI-targeted biopsy group, as compared with 64 of 248 (26%) in the standard-biopsy group (adjusted difference, 12 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4 to 20; P=0.005). MRI, with or without targeted biopsy, was noninferior to standard biopsy, and the 95% confidence interval indicated the superiority of this strategy over standard biopsy. Fewer men in the MRI-targeted biopsy group than in the standard-biopsy group received a diagnosis of clinically insignificant cancer (adjusted difference, -13 percentage points; 95% CI, -19 to -7; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of risk assessment with MRI before biopsy and MRI-targeted biopsy was superior to standard transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy in men at clinical risk for prostate cancer who had not undergone biopsy previously. (Funded by the National Institute for Health Research and the European Association of Urology Research Foundation; PRECISION ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02380027 .).

Primary magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasonography fusion-guided biopsy of the prostate

OBJECTIVE

To examine the performance of a primary magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/ultrasonography (US) fusion-guided targeted biopsy (TB), and in combination with an added systematic biopsy (SB).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Analysis of 318 consecutive biopsy-naïve men with suspicious multiparametric MRI (mpMRI; Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System [PI-RADS] score ≥3) undergoing transrectal TB and 10-core SB between January 2012 and December 2016. The indication for performing mpMRI was based on clinical parameters and decided by the treating urologist before admission. TB was performed with a sensor-based MRI/US fusion-guided platform. Clinically significant prostate cancer was defined as Gleason score ≥4 + 3 = 7 (International Society of Urological Pathology Grade [ISUP] grade 3) or maximum cancer core length of ≥6 mm.

RESULTS

A median (interquartile range) of 14 (13-14) biopsies per case were taken. The overall cancer detection rate (CDR) was 77% (245/318). The TB alone detected 67% of prostate cancers and the SB alone detected 70%. The PI-RADS dependent CDR for the combination of TB/SB were 38% (21/55), 78% (120/154) and 95% (104/109) for PI-RADS scores of 3/4/5, respectively. Clinically significant prostate cancer was diagnosed by the combination of TB and SB in 195 men (61%) and by TB alone in 163 cases (51%). The number of missed or underestimated prostate cancers with a Gleason score ≥8 for TB alone was 31 (10%, P < 0.001) and 21 (7%, P < 0.001) for SB alone in comparison with the results of the combination of TB and SB. The rate of insignificant prostate cancer was comparable for the combination of TB and SB and TB alone (50/318, 16% vs 50/318, 16%).

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-biopsy mpMRI is of incremental value in increasing the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer in biopsy-naïve patients with suspicion of prostate cancer. Combining TB with SB further improved the diagnostic accuracy without increasing the rate of insignificant prostate cancer.

Multiparametric (mp) MRI of prostate cancer

Prostate cancer (PCa) is one of the most prevalent cancers in men. A large number of men are detected with PCa; however, the clinical behavior ranges from low-grade indolent tumors that never develop into a clinically significant disease to aggressive, invasive tumors that may rapidly progress to metastatic disease. The challenges in clinical management of PCa are at levels of screening, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up after treatment. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) methods have shown a potential role in detection, localization, staging, assessment of aggressiveness, targeting biopsies, etc. in PCa patients. Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) is emerging as a better option compared to the individual imaging methods used in the evaluation of PCa. There are attempts to improve the reproducibility and reliability of mpMRI by using an objective scoring system proposed in the prostate imaging reporting and data system (PIRADS) for standardized reporting. Prebiopsy mpMRI may be used to detect PCa in men with elevated prostate-specific antigen or abnormal digital rectal examination and to enable targeted biopsies. mpMRI can also be used to decide on clinical management of patients, for example active surveillance, and may help in detecting only the pathology that requires detection. It can potentially not only guide patient selection for initial and repeat biopsy but also reduce false-negative biopsies. This review presents a description of the MR methods most commonly applied for investigations of prostate. The anatomical, functional and metabolic parameters obtained from these MR methods are discussed with regard to their physical basis and their contribution to mpMRI investigations of PCa.

Cognitive-Targeted versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Guided Prostate Biopsy in Prostate Cancer Detection

Introduction

Purpose of this study is to evaluate the detection rates of prostate cancer (PCa) for cognitive-targeted biopsy (CTB) in comparison with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided biopsy (MRGB) related to prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) score, lesion location and lesion volume. Furthermore, the addition of systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS-GB) to CTB is evaluated.

Materials and Methods

We included all patients with cancer-suspicious lesions on 3-Tesla multiparametric MRI who underwent either CTB and additional TRUS-GB or only MRGB (in-bore) in Haga Teaching Hospital between January 2013 and January 2015.

Results

In total 219 patients were included: 64 CTB + TRUS-GB and 155 MRGB. In 32 (50%) men with CTB was positive for PCa. PI-RADS 3-, 4- and 5-lesions were in 17, 69 and 95% positive, respectively. In 100 men (65%) with MRGB was positive for PCa. Detection rates for PI-RADS 3-, 4- and 5-lesions were 10, 77 and 89%, respectively. CTB missed 4 (11%) low-grade tumors detected by TRUS-GB. In lesions between 0-1.5 ml PCa were significantly more often detected with MRGB than with CTB (69 vs. 39%).

Conclusion

CTB has a high detection rate of PCa in men with cancer-suspicious lesions on MRI. Correction for lesion volume shows that in lesions < 1.5 ml MRGB is more accurate than CTB. The addition of TRUS-GB to CTB can safely be avoided without missing any high grade PCa.

Clinical and pathologic factors predicting reclassification in active surveillance cohorts

The incidence of small, lower risk well-differentiated prostate cancer is increasing and almost half of the patients with this diagnosis are candidates for initial conservative management in an attempt to avoid overtreatment and morbidity associated with surgery or radiation. A proportion of patients labeled as low risk, candidates for Active Surveillance (AS), harbor aggressive disease and would benefit from definitive treatment. The focus of this review is to identify clinicopathologic features that may help identify these less optimal AS candidates. A systematic Medline/PubMed Review was performed in January 2017 according to PRISMA guidelines; 83 articles were selected for full text review according to their relevance and after applying limits described. For patients meeting AS criteria including Gleason Score 6, several factors can assist in predicting those patients that are at higher risk for reclassification including higher PSA density, bilateral cancer, African American race, small prostate volume and low testosterone. Nomograms combining these features improve risk stratification. Clinical and pathologic features provide a significant amount of information for risk stratification (>70%) for patients considering active surveillance. Higher risk patient subgroups can benefit from further evaluation or consideration of treatment. Recommendations will continue to evolve as data from longer term AS cohorts matures.

Anatomic and Molecular Imaging in Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer is characterized by a complex set of heterogeneous disease states. This review aims to describe how imaging has been studied within each specific state. As physicians transition into an era of precision medicine, multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is proving to be a powerful tool leading the way for a paradigm shift in the diagnosis and management of localized prostate cancer. With further research and development, molecular imaging modalities will likely change the way we approach recurrent and metastatic disease. Given the range of possible oncological progression patterns, a thorough understanding of the underlying carcinogenesis, as it relates to imaging, is a requisite if we are to appropriately manage prostate cancer in future decades.

What is an acceptable false negative rate in the detection of prostate cancer?

Background

In prostate cancer (PCa) screening men and their physicians aim to rule out the presence of potentially life threatening PCa. To date, prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing and systematic prostate biopsy (Bx)—in case of an elevated PSA—are still the main modes of PCa detection. Often uncertainty remains when a PSA-test is <3.0 ng/mL or a Bx shows a benign result, leading to the continuous repeating of procedures. Here we assess the potential consequences of false negatives by studying follow-up data of a purely PSA-based approach with applying sextant Bx, an approach considered to have a high risk of missing PCa diagnosis.

Methods

Our study population consisted of 19,970 men from the ERSPC project section Rotterdam, initially screened in 1993–1999. We assessed clinically significant Gleason ≥3+4 PCa (csPCa) diagnosis within the 4-year screening interval and subsequent screening round 4 years later in men having a PSA <3.0 ng/mL at initial screening (no Bx) and men with Bx (PSA >3.0 ng/mL), but no PCa detected at that time. In addition, we addressed PCa mortality and PCa diagnosis for men with a negative PSA test and negative Bx, who were retested every 4 years covering a 15-year follow-up.

Results

A total of 14,935 men had PSA <3.0 ng/mL in the initial screening round, of whom 75 (0.5%) were diagnosed with csPCa at a subsequent screening examination and 2 (<0.1%) in the 4-year screening interval. For 2,260 men with a previously negative Bx at first screening, the figures were 17 (0.8%) and 2 (0.1%) respectively. Indolent PCa (Gleason ≤3+3) was diagnosed in 312 (2%) men with PSA <3.0 ng/mL initially and 115 (5%) men with initial negative Bx. After a 15-year follow-up, 45 (0.3%) PCa deaths occurred in men with initially low PSA, and 29 men (0.2%) had metastasis. For men with negative Bx, 11 (0.5%) PCa deaths occurred and 4 (0.2%) experienced metastasis.

Conclusions

The false negative rates for men with PSA <3.0 ng/mL and negative sextant Bx are extremely low but not negligible. Proper risk stratification before deciding to biopsy is expected to hardly miss any clinical significant PCa diagnosis. This is especially relevant with the increased use of the relatively expensive multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) guided targeted Bx procedures.

Assessment of Needle Tip Deflection During Transrectal Guided Prostate Biopsy: Implications for Targeted Biopsies

OBJECTIVES

To measure needle tip deflection during transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) prostate biopsy and evaluate predictors for needle tip deflection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Analysis of 568 prostate biopsies obtained from 51 consecutive patients who underwent a standard 12-core TRUS guided prostate biopsy. TRUS guided prostate biopsies were performed using BK flex500, with a side-fire biplane probe. Each biopsy core image was captured and clinical data were recorded prospectively. The angle between the expected trajectory of the needle and actual needle course was measured using the longitudinal view of the captured image. The distance between expected and actual needle tip was calculated. We measured median and interquartile needle tip deflection rate stratified by side and location (apex, midgland, base). Univariable and multivariable linear regressions analysis were performed.

RESULTS

The overall median needle tip deflection was 1.77 mm (IQR 1.35-2.47). Location did not significantly alter needle deflection measurements. On multivariable linear regression analysis, higher prostate volume (B = 0.007 95%, CI 0.004, 0.011; p < 0.001) and the right sided biopsy (B = 0.191 95%, CI 0.047, 0.336; p = 0.010) emerged as predictors of higher needle tip deflection.

CONCLUSIONS

To the best of our knowledge this is the first study to measure needle tip deflection during TRUS guided prostate biopsies. We demonstrated that larger prostate size and biopsy side may affect the accuracy of biopsies. These results may have clinical implication to those performing targeted biopsies.

Diagnostic performance of 68Gallium-PSMA-11 PET/CT to detect significant prostate cancer and comparison with 18FEC PET/CT

Background

Radiolabeled prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) has proven to be a highly accurate method to detect recurrence and metastases of prostate cancer, but only sparse data is available about its performance in the diagnosis of clinically significant primary prostate cancer.

Methods

We compared ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT in 25 patients with ¹⁸FEC PET/CT in 40 patients with suspected prostate carcinoma based on an increased PSA level.The PET/CT results were compared with the histopathologic Gleason Score (GS) of biopsies.

Results

The ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT revealed highly suspect prostatic lesions (maximum standardized uptake value/SUV_max >2.5) in 21/25 patients (84%), associated with GS≥6 (low-grade/high-grade carcinoma). Two histopathologic non-malignancy-relevant cases (GS<6) had PSMA-SUV_max ≤2.5; all histopathologic high-grade cases (GS≥7b) showed PSMA-SUV_max >12.0 which further increased with rising GS. There were 2 false positives and no false negative findings for high-grade prostate cancer using a cut off-level for SUV_max of 2.5.In contrast, the ¹⁸FEC PET/CT showed suspected malignant lesions in 38/40 patients (95%), which included 3 lesions with GS<6. The mean SUV_max values did not differ with different GS. There were 11 false positives and 1 false negative for detection of high-grade prostate cancer (cut off 2.5).By means of ROC analysis a SUV_max of 5.4 was found to be an optimal cut off-level to distinguish between low- and high-grade carcinoma in ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT (AUC=0.9692; 95% CI 0.9086;1.0000;SD(AUC)=0.0309)). Choosing a cut off-level of SUV_max5.4, ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT was able to distinguish between GS ≤7a/≥7b with a sensitivity of 84%, a specificity of 100%, a negative predictive value (NPV) of 67%, and an efficiency of 88% (p<0.001).The ROC analysis revealed a SUV_max 6.5 as an optimal cut off-level to distinguish between low- and high-grade carcinoma in ¹⁸FEC PET/CT (AUC=0.7470; 95% CI 0.5919;0.9020;SD(AUC)=0.0791) with a sensitivity of 61% and a specificity of 92%; but the efficiency was only 70% and the NPV 50% (p=0.01).

Conclusion

⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT guided biopsy of the prostate increases diagnostic precision and is likely to help to reduce overtreatment of low-grade malignant disease as well as detect the foci of the highest Gleason pattern. Both methods (⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-11,¹⁸FEC) were suitable to detect primary prostate cancer, but the excellent image quality, the higher specificity and the good correlation of positive scans with GS are advantages of ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-11.

[Prostate cancer diagnostic by saturation randomized biopsy versus rigid targeted biopsy]

INTRODUCTION

Optimal diagram teaming up randomized biopsy (BR) to targeted biopsy (BC) is still missing for the diagnostic of prostate cancer (CP). This study compares diagram of 6, 12 or 18 BR with or without BC rigid.

METHODS

Between January 2014 and May 2016, 120 patients had prostate biopsy BR and BC. Each patient had 18 BR and BC. Results compared sextant (6 BR), standard (12 BR) and saturation (18 BR) protocol with or without the adding of BC for the detection of CP.

RESULTS

Rectal examination was normal, mean PSA at 8.99ng/mL and mean volume at 54cm³. It was first round for 48% of patients. Forty-four cancers were found by the group 18 BR+BC (control). The detection rate was respectively, for 6, 12 and 18 BR of 61%, 82% and 91%. The add of BC increased this detection of +27% for 6 BR+BC, +13% for 12 BR+BC and +9% for 18 BR+BC. BC found 70% of all CP. Nine percent of CP were missed by BR only. Significant CP (Gleason≥7) diagnostic was the same for 12 BR+BC and 18 BR+BC.

CONCLUSION

The add of BC to BR increase the detection of CP by 10%. Twelve BR+BC is the optimal diagram for the diagnostic of CP finding 95% of CP and 97% of significant CP.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for transition zone prostate cancer: essential findings, limitations, and future directions

OBJECTIVE

Review the multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) findings of transition zone (TZ) prostate cancer (PCa) using T2-weighted imaging (T2WI), diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), and dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI and to integrate mpMRI findings with clinical history, laboratory values, and histopathology.

CONCLUSION

TZ prostate tumors are challenging to detect clinically and at MRI. mpMRI using the combination of sequences has the potential to improve accuracy of TZ cancer detection and staging.

Multicentre evaluation of targeted and systematic biopsies using magnetic resonance and ultrasound image-fusion guided transperineal prostate biopsy in patients with a previous negative biopsy

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the detection rates of targeted and systematic biopsies in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasound (US) image-fusion transperineal prostate biopsy for patients with previous benign transrectal biopsies in two high-volume centres.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A two centre prospective outcome study of 487 patients with previous benign biopsies that underwent transperineal MRI/US fusion-guided targeted and systematic saturation biopsy from 2012 to 2015. Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) was reported according to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) Version 1. Detection of Gleason score 7-10 prostate cancer on biopsy was the primary outcome. Positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values including 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated. Detection rates of targeted and systematic biopsies were compared using McNemar's test.

RESULTS

The median (interquartile range) PSA level was 9.0 (6.7-13.4) ng/mL. PI-RADS 3-5 mpMRI lesions were reported in 343 (70%) patients and Gleason score 7-10 prostate cancer was detected in 149 (31%). The PPV (95% CI) for detecting Gleason score 7-10 prostate cancer was 0.20 (±0.07) for PI-RADS 3, 0.32 (±0.09) for PI-RADS 4, and 0.70 (±0.08) for PI-RADS 5. The NPV (95% CI) of PI-RADS 1-2 was 0.92 (±0.04) for Gleason score 7-10 and 0.99 (±0.02) for Gleason score ≥4 + 3 cancer. Systematic biopsies alone found 125/138 (91%) Gleason score 7-10 cancers. In patients with suspicious lesions (PI-RADS 4-5) on mpMRI, systematic biopsies would not have detected 12/113 significant prostate cancers (11%), while targeted biopsies alone would have failed to diagnose 10/113 (9%). In equivocal lesions (PI-RADS 3), targeted biopsy alone would not have diagnosed 14/25 (56%) of Gleason score 7-10 cancers, whereas systematic biopsies alone would have missed 1/25 (4%). Combination with PSA density improved the area under the curve of PI-RADS from 0.822 to 0.846.

CONCLUSION

In patients with high probability mpMRI lesions, the highest detection rates of Gleason score 7-10 cancer still required combined targeted and systematic MRI/US image-fusion; however, systematic biopsy alone may be sufficient in patients with equivocal lesions. Repeated prostate biopsies may not be needed at all for patients with a low PSA density and a negative mpMRI read by experienced radiologists.

MRI/US fusion-guided biopsy: performing exclusively targeted biopsies for the early detection of prostate cancer

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to validate the role of MR/Ultrasound Fusion-Guided Targeted Biopsy as a first diagnostic modality in subjects with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

108 men (age range 46-78 years) with clinical suspicion for PCa (PSA > 4 ng/mL) underwent multiparametric MRI of the prostate (mpMRI) and, when suspicious lesion were found (according to the PIRADSv2 scoring system), targeted biopsy was performed. All patients without significant alteration patterns at mpMRI have been referred for follow-up at 1 year.

RESULTS

91/108 patients showed on the mpMRI highly suspicious lesions (PIRADS 4 and 5); the remaining 17/108 patients revealed no significant alteration consistent with PCa (PIRADS 3). Among the first group of patients, 58/91 proved to be positive for PCa on the pathology report: 24 patients had a Gleason Score (GS) 6 (3 + 3); 18 patients GS 7 of which 7 (3 + 4) and 11 (4 + 3); 14 patients GS 8 (4 + 4); two patients GS 9 (5 + 4); 33 proved to be negative. Overall cancer detection rate (CDR) was 63%. However, the CDR rises significantly, up to 77%, after the 53 initial consecutive biopsies that were performed (p < 0,05) and thus identified as part of the learning curve. Patients of the second group (17/108) have been followed with serial PSA assessments, clinical reevaluation, and follow-up mpMRI.

CONCLUSION

Performing exclusively targeted MR/Ultrasound Fusion-Guided biopsies for the diagnosis of PCa in patients with suspicious PSA levels (> 4 ng/mL) increases the detection rate of clinically significant cancer, changing both the therapeutic options and the prognosis.

Accuracy of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis

The goals of this meta-analysis were to assess the effectiveness of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) in patients with prostate carcinoma (PCa) and to explore the risk profiles with the highest benefit. Systematic electronic searched were conducted in database. We used patient-based and biopsy-based pooled weighted estimates of the sensitivity, specificity, and a summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve for assessing the diagnostic performance of DCE. We performed direct and indirect comparisons of DCE and other methods of imaging. A total of 26 articles met the inclusion criteria for the analysis. DCE-MRI pooled sensitivity was 0.53 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.67), with a specificity of 0.88 (95% CI 0.83 to 0.92) on whole gland. The peripheral zone pooled sensitivity was 0.70 (95% CI 0.46 to 0.86), with a specificity of 0.88 (95% CI 0.76 to 0.94). Compared with T2-weighted imaging (T2WI), DCE was statistically superior to T2. In conclusion, DCE had relatively high specificity in detecting PCa but relatively low sensitivity as a complementary functional method. DCE-MRI might help clinicians exclude cases of normal tissue and serve as an adjunct to conventional imaging when seeking to identify tumor foci in patients with PCa.

[Indications and limits of ablative therapies in prostate cancer]

OBJECTIVE

To perform a state of the art about indications and limits of ablative therapies for localized prostate cancer.

METHODS

A review of the scientific literature was performed in Medline database (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov) and Embase (http://www.embase.com) using different associations of keywords. Publications obtained were selected based on methodology, language and relevance. After selection, 107 articles were analysed.

RESULTS

The objective to combine reduction of side effects and oncological control has induced recent development of several ablative therapies. Beyond this heterogeneity, some preferential indications appear: unilateral cancer of low risk (but with significant volume, excluding active surveillance) or intermediate risk (excluding majority of grade 4); treatment targeted the index lesion, by quarter or hemi-ablation, based on biopsy and mpMRI. In addition, indications must considered specific limits of each energy, such as gland volume and tumor localization.

CONCLUSION

Based on new imaging and biopsy, ablative therapies will probably increased its role in the future in management of localize prostate cancer. The multiple ongoing trials will certainly be helpful to better define their indications and limits.

Transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy for prostate cancer detection: Systematic and/or magnetic-resonance imaging-targeted

INTRODUCTION

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is being more widely used in the detection of prostate cancer (PCa), particularly after an initial negative biopsy. In this study, we compared 12-core systematic biopsy (SYS), MRI-targeted biopsy (TAR), and the association of systematic and MRI-targeted (SYS+TAR) prostate biopsy in patients with previous biopsy and those who were biopsy-naive to evaluate the differences in terms of cancer detection and clinically significant cancer detection between the three modalities.

METHODS

Overall, 203 consecutive patients with suspicion of PCa were analyzed; 48.2% were biopsy-naive and 51.7% had at least one previous negative prostate biopsy. The median age was 66 years, median prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level was 7.9 ng/mL and median prostate volume was 46 mL. 38.9% had SYS, 19.2% TAR only, and 41.8% had SYS+TAR biopsy.

RESULTS

Overall, the PCa detection (PCaDR) was 63%. The SYS+TAR biopsy detected significantly more cancer than SYS and TAR only biopsies (72.9% vs. 56.9% and 53.8% respectively; p=0.03). Detection rate of clinically significant cancer (csPCaDR) was 50.7% overall; 65.8% in the SYS+TAR biopsy vs. 39.2% in the SYS and 48.7% in the TAR groups (p=0.002). In the biopsy-naive group, PCaDR and csPCaDR were significantly higher in the SYS+TAR group than in the SYS and TAR groups (p=0.01). In the repeat biopsy group, PCaDR and csPCaDR were equivalent in the TAR and SYS+TAR groups and higher than in the SYS group (p=0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

TAR biopsy, when added to SYS biopsy, was associated with a higher detection rate of csPCa in biopsy-naive patients when compared to TAR and SYS only biopsies. In patients after previous negative biopsy, detection rates of csPCa were equivalent for SYS+TAR and TAR only biopsies, but higher than SYS.