High diagnostic ability of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging to detect anterior prostate cancer missed by transrectal 12-core biopsy

Inter-Reader Variability Using PI-RADS v2 Versus PI-RADS v2.1: Most New Disagreement Stems from Scores 1 and 2

PURPOSE

To analyze possible differences in the inter-reader variability between PI-RADS version 2 (v2) and version 2.1 (v2.1) for the classification of prostate lesions using multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) of the prostate.

METHODS

In this retrospective and randomized study, 239 annotated and histopathologically correlated prostate lesions (104 positive and 135 negative for prostate cancer) were rated twice by three experienced uroradiologists using PI-RADS v2 and v2.1 with an interval of at least two months between readings. Results were tabulated across readers and reading timepoints and inter-reader variability was determined using Fleiss' kappa (κ). Thereafter, an additional analysis of the data was performed in which PI-RADS scores 1 and 2 were combined, as they have the same clinical consequences.

RESULTS

PI-PI-RADS v2.1 showed better inter-reader agreement in the peripheral zone (PZ), but poorer inter-reader agreement in the transition zone (TZ) (PZ: κ = 0.63 vs. κ = 0.58; TZ: κ = 0.47 vs. κ = 0.57). When PI-RADS scores 1 and 2 were combined, the use of PI-RADS v2.1 resulted in almost perfect inter-reader agreement in the PZ and substantial agreement in the TZ (PZ: κ = 0.81; TZ: κ = 0.80).

CONCLUSION

PI-RADS v2.1 improves inter-reader agreement in the PZ. New differences in inter-reader agreement were mainly the result of the assignment of PI-RADS v2.1 scores 1 and 2 to lesions in the TZ. Combining scores 1 and 2 improved inter-reader agreement both in the TZ and in the PZ, indicating that refined definitions may be warranted for these PI-RADS scores.

KEY POINTS

· PI-RADSv2.1 improves inter-reader agreement in the PZ but not in the TZ.. · New differences derived from PI-RADSv2.1 scores 1 and 2 in the TZ.. · Combined PI-RADSv2.1 scores of 1 and 2 yielded better inter-reader agreement.. · PI-RADSv2.1 appears to provide more precise description of lesions in the PZ.. · Improved inter-reader agreement in the PZ stresses the importance of appropriate lexicon description..

CITATION FORMAT

· Beetz N, Haas M, Baur A et al. Inter-Reader Variability Using PI-RADS v2 Versus PI-RADS v2.1: Most New Disagreement Stems from Scores 1 and 2. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2022; 194: 852 - 861.

Transrectal ultrasound features and biopsy outcomes of transition PI-RADS 5

BACKGROUND

Transition Prostate Imaging and Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) 5 is easily detected owing to typical magnetic resonance imaging features. However, it is unclear as to how transition PI-RADS 5 appears on transrectal ultrasound (TRUS).

PURPOSE

To assess TRUS features of transition PI-RADS 5 and outcomes of TRUS-guided target biopsy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between March 2014 and November 2018, 186 male patients underwent TRUS-guided biopsy of PI-RADS 5. Of them, 82 and 104were transition and peripheral PI-RADS 5, respectively. Transition and peripheral PI-RADS 5 were compared according to echogenicity (hyperechoic or hypoechoic) and hypoechoic rim (present or absent). Each tumor was targeted with TRUS based on TRUS features. Significant (Gleason score ≥7) and insignificant (Gleason score 6) cancer detection rates (CDRs) were compared between transition and peripheral PI-RADS 5. Standard reference was biopsy examination. Fisher's exact test was used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Transition PI-RADS 5 was hyperechoic in 89.0% (73/82) and had a hypoechoic rim in 97.6% (80/82), whereas peripheral PI-RADS 5 was hypoechoic in 99.0% (103/104) and had a hypoechoic rim in 26.9% (28/104) (both, P<0.0001). The significant CDRs of transition and peripheral PI-RADS 5 were 56.1% (46/82) and 65.4% (68/104), respectively (P=0.2263). However, the insignificant CDRs of these categories were 22.0% (18/82) and 8.7% (9/104), respectively (P=0.0123).

CONCLUSION

Transition PI-RADS 5 tends to have hyperechoic echogenicity and a hypoechoic rim. These findings help to target the transition PI-RADS 5 using TRUS. However, transition PI-RADS 5 is confirmed more frequently as insignificant cancer than peripheral PI-RADS 5.

Do all patients with suspicious prostate cancer need Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging before prostate biopsy?

OBJECTIVES

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is a useful tool to diagnose prostate cancer (PCa) but its cost is not negligible. In order to reduce costs and minimize time to diagnosis, it is necessary to establish which patients benefit the most from doing mpMRI prior to prostate biopsy (PB). Our aim was to test if mpMRI still predicts PCa and clinically significant PCa (csPCa) in patients with high clinical suspicion of cancer, defined as prostate specific antigen (PSA) > 10 ng/ml, PSA-Density (PSAD) > 0.15 ng/ml/cc or suspicious digital rectal examination (DRE).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively collected data on 206 patients who underwent mpMRI before PB at our Department from January 2017 to July 2018. mpMRI results were classified using Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2. In primary analysis, we evaluated the association of mpMRI with PCa and csPCa and stratified this model for low and high clinical suspicion of cancer. In secondary analysis, we determined the rate of negative PB results in patients with high suspicion of cancer and compared theses rates with those obtained if only those with PI-RADS 3-5 would be biopsied.

RESULTS

In primary analysis and overall, mpMRI was predictive of PCa and csPCa. In stratified analysis, mpMRI was still significantly associated with csPCa in patients with PSA > 10 ng/ml and PSAD > 0.15 ng/ml/cc, but not in those with suspicious DRE. In secondary analysis, negative result rates were lower if only patients with PI-RADS 3-5 were biopsied, even in subgroups with high suspicion of cancer based on PSA and PSAD. In patients with suspicious DRE, however, the rate of negative results did not change significantly if only patients with PI-RADS 3-5 were biopsied.

CONCLUSIONS

mpMRI is still useful in predicting csPCa in patients with PSA > 10 ng/mL and PSAD > 0.15 ng/ml/cc. If DRE is suspicious, though, mpMRI might be no longer useful in the prediction of PCa.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound guided fusion biopsy of prostate for cancer detection-Comparing transrectal with transperineal approaches

Targeted biopsy using multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging increases the detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer (csCaP). In this meta-analysis, we compare the diagnostic accuracy of transrectal (TR) vs transperineal (TP) approaches for MRI-guided software fusion biopsy (FB) in the detection of csCaP. A literature search was performed in PubMed, Cochrane and Embase electronic databases up until July 2019 following the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis system. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of either approach was evaluated using radical prostatectomy or systematic biopsies with ≥24 biopsy cores to be the reference standard. Fourteen papers with a total of 2002 patients were selected. Seven hundred and sixty-five patients underwent TR FB, while 1,387 underwent TP FB. One hundred and fifty of the patients underwent both TR and TP approaches. Both approaches were similar in terms of sensitivity (TR vs. TP: 0.81 vs 0.80) and specificity (TR vs. TP: 0.99 vs 0.95). In terms of likelihood ratios and diagnostic odds ratio, TR performed better than TP approach. The area under the receiving operator curve for both approaches was similar (0.91 vs 0.88 respectively). However, there was substantial heterogeneity across the studies for both approaches. TP and TR approaches to software-based FB yield similar diagnostic performance for the detection of csCaP. When deciding on the approach, physicians should consider other inherent features of either technique that suit their practice.

"In-Bore" MRI-Guided Prostate Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: Results from 140 Consecutive Patients

Objectives

Transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS-GB) is the current reference standard procedure for diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa) but this procedure has limitations related to the low detection rate (DR) described in the literature. The aim of the study was to evaluate the DR efficiency, and complication rate in a pure "in-bore" magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsy (MRI-GB) series according to the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System, version 2 (PI-RADS v2).

Materials and Methods

From July 2015 to April 2018, a series of 142 consecutive patients undergoing MRI-GB were prospectively enrolled. According to the European Society of Urogenital Radiology guidelines, the presence of clinically significant PCa (csPCa) on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging was defined as equivocal, likely, or highly likely according to a PI-RADS v2, score of 3, 4, or 5, respectively.

Results

Of 142 patients, 76 (53.5%) were biopsy naive and 66 (46.5%) had ≤ 1 previous negative set of random TRUS-GB findings. The MRI-GB findings were positive in 75 of 142 patients with a DR of 52.8%. Of the 76 patients with ≤ 1 previous set of TRUS-GB, 43 had PCa found by MRI-GB, with a DR of 57.3%. The DR in the 66 biopsy-naive patients was 48% (32/66). Of the 75 patients with positive biopsy findings, 54 (80.5%) were found to have csPCa on histological examination. Of these 54 patients, 28 had an International Society of Urological Pathology grade 2; 5 had grade 3, 19 had grade 4, and 2 had grade 5. Considering the anatomic distribution of the index lesions using the PI-RADS v2 scheme, the probability of PCa was greater for lesions located in the peripheral zone (55 of 75, 73.3%) than for those in the central zone (20 of 75, 26.7%).

Conclusions

Our study conducted on 142 patients confirmed the greater DR of csPCa by MRI-GB, with a very low number of cores needed and a negligible incidence of complications, especially in patients with a previous negative biopsy. MRI-GB is optimal for the diagnosis of anterior and central lesions.

Comparison of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-stratified Clinical Pathways and Systematic Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Biopsy Pathway for the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

CONTEXT

Recent studies suggested that magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) followed by targeted biopsy ("MRI-stratified pathway") detects more clinically significant prostate cancers (csPCa) than the systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TRUS-Bx) pathway, but controversy persists. Several randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were recently published, enabling generation of higher-level evidence to evaluate this hypothesis.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs comparing the detection rates of csPCa in the MRI-stratified pathway and the systematic TRUS-Bx pathway in patients with a suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched up to March 18, 2019. RCTs reporting csPCa detection rates of both pathways in patients with a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer were included. Relative csPCa detection rates of the MRI-stratified pathway were pooled using random-effect model. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials. A comparison of detection rates of clinically insignificant PCa (cisPCa) and any PCa was also performed.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Nine RCTs (2908 patients) were included. The MRI-stratified pathway detected more csPCa than the TRUS-Bx pathway (relative detection rate 1.45 [95% confidence interval {CI} 1.09-1.92] for all patients, and 1.42 [95% CI 1.02-1.97] and 1.60 [95% CI 1.01-2.54] for biopsy-naïve and prior negative biopsy patients, respectively). Detection rates were not significantly different between pathways for cisPCa (0.89 [95% CI 0.49-1.62]), but higher in the MRI-stratified pathway for the detection of any PCa (1.39 [95% CI 1.05-1.84]).

CONCLUSIONS

The MRI-stratified pathway detected more csPCa than the systematic TRUS-guided biopsy pathway in men with a clinical suspicion of PCa, for both biopsy-naïve patients and those with prior negative biopsy. The detection rate of any PCa was higher in the MRI-stratified pathway, but not significantly different from that of cisPCa.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Our meta-analysis of clinical trials shows that the magnetic resonance imaging-stratified pathway detects more clinically significant prostate cancers than the transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy pathway in men with a suspicion of prostate cancer.

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.

The Value of an Extensive Transrectal Repeat Biopsy with Anterior Sampling in Men on Active Surveillance for Low-risk Prostate Cancer: A Comparison from the Randomised Study of Active Monitoring in Sweden (SAMS)

BACKGROUND

A systematic repeat biopsy is recommended for men starting on active surveillance for prostate cancer, but the optimal number and distribution of cores are unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate an extensive repeat transrectal biopsy with anterior sampling in men starting on active surveillance.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Randomised multicentre trial. From 2012 to 2016, 340 Swedish men, aged 40-75yr, with recently diagnosed low-volume Gleason grade group 1 prostate cancer were included.

INTERVENTION

Either an extensive transrectal biopsy with anterior sampling (median 19 cores) or a standard transrectal biopsy (median 12 cores).

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Primary outcome measure: Gleason grade group ≥2 cancer.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

Cancer in anteriorly directed biopsy cores and postbiopsy infection. Nonparametric statistical tests were applied.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Gleason grade group ≥2 cancer was detected in 16% of 156 men who had an extensive biopsy and in 10% of 164 men who had a standard biopsy, a 5.7% difference (95% confidence interval [CI]-0.2% to 13%, p=0.09). There was a strong linear association between prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density and cancer in the anteriorly directed biopsy cores. The odds ratios for cancer in the anteriorly directed cores were for any cancer 2.2 (95% CI 1.3-3.9, p=0.004) and for Gleason grade group ≥2 cancer 2.3 (95% CI 1.2-4.4, p=0.015) per 0.1-ng/ml/cm³ increments. Postbiopsy infections were equally common in the two groups. A limitation is that magnetic resonance imaging was not used.

CONCLUSIONS

The trial did not support general use of the extensive transrectal repeat biopsy template, but cancer in the anteriorly directed cores was common, particularly in men with high PSA density. The higher the PSA density, the stronger the reason to include anterior sampling at a systematic repeat biopsy.

PATIENT SUMMARY

This trial compared two different templates for transrectal prostate biopsy in men starting on active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer. Cancer was often found in the front part of the prostate, which is not sampled on a standard prostate biopsy.

Rethinking active surveillance for prostate cancer in African American men

Active surveillance (AS) is a treatment modality for prostate cancer that aims to simultaneously avoid overtreatment and allow for the timely intervention of localized disease. AS has become the de facto standard of care for most men with low-risk prostate cancer. However, few African American (AA) men were included in the prospective observational cohorts that resulted in a paradigm shift in treatment recommendations from active intervention toward AS. It has been established that AA men have an increased prostate cancer incidence, higher baseline prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values, more aggressive prostate cancer features, greater frequency of biochemical recurrence after treatment, and higher overall cancer-specific mortality compared to their Caucasian counterparts. As such, this has given many physicians pause before initiating AS for AA patients. In the following manuscript, we will review the available literature regarding AS, with a particular focus on AA men. The preponderance of evidence demonstrates that AS is as viable a management method for AA with low-risk prostate cancer as it is with other racial groups.

Predictive role of Trimprob associated with multiparametric MRI in the diagnosis of prostate cancer

Objectives

To evaluate the predictive value of TRIMprob test to detect prostate cancer (PCa) in patients referred to prostate biopsy (PB).

Material and Methods

Patients with PSA <10ng/mL and rectal exam without findings suggestive of prostate cancer were selected for TRIMprob evaluation. Exam was performed by a single operator through transperineal approach. Patients admitted for the study were submitted to TRIMprob and multiparametric magnetic resonance (mpMRI) and posteriorly to PB.

Results

In total, 77 patients were included. TRIMprob showed evidences of PCa in 25 (32.5%) and was negative in 52 patients (67.5%). The rate of detection of prostate cancer at biopsy was higher in patients with positive TRIMprob (16/25; 64.0%) than in patients with negative TRIMprob (11/52; 21.1%; p<0.001). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy of TRIMprob were respectively 61.5%, 82.0%, 64.0%, 80.3% and 74.0%. ROC curve showed the following areas under the curve values for TRIMprob, mpMRI and combination of TRIMprob + mpMRI: 0.706; 0.662 and 0.741 respectively. At combined analysis, when both TRIMprob and mpMRI were negative for prostate cancer, accuracy was 96.3% or only 1 in 27 PB was positive (3.7%).

Conclusions

Trimprob had similar predictive value for PCa in patients submitted to PB as mpMRI. Combined TRIMprob and mpMRI showed higher accuracy than when performed singly.

Diffusion weighted imaging of the prostate-principles, application, and advances

This review article aims to provide an overview on the principles of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) and its applications in the imaging of the prostate. DW-MRI with regards to different applications for prostate cancer (PCa) detection and characterization, local staging as well as for active surveillance (AS) and tumor recurrence after radical prostatectomy (RP) will be discussed. Furthermore, advances in DW-MRI techniques like diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI) will be presented.

Evidence-based guideline recommendations on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: A Cancer Care Ontario clinical practice guideline

This clinical guideline focuses on: 1) the use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in diagnosing clinically significant prostate cancer (CSPC) in patients with an elevated risk of CSPC and who are biopsy-naïve; and 2) the use of mpMRI in diagnosing CSPC in patients with a persistently elevated risk of having CSPC and who have a negative transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided systematic biopsy. The methods of the Practice Guideline Development Cycle were used. MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library (1997‒April 2014), main guideline websites, and relevant annual meeting abstracts (2011‒2014) were searched. Internal and external reviews were conducted. The two main recommendations are: Recommendation 1: In patients with an elevated risk of CSPC (according to prostate-specific antigen [PSA] levels and/or nomograms) who are biopsy-naïve: mpMRI followed by targeted biopsy (biopsy directed at cancer-suspicious foci detected with mpMRI) should not be considered the standard of care.Data from future research studies are essential and should receive high-impact trial funding to determine the value of mpMRI in this clinical context.Recommendation 2: In patients who had a prior negative TRUS-guided systematic biopsy and demonstrate an increasing risk of having CSPC since prior biopsy (e.g., continued rise in PSA and/or change in findings from digital rectal examination): mpMRI followed by targeted biopsy may be considered to help in detecting more CSPC patients compared with repeated TRUS-guided systematic biopsy.

MRI assessment of pathological stage and surgical margins in anterior prostate cancer (APC) using subjective and quantitative analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for assessment of extraprostatic extension (EPE) and positive surgical margins (PSM) in anterior prostate cancer (APC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

With Institutional Review Board approval, 25 APC (>2/3 of tumor anterior to urethra) were assessed using 3T MRI by two blinded radiologists for: size and maximal leading edge of tumor (relative to anterior fibromuscular stroma [AFMS]) on b ≥1000 sec/mm² echo-planar-MRI fused onto T₂ -weighted-MRI, invasion of AFMS and EPE. Comparisons were performed between APCs by EPE/PSM using chi-square, multivariable analysis, and receiver operator characteristic (ROC) analysis.

RESULTS

The prevalence of EPE and PSM were 52% (13/25) and 36% (9/25). Tumor sizes were larger with EPE (22.5 ± 8.4 vs. 14.7 ± 6.3, P = 0.02) and PSM (23.0 ± 9.3 vs. 16.4 ± 7.0, P = 0.06). Area under ROC curve (AUC-ROC) for the diagnosis of EPE by tumor size was 0.77 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58-0.95); ≥16 mm size = sensitivity/specificity 69.2/66.7%. Maximal leading edge of tumor was greater with EPE (2.4 ± 2.2 vs. -0.2 ± 3.0) and PSM (2.8 ± 2.3 vs. -0.3 ± 2.5), (P = 0.023, 0.031). AUC-ROC for diagnosis of EPE/PSM by leading edge was 0.78 (CI 0.57-0.97) and 0.75 (CI 0.56-0.94). A ≥1 mm leading edge yielded sensitivity/specificity of 76.9/75.0% and 77.8/62.5% for diagnosis of EPE/PSM. 60-72% (15-18/25) tumors invaded AFMS (k = 0.74), which was not associated with EPE/PSM (P = 0.12-0.14). Radiologists' assessment of EPE had sensitivity/specificity of 61.5-69.2/50.0-75.0% (k = 0.53).

CONCLUSION

Tumor size and leading edge of tumor relative to AFMS may enable diagnosis of EPE and positive surgical margins in APC.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2 J. MAGN. RESON. IMAGING 2017;45:1296-1303.

Standardized Reporting of Prostate MRI: Comparison of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) Version 1 and Version 2

Introduction

Objective of our study was to determine the agreement between version 1 (v1) and v2 of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) for evaluation of multiparametric prostate MRI (mpMRI) and to compare their diagnostic accuracy, their inter-observer agreement and practicability.

Material and Methods

mpMRI including T2-weighted imaging, diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging (DCE) of 54 consecutive patients, who subsequently underwent MRI-guided in-bore biopsy were re-analyzed according to PI-RADS v1 and v2 by two independent readers. Diagnostic accuracy for detection of prostate cancer (PCa) was assessed using ROC-curve analysis. Agreement between PI-RADS versions and observers was calculated and the time needed for scoring was determined.

Results

MRI-guided biopsy revealed PCa in 31 patients. Diagnostic accuracy for detection of PCa was equivalent with both PI-RADS versions for reader 1 with sensitivities and specificities of 84%/91% (AUC = 0.91 95%CI[0.8–1]) for PI-RADS v1 and 100%/74% (AUC = 0.92 95% CI[0.8–1]) for PI-RADS v2. Reader 2 achieved similar diagnostic accuracy with sensitivity and specificity of 74%/91% (AUC = 0.88 95%CI[0.8–1]) for PI-RADS v1 and 81%/91% (AUC = 0.91 95%CI[0.8–1]) for PI-RADS v2. Agreement between scores determined with different PI-RADS versions was good (reader 1: κ = 0.62, reader 2: κ = 0.64). Inter-observer agreement was moderate with PI-RADS v2 (κ = 0.56) and fair with v1 (κ = 0.39). The time required for building the PI-RADS score was significantly lower with PI-RADS v2 compared to v1 (24.7±2.3 s vs. 41.9±2.6 s, p<0.001).

Conclusion

Agreement between PI-RADS versions was high and both versions revealed high diagnostic accuracy for detection of PCa. Due to better inter-observer agreement for malignant lesions and less time demand, the new PI-RADS version could be more practicable for clinical routine.

Diagnosis and Monitoring of Prostatic Lesions: A Comparison of Three Modalities: Multiparametric MRI, Fusion MRI/Transrectal Ultrasound (TRUS), and Traditional TRUS

PURPOSE

 Transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) has been the gold standard of imaging for diagnosing prostate cancer for decades but is plagued by user error and undersampling. We aim to explore imaging modalities that are now being used in combination or alone for screening, diagnosis, and/or active surveillance of prostate cancer.

METHODS

A PubMed literature search was performed to include articles published up to April 2016. Data were extracted and analyzed.

RESULTS

Several large-scale studies have found an increased cancer detection rate in MRI-targeted lesions with an improved ability to target anterior lesions as well as an increased cancer detection in high-risk cancers using fusion platforms vs TRUS alone.

CONCLUSIONS

To date, there have been few head-to-head trials to directly compare the use of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI), transrectal ultrasound, and MRI-ultrasound fusion modalities for accurate and reliable detection, active surveillance, or biopsy procedure success rates. Further investigation utilizing these modalities are needed before they can be relied upon in active surveillance management, although mpMRI appears to be currently the most reliable in monitoring and diagnosing prostate lesions.

A practical approach to investigating a man with a raised prostate-specific antigen in the modern era

Urologists in the UK are encouraged to follow the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines for patient management. In 2014, members of the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) were asked in a survey what diagnostic pathway they would follow for themselves or their relatives if they had a raised prostate-specific antigen (PSA). It was found that only a quarter would follow NICE guidance. The current recommendations rely on pathological assessment of prostate tissue obtained at a transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy. Increasing evidence indicates that pre-biopsy multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) coupled with targeted biopsy approaches outperform random biopsies in the detection of clinically significant disease. Herein we discuss the role of magnetic resonance imaging and targeted biopsy approaches to diagnose prostate cancer in the modern era.

Anterior prostate biopsy at initial and repeat evaluation: is it useful to detect significant prostate cancer?

Purpose:

Detection rate for anterior prostate cancer (PCa) in men who underwent initial and repeat biopsy has been prospectively evaluated.

Materials and Methods:

From January 2013 to March 2014, 400 patients all of Caucasian origin (median age 63.5 years) underwent initial (285 cases) and repeat (115 cases) prostate biopsy; all the men had negative digital rectal examination and the indications to biopsy were: PSA values > 10 ng/mL, PSA between 4.1-10 or 2.6-4 ng/mL with free/total PSA≤25% and ≤20%, respectively. A median of 22 (initial biopsy) and 31 cores (repeat biopsy) were transperineally performed including 4 cores of the anterior zone (AZ) and 4 cores of the AZ plus 2 cores of the transition zone (TZ), respectively.

Results:

Median PSA was 7.9 ng/mL; overall, a PCa was found in 180 (45%) patients: in 135 (47.4%) and 45 (36%) of the men who underwent initial and repeat biopsy, respectively. An exclusive PCa of the anterior zone was found in the 8.9 (initial biopsy) vs 13.3% (repeat biopsy) of the men: a single microfocus of cancer was found in the 61.2% of the cases; moreover, in 7 out 18 AZ PCa the biopsy histology was predictive of significant cancer in 2 (28.5%) and 5 (71.5%) men who underwent initial and repeat biopsy, respectively.

Conclusions:

However AZ biopsies increased detection rate for PCa (10% of the cases), the majority of AZ PCa with histological findings predictive of clinically significant cancer were found at repeat biopsy (about 70% of the cases).

Comparative Effectiveness of Targeted Prostate Biopsy Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging Ultrasound Fusion Software and Visual Targeting: a Prospective Study

PURPOSE

We compared the diagnostic outcomes of magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion and visually targeted biopsy for targeting regions of interest on prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients presenting for prostate biopsy with regions of interest on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging underwent magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy. For each region of interest 2 visually targeted cores were obtained, followed by 2 cores using a magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion device. Our primary end point was the difference in the detection of high grade (Gleason 7 or greater) and any grade cancer between visually targeted and magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion, investigated using McNemar's method. Secondary end points were the difference in detection rate by biopsy location using a logistic regression model and the difference in median cancer length using the Wilcoxon signed rank test.

RESULTS

We identified 396 regions of interest in 286 men. The difference in the detection of high grade cancer between magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion biopsy and visually targeted biopsy was -1.4% (95% CI -6.4 to 3.6, p=0.6) and for any grade cancer the difference was 3.5% (95% CI -1.9 to 8.9, p=0.2). Median cancer length detected by magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion and visually targeted biopsy was 5.5 vs 5.8 mm, respectively (p=0.8). Magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion biopsy detected 15% more cancers in the transition zone (p=0.046) and visually targeted biopsy detected 11% more high grade cancer at the prostate base (p=0.005). Only 52% of all high grade cancers were detected by both techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence of a significant difference in the detection of high grade or any grade cancer between visually targeted and magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion biopsy. However, the performance of each technique varied in specific biopsy locations and the outcomes of both techniques were complementary. Combining visually targeted biopsy and magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion biopsy may optimize the detection of prostate cancer.

Use of mpMRI in active surveillance for localized prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION

In an effort to limit prostate cancer (PCa) overdiagnosis and overtreatment, which have occurred in response to widespread prostate specific antigen testing, numerous strategies aimed at improved risk stratification of patients with PCa have evolved. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is being used in concert with prostate specific antigen testing and prostate biopsies to improve sensitivity and specificity of these tests. There are limited data on how multiparametric MRI can be incorporated into active surveillance (AS) protocols.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A PubMed literature search of available English language publications on PCa, AS, and MRI was conducted. Appropriate articles were selected and included for review. Bibliographies were also used to expand our search.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Data from 41 studies were reviewed. AS inclusion criteria and protocols varied among studies, as did indications for use of MRI. Technological improvements are briefly highlighted. Studies are broadly categorized and discussed according to the role of MRI in patient selection, disease staging, and monitoring in AS protocols.

CONCLUSIONS

Although improvements in MRI technology have been useful for biopsy guidance and in the diagnosis and staging of PCa, this literature search demonstrates that more prospective research is needed, specifically regarding how this promising technology can be incorporated into AS protocols.

Prostate Radiotherapy in the Era of Advanced Imaging and Precision Medicine

Tremendous technological advancements in prostate radiotherapy have decreased treatment toxicity and improved clinical outcomes for men with prostate cancer. While these advances have allowed for significant treatment volume reduction and whole-organ dose escalation, further improvement in prostate radiotherapy has been limited by classic techniques for diagnosis and risk stratification. Developments in prostate imaging, image-guided targeted biopsy, next-generation gene expression profiling, and targeted molecular therapies now provide information to stratify patients and select treatments based on tumor biology. Image-guided targeted biopsy improves detection of clinically significant cases of prostate cancer and provides important information about the biological behavior of intraprostatic lesions which can further guide treatment decisions. We review the evolution of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and MRI-ultrasound fusion-guided prostate biopsy. Recent advancements in radiation therapy including dose escalation, moderate and extreme hypofractionation, partial prostate radiation therapy, and finally dose escalation by simultaneous integrated boost are discussed. We also review next-generation sequencing and discuss developments in targeted molecular therapies. Last, we review ongoing clinical trials and future treatment paradigms that integrate targeted biopsy, molecular profiling and therapy, and prostate radiotherapy.

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer: A review and update for urologists

Recently, imaging of prostate cancer has greatly advanced since the introduction of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI). mpMRI consists of T2-weighted sequences combined with several functional sequences including diffusion-weighted imaging, dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging, and/or magnetic resonance spectroscopy imaging. Interest has been growing in mpMRI because no single MRI sequence adequately detects and characterizes prostate cancer. During the last decade, the role of mpMRI has been expanded in prostate cancer detection, staging, and targeting or guiding prostate biopsy. Recently, mpMRI has been used to assess prostate cancer aggressiveness and to identify anteriorly located tumors before and during active surveillance. Moreover, recent studies have reported that mpMRI is a reliable imaging modality for detecting local recurrence after radical prostatectomy or external beam radiation therapy. In this regard, some urologic clinical practice guidelines recommended the use of mpMRI in the diagnosis and management of prostate cancer. Because mpMRI is the evolving reference standard imaging modality for prostate cancer, urologists should acquire cutting-edge knowledge about mpMRI. In this article, we review the literature on the use of mpMRI in urologic practice and provide a brief description of techniques. More specifically, we state the role of mpMRI in prostate biopsy, active surveillance, high-risk prostate cancer, and detection of recurrence after radical prostatectomy.

Prospective randomized trial comparing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided in-bore biopsy to MRI-ultrasound fusion and transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in patients with prior negative biopsies

BACKGROUND

A significant proportion of prostate cancers (PCas) are missed by conventional transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS-GB). It remains unclear whether the combined approach using targeted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy (FUS-GB) and systematic TRUS-GB is superior to targeted MRI-guided in-bore biopsy (IB-GB) for PCa detection.

OBJECTIVE

To compare PCa detection between IB-GB alone and FUS-GB + TRUS-GB in patients with at least one negative TRUS-GB and prostate-specific antigen ≥4 ng/ml.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Patients were prospectively randomized after multiparametric prostate MRI to IB-GB (arm A) or FUS-GB + TRUS-GB (arm B) from November 2011 to July 2014.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The study was powered at 80% to demonstrate an overall PCa detection rate of ≥60% in arm B compared to 40% in arm A. Secondary endpoints were the distribution of highest Gleason scores, the rate of detection of significant PCa (Gleason ≥7), the number of biopsy cores to detect one (significant) PCa, the positivity rate for biopsy cores, and tumor involvement per biopsy core.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The study was halted after interim analysis because the primary endpoint was not met. The trial enrolled 267 patients, of whom 210 were analyzed (106 randomized to arm A and 104 to arm B). PCa detection was 37% in arm A and 39% in arm B (95% confidence interval for difference, -16% to 11%; p=0.7). Detection rates for significant PCa (29% vs 32%; p=0.7) and the highest percentage tumor involvement per biopsy core (48% vs 42%; p=0.4) were similar between the arms. The mean number of cores was 5.6 versus 17 (p<0.001). A limitation is the limited number of patients because of early cessation of accrual.

CONCLUSIONS

This trial failed to identify an important improvement in detection rate for the combined biopsy approach over MRI-targeted biopsy alone. A prospective comparison between MRI-targeted biopsy alone and systematic TRUS-GB is justified.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Our randomized study showed similar prostate cancer detection rates between targeted prostate biopsy guided by magnetic resonance imaging and the combination of targeted biopsy and systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. An important improvement in detection rates using the combined biopsy approach can be excluded.

Evaluation of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Detection and Prediction of Prostate Cancer

Background

Although European Society of Urogenital Radiology proposed the potential of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MP-MRI) as a tool in the diagnostic pathway for prostate cancer (PCa) and published a unified scoring system named Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS version 1), these still need to be validated by real-life studies.

Objective

To evaluate the role of MP-MRI in detection and prediction of PCa.

Methods

Patients with clinical suspicion of PCa who underwent prebiopsy MP-MRI from 2002 to 2009 were recruited. MP-MRI results were retrospectively assigned as overall scores using PI-RADS by two radiologists. Patients were followed and the end point was the diagnosis of PCa. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve was performed to test diagnostic efficacy of MP-MRI, under results of biopsy within three months. The cox proportional hazards model was used to identify independent variables for the detection of PCa.

Results

Finally, 1113 of the 1806 enrolled patients were included for analysis. The median follow-up was 56.0 months (1–137 mo). For 582 patients biopsied within three months, area under the curve for the detection of PCa with MP-MRI was 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75–1.00) in group of baseline prostate specific antigen (PSA) 0.01–4.00 ng/ml (n = 31), 0.90 (95% CI, 0.84–0.95) in PSA 4.01–10.00 ng/ml (n = 142), and 0.91 (95% CI, 0.87–0.94) in PSA >10.00 ng/ml (n = 409), respectively. In the cox model adjusted for age and baseline PSA level, for the detection rate of PCa, compared with PI-RADS 1–2 (reference), the hazard ratio was 6.43 (95% CI, 4.29–9.65) for PI-RADS 3, 18.58 (95% CI, 13.36–25.84) for PI-RADS 4–5 (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Prebiopsy MP-MRI with PI-RADS is demonstrated as a valuable diagnostic and predictive tool for PCa.

Prostate cancer: top places where tumors hide on multiparametric MRI

OBJECTIVE

Prostate tumors occasionally have unusual manifestations on multiparametric MR images that can present a diagnostic dilemma and result in a false-negative interpretation. This article presents examples of such "hiding places" of prostate tumors, four in the peripheral zone and four in the central gland.

CONCLUSION

The provided pointers in multiparametric MRI assessment can aid the radiologist in achieving an accurate diagnosis of tumor in the eight scenarios described.

Computer aided-diagnosis of prostate cancer on multiparametric MRI: a technical review of current research

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most commonly diagnosed cancer among men in the United States. In this paper, we survey computer aided-diagnosis (CADx) systems that use multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MP-MRI) for detection and diagnosis of prostate cancer. We review and list mainstream techniques that are commonly utilized in image segmentation, registration, feature extraction, and classification. The performances of 15 state-of-the-art prostate CADx systems are compared through the area under their receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC). Challenges and potential directions to further the research of prostate CADx are discussed in this paper. Further improvements should be investigated to make prostate CADx systems useful in clinical practice.

Use of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) for Prostate Cancer Detection with Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Diagnostic Meta-analysis

CONTEXT

In 2012, an expert panel of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) published the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) for prostate cancer (PC) detection with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI). Since then, many centers have reported their experiences.

PURPOSE

To review the diagnostic accuracy of PI-RADS for PC detection with mp-MRI.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We searched Medline and Embase up to March 20, 2014. We included diagnostic accuracy studies since 2012 that used PI-RADS with mp-MRI for PC detection in men, using prostatectomy or biopsy as the reference standard. The methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool by two independent reviewers. Data necessary to complete 2×2 contingency tables were obtained from the included studies, and test characteristics including sensitivity and specificity were calculated. Results were pooled and plotted in a summary receiver operating characteristics plot.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Fourteen studies (1785 patients) could be analyzed. The pooled data showed sensitivity of 0.78 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70-0.84) and specificity of 0.79 (95% CI 0.68-0.86) for PC detection, with negative predictive values ranging from 0.58 to 0.95. Sensitivity analysis revealed pooled sensitivity of 0.82 (95% CI 0.72-0.89) and specificity of 0.82 (95% CI 0.67-0.92) in studies with correct use of PI-RADS (ie, clear description in the methodology and no adjustment of criteria). For studies with a less strict or adjusted use of PI-RADS criteria, or unclear description of the methodology, had pooled sensitivity of 0.73 (95% CI 0.62-0.82) and specificity of 0.75 (95% CI 0.61-0.84).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients for whom PC is suspected, PI-RADS appears to have good diagnostic accuracy in PC detection, but no recommendation regarding the best threshold can be provided because of heterogeneity.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Pooling of results from all previous studies that used a relatively new 5-point scoring system for prostate magnetic resonance imaging showed that this scoring system appears to be able to detect prostate cancer accurately.

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the management and diagnosis of prostate cancer: current applications and strategies

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has become increasingly used worldwide in the diagnosis and management of prostate cancer. With advances in multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) technology, such as the use of dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted imaging sequences, observational studies have evaluated the utility for mpMRI in the continuum of prostate cancer management, from improving the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer, to planning radical prostatectomy and radiation therapy and the early detection of local recurrence. Furthermore, the potential for advanced imaging to reduce the burden of routine serial prostate needle biopsies for men on active surveillance is a promising area of research. MRI technology continues to evolve, and the potential applications in the management of prostate cancer care will require well-designed multi-institutional prospective clinical trials and rigorous efforts to standardize reporting and improve dissemination of expertise across institutions.

Role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer

Prostate cancer is the most common solid-organ malignancy among American men. It is currently most commonly diagnosed on random systematic biopsies prompted by elevated serum PSA levels. Multi-parametric MRI (MP-MRI) of the prostate has emerged as an anatomic and functional imaging modality, which offers accurate detection, localization and staging of prostate cancer. Recently, MP-MRI has gained an increasing role in guiding biopsies to sites of abnormality and in monitoring patients on active surveillance. Here, we discuss the historical development, current role, and potential future directions of MP-MRI in the diagnosis of prostate cancer.

Outcomes of men with an elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level as their sole preoperative intermediate- or high-risk feature

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the post-prostatectomy and long-term outcomes of men presenting with an elevated pretreatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level (>10 ng/mL), but otherwise low-risk features (biopsy Gleason score ≤6 and clinical stage ≤T2a).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

PSA-incongruent intermediate-risk (PII) cases were defined as those patients with preoperative PSA >10 and ≤20 ng/mL but otherwise low-risk features, and PSA-incongruent high-risk (PIH) cases were defined as men with PSA >20 ng/mL but otherwise low-risk features. Our institutional radical prostatectomy database (1992-2012) was queried and the results were stratified into D'Amico low-, intermediate- and high risk, PSA-incongruent intermediate-risk and PSA-incongruent high-risk cases. Prostate cancer (PCa) features and outcomes were evaluated using appropriate comparative tests. Multivariable analyses were adjusted for age, race and year of surgery.

RESULTS

Of the total cohort of 17 608 men, 1132 (6.4%) had PII-risk disease and 183 (1.0%) had PIH-risk disease. Compared with the low-risk group, the odds of upgrading at radical prostatectomy (RP) were 2.20 (95% CI 1.93-2.52; P < 0.001) for the PII group and 3.58 (95% CI 2.64-4.85; P < 0.001) for the PIH group, the odds of extraprostatic disease at RP were 2.35 (95% CI 2.05-2.68; P < 0.001) for the PII group and 6.68 (95% CI 4.89-9.15; P < 0.001) for the PIH group, and the odds of positive surgical margins were 1.97 (95% CI 1.67-2.33; P < 0.001) for the PII group and 3.54 (95% CI 2.50-4.95, P < 0.001) for the PIH group. Compared with low-risk disease, PII-risk disease was associated with a 2.85-, 2.99- and 3.32-fold greater risk of biochemical recurrence (BCR), metastasis and PCa-specific mortality, respectively, and PIH-risk disease was associated with a 5.32-, 6.14- and 7.07-fold greater risk of BCR, metastasis and PCa-specific mortality, respectively (P ≤ 0.001 for all comparisons). For the PII group, the higher risks of positive surgical margins, upgrading, upstaging and BCR were dependent on PSA density (PSAD): men in the PII group who had a PSAD <0.15 ng/mL/g were not at higher risk compared with those in the low-risk group. Men in the PII group with a PSAD ≥0.15 ng/mL/g and men in the PIH group were more likely to have an anterior component of the dominant tumour (59 and 64%, respectively) compared with those in the low- (35%) and intermediate-risk group (39%) and those in the PII-risk group with PSAD <0.15 ng/mL/g (29%).

CONCLUSIONS

Men with PSA >20 ng/mL or men with PSA >10 and ≤20 ng/mL with a PSAD ≥0.15 ng/mL/g, but otherwise low-risk PCa, are at greater risk of adverse pathological and oncological outcomes and may be inappropriate candidates for active surveillance. These men are at greater risk of having anterior tumours that are undersampled at biopsy, so if treatment is deferred, ancillary testing such as anterior zone sampling or magnetic resonance imaging should be strongly encouraged. Men with elevated PSA levels >10 and ≤20 ng/mL but low PSAD have outcomes similar to those in the low-risk group, and consideration of surveillance is appropriate in these cases.

Multiparametric MRI in biopsy guidance for prostate cancer: fusion-guided

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common solid-organ malignancy among American men and the second most deadly. Current guidelines recommend a 12-core systematic biopsy following the finding of an elevated serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA). However, this strategy fails to detect an unacceptably high percentage of clinically significant cancers, leading researchers to develop new, innovative methods to improve the effectiveness of prostate biopsies. Multiparametric-MRI (MP-MRI) has emerged as a promising instrument in identifying suspicious regions within the prostate that require special attention on subsequent biopsy. Fusion platforms, which incorporate the MP-MRI into the biopsy itself and provide active targets within real-time imaging, have shown encouraging results in improving the detection rate of significant cancer. Broader applications of this technology, including MRI-guided focal therapy for prostate cancer, are in early phase trials.

Current status of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasonography fusion software platforms for guidance of prostate biopsies

Prostate MRI is currently the best diagnostic imaging method for detecting PCa. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/ultrasonography (US) fusion allows the sensitivity and specificity of MRI to be combined with the real-time capabilities of transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS). Multiple approaches and techniques exist for MRI/US fusion and include direct 'in bore' MRI biopsies, cognitive fusion, and MRI/US fusion via software-based image coregistration platforms.

Detection rate of anterior prostate cancer in 226 patients submitted to initial and repeat transperineal biopsy

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the detection rate of anterior zone (AZ) prostate cancer (PCa) in patients submitted to initial and repeat transperineal prostate biopsy.

METHODS

From January 2013 to August 2013, 226 patients (median age 64 years) with negative digital rectal examination underwent initial (144 cases) and repeat (82 cases) transperineal prostate biopsy for PSA >10 ng/ml, PSA 4.1-10.0 or 2.6-4.0 ng/ml with free/total PSA ≤25% and ≤20%, respectively. A median of 22 versus 32 cores were performed, including 4 cores of the AZ versus 6 cores (4 anterior plus 2 cores of the transition zone, TZ) at initial versus repeat biopsy, respectively. The detection rate of PCa of the peripheral zone (PZ), AZ and TZ was prospectively evaluated.

RESULTS

The median PSA was 7.6 ng/ml; overall, a stage cT1c PCa was found in 104/226 (46%) patients, in 70 (48.6%) and 34 (41.5%) of the men who underwent initial and repeat biopsy, respectively. An AZ PCa was found in 11.5 vs. 8.8% (p = 0.32) of the patients submitted to initial versus repeat biopsy, respectively. AZ cancers demonstrated a number of positive cores (p = 0.03), greatest percentage of cancer (p = 0.001) and total percentage of cancer (p = 0.001) significantly lower in comparison with PZ PCa; moreover, 56.2 vs. 36.5% of AZ versus PZ PCa were characterized by a microfocus of cancer (p = 0.001), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

AZ biopsies increase the detection rate of PCa (about 10% of cases) at initial and repeat biopsy, allowing reduction of the biopsy false-negative rate.

Pathological examination of radical prostatectomy specimens in men with very low risk disease at biopsy reveals distinct zonal distribution of cancer in black American men

PURPOSE

Of men with very low risk prostate cancer at biopsy recent evidence shows that black American men are at greater risk for adverse oncologic outcomes after radical prostatectomy. We studied radical prostatectomy specimens from black and white men at very low risk to determine whether there are systematic pathological differences.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Radical prostatectomy specimens were evaluated in men with National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN) very low risk prostate cancer. At diagnosis all men underwent extended biopsy sampling (10 or more cores) and were treated in the modern Gleason grade era. We analyzed tumor volume, grade and location in 87 black and 89 white men. For each specimen the dominant nodule was defined as the largest tumor with the highest grade.

RESULTS

Compared to white men, black men were more likely to have significant prostate cancer (61% vs 29%), Gleason 7 or greater (37% vs 11%, each p <0.001) and a volume of greater than 0.5 cm(3) (45% vs 21%, p = 0.001). Dominant nodules in black men were larger (median 0.28 vs 0.13 cm(3), p = 0.002) and more often anterior (51% vs 29%, p = 0.003). In men who underwent pathological upgrading the dominant nodule was also more frequently anterior in black than in white men (59% vs 0%, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Black men with very low risk prostate cancer at diagnosis have a significantly higher prevalence of anterior cancer foci that are of higher grade and larger volume. Enhanced imaging or anterior zone sampling may detect these significant anterior tumors, improving the outcome in black men considering active surveillance.