Combined Biparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Prostate-specific Antigen in the Detection of Prostate Cancer: A Validation Study in a Biopsy-naive Patient Population

Biparametric versus multiparametric MRI for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer in a diverse, multiethnic population

PURPOSE

There is not yet satisfactory performance data comparing multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) versus biparametric MRI (bpMRI) for detecting prostate cancer (PCa), particularly in high-risk populations. We compared both protocols for detecting overall PCa and clinically significant PCa (CS-PCa; defined as Grade Group ≥ 2) in a multiethnic urban population.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed electronic medical record data from men who underwent image-guided fusion prostate biopsy (FB) between 2016 and 2021 at our institution. Patient characteristics, Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) scores, and FB outcomes were analyzed based on MRI protocol. Multivariate mixed-effects logistic regression models were used to examine associations of bpMRI versus mpMRI for detecting overall PCa and CS-PCa in targeted lesions, among all patients and stratified by race/ethnicity.

RESULTS

Overall, 566 men (44.0% Non-Hispanic Black [NHB]; 27.0% Hispanic) with 975 PI-RADS 3-5 lesions on MRI underwent FB. Of these, 312 (55%) men with 497 lesions underwent mpMRI and 254 (45%) men with 478 lesions underwent bpMRI. On multivariate analyses among all men, the odds of detecting overall PCa (OR = 1.18, 95% CI: 1.05-3.11, p = 0.031) and CS-PCa (OR = 2.15, 95% CI: 1.16-4.00, p = 0.014) on FB were higher for lesions identified on bpMRI than mpMRI. When stratified by race/ethnicity, the odds of detecting overall PCa (OR = 1.86; p = 0.15) and CS-PCa (OR = 2.20; p = 0.06) were not statistically different between lesions detected on bpMRI or mpMRI.

CONCLUSION

BpMRI has similar diagnostic performance to mpMRI in detecting overall and CS-PCa within a racially/ethnically diverse population. BpMRI can be utilized for evaluating suspected CS-PCa among NHB and Hispanic men.

Risk-Adapted Strategy Combining Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Prostate-Specific Antigen Density to Individualize Biopsy Decision in Patients With PI-RADS 3 ``Gray Zone'' Lesions

INTRODUCTION

Recent guidelines suggest that biopsy may be omitted in some groups of patients with PI-RADS 3 lesions on mpMRI. In this study, we aimed to evaluate biopsy strategies involving prostate-specific antigen density (PSAd) to avoid unnecessary biopsy versus the risk of missing clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in patients with PI-RADS 3 lesions.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Data of 616 consecutive patients who underwent PSAd and mpMRI before prostate biopsy between January 2017 and January 2022 at a single center were retrospectively assessed. All of these patients underwent combined cognitive or fusion targeted biopsy of suspicious lesions and transrectal ultrasonography guided systematic biopsy. PI-RADS 3 based strategies with PSAd and mpMRI combination were created. For each strategy, avoided unnecessary biopsy, reduced ISUP Grade 1, and missed ISUP Grade ≥ 2 ratios were determined. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was used to statistically compare the net benefit of each strategy.

RESULTS

DCA revealed that patients who had PI-RADS 3 lesions with PSAd ≥ 0.2, and/or patients who had PI-RADS 4 and 5 lesions had the most benefit, under the threshold probability level between 10% and 50%, which avoided 48.2% unnecessary prostate biopsies and reduced 51% of ISUP grade 1 cases, while missed 17.5% of ISUP grade ≥ 2 cases. (22.1% for ISUP grade 2 and 8.8% for ISUP grade ≥ 3). Strategy 1 (PI-RADS 4-5 and/or PSAd ≥ 0.2), 3 (PI-RADS 4-5 and/or PI-RADS 3 if PSAd ≥ 0.15), and 7 (PI-RADS 4-5 and/or PI-RADS 3 if PSAd ≥ 0.15 and/or PI-RADS 2 if PSAd ≥ 0.2) were the next three best strategies.

CONCLUSION

mpMRI combined with PSAd strategies reduced biopsy attempts in PI-RADS 3 lesions. Using these strategies, the advantage of avoiding biopsy and the risk of missing the diagnosis of csPCa can be discussed with the patient, and the biopsy decision can be made afterwards.

Diagnostic Performance of Prostate-specific Antigen Density for Detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in the Era of Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

CONTEXT

There has been a dramatic increase in the use of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the diagnostic workup. With prostate volume calculated from MRI, prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) now is a ready-to-use parameter for prostate cancer (PCa) risk stratification before prostate biopsy, especially among patients with negative MRI or equivocal lesions.

OBJECTIVE

In this review, we aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of PSAD for clinically significant prostate cancer (CSPCa) among patients who received MRI before prostate biopsy.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Two investigators performed a systematic review according of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) criteria. Studies (published between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2021) reporting the diagnostic performance (outcomes) of PSAD (intervention) for CSPCa among men who received prebiopsy prostate MRI and subsequent prostate biopsy (patients), using biopsy pathology as the gold standard (comparison), were eligible for inclusion.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 1536 papers were identified in PubMed, Scopus, and Embase. Of these, 248 studies were reviewed in detail and 39 were qualified. The pooled sensitivity (SENS) and specificity (SPEC) for diagnosing CSPCa among patients with positive MRI were, respectively, 0.87 and 0.35 for PSAD of 0.1 ng/ml/ml, 0.74 and 0.61 for PSAD of 0.15 ng/ml/ml, and 0.51 and 0.81 for PSAD of 0.2 ng/ml/ml. The pooled SENS and SPEC for diagnosing CSPCa among patients with negative MRI were, respectively, 0.85 and 0.36 for PSAD of 0.1 ng/ml/ml, 0.60 and 0.66 for PSAD of 0.15 ng/ml/ml, and 0.33 and 0.84 for PSAD of 0.2 ng/ml/ml. The pooled SENS and SPEC among patients with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) 3 or Likert 3 lesions were, respectively, 0.87 and 0.39 for PSAD of 0.1 ng/ml/ml, 0.61 and 0.69 for PSAD of 0.15 ng/ml/ml, and 0.42 and 0.82 for PSAD of 0.2 ng/ml/ml. The post-test probability for CSPCa among patients with negative MRI was 6% if PSAD was <0.15 ng/ml/ml and dropped to 4% if PSAD was <0.10 ng/ml/ml.

CONCLUSIONS

In this systematic review, we quantitatively evaluated the diagnosis performance of PSAD for CSPCa in combination with prostate MRI. It demonstrated a complementary performance and predictive value, especially among patients with negative MRI and PI-RADS 3 or Likert 3 lesions. Integration of PSAD into decision-making for prostate biopsy may facilitate improved risk-adjusted care.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Prostate-specific antigen density is a ready-to-use parameter in the era of increased magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) use in clinically significant prostate cancer (CSPCa) diagnosis. Findings suggest that the chance of having CSPCa was very low (4% or 6% for those with negative prebiopsy MRI or Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (Likert) score 3 lesion, respectively, if the PSAD was <0.10 ng/ml/ml), which may lower the need for biopsy in these patients.

Reduction of false positives using zone-specific prostate-specific antigen density for prostate MRI-based biopsy decision strategies

OBJECTIVES

To develop and test zone-specific prostate-specific antigen density (sPSAD) combined with PI-RADS to guide prostate biopsy decision strategies (BDS).

METHODS

This retrospective study included consecutive patients, who underwent prostate MRI and biopsy (01/2012-10/2018). The whole gland and transition zone (TZ) were segmented at MRI using a retrained deep learning system (DLS; nnU-Net) to calculate PSAD and sPSAD, respectively. Additionally, sPSAD and PI-RADS were combined in a BDS, and diagnostic performances to detect Grade Group ≥ 2 (GG ≥ 2) prostate cancer were compared. Patient-based cancer detection using sPSAD was assessed by bootstrapping with 1000 repetitions and reported as area under the curve (AUC). Clinical utility of the BDS was tested in the hold-out test set using decision curve analysis. Statistics included nonparametric DeLong test for AUCs and Fisher-Yates test for remaining performance metrics.

RESULTS

A total of 1604 patients aged 67 (interquartile range, 61-73) with 48% GG ≥ 2 prevalence (774/1604) were evaluated. By employing DLS-based prostate and TZ volumes (DICE coefficients of 0.89 (95% confidence interval, 0.80-0.97) and 0.84 (0.70-0.99)), GG ≥ 2 detection using PSAD was inferior to sPSAD (AUC, 0.71 (0.68-0.74)/0.73 (0.70-0.76); p < 0.001). Combining PI-RADS with sPSAD, GG ≥ 2 detection specificity doubled from 18% (10-20%) to 43% (30-44%; p < 0.001) with similar sensitivity (93% (89-96%)/97% (94-99%); p = 0.052), when biopsies were taken in PI-RADS 4-5 and 3 only if sPSAD was ≥ 0.42 ng/mL/cc as compared to all PI-RADS 3-5 cases. Additionally, using the sPSAD-based BDS, false positives were reduced by 25% (123 (104-142)/165 (146-185); p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Using sPSAD to guide biopsy decisions in PI-RADS 3 lesions can reduce false positives at MRI while maintaining high sensitivity for GG ≥ 2 cancers.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

Transition zone-specific prostate-specific antigen density can improve the accuracy of prostate cancer detection compared to MRI assessments alone, by lowering false-positive cases without significantly missing men with ISUP GG ≥ 2 cancers.

KEY POINTS

• Prostate biopsy decision strategies using PI-RADS at MRI are limited by a substantial proportion of false positives, not yielding grade group ≥ 2 prostate cancer. • PI-RADS combined with transition zone (TZ)-specific prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) decreased the number of unproductive biopsies by 25% compared to PI-RADS only. • TZ-specific PSAD also improved the specificity of MRI-directed biopsies by 9% compared to the whole gland PSAD, while showing identical sensitivity.

Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Study in the mpMRI of the Prostate-Unnecessary or Underutilised? A Narrative Review

The aim of this review is to summarise recent scientific literature regarding the clinical use of DCE-MRI as a component of multiparametric resonance imaging of the prostate. This review presents the principles of DCE-MRI acquisition and analysis, the current role of DCE-MRI in clinical practice with special regard to its role in presently available categorisation systems, and an overview of the advantages and disadvantages of DCE-MRI described in the current literature. DCE-MRI is an important functional sequence that requires intravenous administration of a gadolinium-based contrast agent and gives information regarding the vascularity and capillary permeability of the lesion. Although numerous studies have confirmed that DCE-MRI has great potential in the diagnosis and monitoring of prostate cancer, its role is still inadequate in the PI-RADS categorisation. Moreover, there have been numerous scientific discussions about abandoning the intravenous application of gadolinium-based contrast as a routine part of MRI examination of the prostate. In this review, we summarised the recent literature on the advantages and disadvantages of DCE-MRI, focusing on an overview of currently available data on bpMRI and mpMRI, as well as on studies providing information on the potential better usability of DCE-MRI in improving the sensitivity and specificity of mpMRI examinations of the prostate.

Deep learning algorithm performs similarly to radiologists in the assessment of prostate volume on MRI

OBJECTIVES

Prostate volume (PV) in combination with prostate specific antigen (PSA) yields PSA density which is an increasingly important biomarker. Calculating PV from MRI is a time-consuming, radiologist-dependent task. The aim of this study was to assess whether a deep learning algorithm can replace PI-RADS 2.1 based ellipsoid formula (EF) for calculating PV.

METHODS

Eight different measures of PV were retrospectively collected for each of 124 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy and preoperative MRI of the prostate (multicenter and multi-scanner MRI's 1.5 and 3 T). Agreement between volumes obtained from the deep learning algorithm (PV_DL) and ellipsoid formula by two radiologists (PV_EF1 and PV_EF2) was evaluated against the reference standard PV obtained by manual planimetry by an expert radiologist (PV_MPE). A sensitivity analysis was performed using a prostatectomy specimen as the reference standard. Inter-reader agreement was evaluated between the radiologists using the ellipsoid formula and between the expert and inexperienced radiologists performing manual planimetry.

RESULTS

PV_DL showed better agreement and precision than PV_EF1 and PV_EF2 using the reference standard PV_MPE (mean difference [95% limits of agreement] PV_DL: -0.33 [-10.80; 10.14], PV_EF1: -3.83 [-19.55; 11.89], PV_EF2: -3.05 [-18.55; 12.45]) or the PV determined based on specimen weight (PV_DL: -4.22 [-22.52; 14.07], PV_EF1: -7.89 [-30.50; 14.73], PV_EF2: -6.97 [-30.13; 16.18]). Inter-reader agreement was excellent between the two experienced radiologists using the ellipsoid formula and was good between expert and inexperienced radiologists performing manual planimetry.

CONCLUSION

Deep learning algorithm performs similarly to radiologists in the assessment of prostate volume on MRI.

KEY POINTS

• A commercially available deep learning algorithm performs similarly to radiologists in the assessment of prostate volume on MRI. • The deep-learning algorithm was previously untrained on this heterogenous multicenter day-to-day practice MRI data set.

Head-to-head comparison of biparametric versus multiparametric MRI of the prostate before robot-assisted transperineal fusion prostate biopsy

Purpose

Prostate biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) including T2-weighted imaging (T2WI) and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) might be an alternative to multiparametric MRI (mpMRI, including dynamic contrast imaging, DCE) to detect and guide targeted biopsy in patients with suspected prostate cancer (PCa). However, there is no upgrading peripheral zone PI-RADS 3 to PI-RADS 4 without DCE in bpMRI. The aim of this study was to evaluate bpMRI against mpMRI in biopsy-naïve men with elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) scheduled for robot-assisted-transperineal fusion-prostate biopsy (RA-TB).

Methods

Retrospective single-center-study of 563 biopsy-naïve men (from 01/2015 to 09/2018, mean PSA 9.7 ± 6.5 ng/mL) with PI-RADSv2.1 conform mpMRI at 3 T before RA-TB. Clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) was defined as ISUP grade ≥ 2 in any core. Two experienced readers independently evaluated images according to PI-RADSv2.1 criteria (separate readings for bpMRI and mpMRI sequences, 6-month interval). Reference standard was histology from RA-TB.

Results

PI-RADS 2 was scored in 5.1% of cases (3.4% cancer/3.4% csPCa), PI-RADS 3 in 16.9% (32.6%/3.2%), PI-RADS 4 in 57.6% (66.1%/58.3%) and PI-RADS 5 in 20.4% of cases (79.1%/74.8%). For mpMRI/bpMRI test comparison, sensitivity was 99.0%/97.1% (p < 0.001), specificity 47.5%/61.2% (p < 0.001), PPV 69.5%/75.1% (p < 0.001) and NPV 97.6%/94.6% (n.s.). csPCa was considered gold standard. 35 cases without cancer were upgraded to PI-RADS 4 (mpMRI) and six PI-RADS 3 cases with csPCa were not upgraded (bpMRI).

Conclusion

In patients planned for RA-TB with elevated PSA and clinical suspicion for PCa, specificity was higher in bpMRI vs. mpMRI, which could solve constrains regarding time and contrast agent.

Early experience in avoiding biopsies for biopsy-naïve men with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer but non-suspicious biparametric magnetic resonance imaging results and prostate-specific antigen density < 0.15 ng/mL2: A 2-year follow-up study

Background

Only limited data have been published on the diagnostic accuracy of combining biparametric (bp) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and prostate-specific antigen density (PSAd) to rule out biopsies.

Purpose

The purpose is to assess the 2-year risk of being diagnosed with sPCa following the strategy of avoiding immediate biopsies in men with non-suspicious bp MRIs and a PSAd <0.15 ng/mL².

Material and Methods

Two hundred biopsy-naïve men with clinical suspicion of PCa underwent a pre-biopsy bp MRI from March to July 2019. Of these, 109 men had a Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score of 1–3 including 77 men with calculated PSAd <0.15 ng/mL². As a result, no biopsies were performed in these 77 men, who were clinically followed up for at least 2 years and re-examined in case of rising suspicion of sPCa. The remaining 32 men with a calculated PSAd ≥0.15 ng/mL² underwent systematic biopsies and targeted biopsies of any PI-RADS 3 lesion.

Results

One of the 77 men (1.3%) had an sPCa diagnosed within 2 years of follow-up. All men were referred back to their general practitioner within 1 year and 9% (7/77) were re-referred to the urology department during follow-up. Among these men, 43% (3/7) continued to have PSA levels that were above their individual thresholds at confirmatory testing and underwent secondary MRI scans.

Conclusions

No biopsies for men with bpMRI results exhibiting maximum PI-RADS 3 and with a PSAd <0.15 ng/mL² resulted in a 2-year risk of being diagnosed with sPCa of 1.3%.

Is perfect the enemy of good? Weighing the evidence for biparametric MRI in prostate cancer

The role of multiparametric MRI in diagnosis, staging and treatment planning for prostate cancer is well established. However, there remain several challenges to widespread adoption. One such challenge is the duration and cost of the examination. Abbreviated exams omitting contrast-enhanced sequences may help address this challenge. In this review, we will discuss the rationale for biparametric MRI for detection and characterization of clinically significant prostate cancer prior to biopsy and synthesize the published literature. We will weigh up the advantages and disadvantages to this approach and lay out a conceptual cost/benefit analysis regarding adoption of biparametric MRI.

Diagnostic accuracy of bi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging in suspected prostate cancer: Correlation of scan results with biopsy findings in a series of 266 patients

Objectives:

This study aimed to determine the diagnostic accuracy of bi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) for clinically significant (CS) prostate cancer (PCa), and to assess the suitability of a new diagnostic pathway using bpMRI and prostate-specific antigen density (PSAd) to determine the need for biopsy.

Methods:

A total of 386 patients referred to one UK cancer centre with suspected PCa across 12 months from 2017 to 2018 underwent bpMRI, with a Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) score assigned. Of these, 266 (69%) were biopsied, with 150 CS-PCa (a Gleason score of 7 or a Gleason score of 3 with core length ⩾5 mm) detected: a 57% diagnostic yield. Imaging, PSAd and biopsy results were collated, and a confusion matrix was calculated.

Results:

Twenty-three men with PIRADS 1 were biopsied, with two CS-PCa detected: PSAd M=0.19 ( SD=0.07). Twenty-one men with PIRADS 2 lesions were biopsied, with one CS-PCa detected: PSAd was 0.28. Seventy-five men with PIRADS 3 were biopsied, with 25 CS-PCa detected: PSAd M=0.26 ( SD=0.16). Fifty-seven men with PIRADS 4 were biopsied, with 46 CS-PCa detected: PSAd M=0.26 ( SD=0.16). Ninety men with PIRADS 5 were biopsied, with 83 CS-PCa detected: PSAd M=0.55 ( SD=0.63). Among the 266 biopsied patients, a pathway offering biopsy if PIRADS is ⩾3 or PSAd ⩾0.1 spares 11 (4.2%) biopsies compared to baseline practice, with a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 10.1%, for biopsy-detected CS-PCa. The diagnostic yield is 61.8%.

Conclusion:

BpMRI is comparable to multi-parametric MRI for assessing need for biopsy in suspected PCa, albeit with lower specificity. A diagnostic pathway using bpMRI and PSAd can be safely used to avoid biopsy in men at low risk, increasing diagnostic yield of biopsy while reducing overdiagnosis and avoiding the risks and costs associated with gadolinium contrast.

Level of evidence:

Level 4.

PMP(Porphyrin-Micelle-PSMA) Nanoparticles for Photoacoustic and Ultrasound Signal Amplification in Mouse Prostate Cancer Xenografts

Photoacoustic (PA) imaging is used widely in cancer diagnosis. However, the availability of PA agents has not made great progress due to the limitations of the one currently in use, porphyrin. Porphyrin-Micelle (PM), developed by synthesizing porphyrin and PEG-3.5k, confirmed the amplification of the PA agent signal, and added binding affinity in an LNCaP model by attaching prostate-specific membrane antigen PSMA. Compared to the previously used porphyrin, a superior signal was confirmed, and the potential of PMP was confirmed when it showed a signal superior to that of hemoglobin at the same concentration. In addition, in the in vivo mouse experiment, it was confirmed that the signal in the LNCaP xenograft model was stronger than that in the PC-3 xenograft model, and the PMP signal was about three times higher than that of PM and porphyrin.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of biparametric prostate MRI for prostate cancer in men at risk

INTRODUCTION

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), the use of three multiple imaging sequences, typically T2-weighted, diffusion weighted (DWI) and dynamic contrast enhanced (DCE) images, has a high sensitivity and specificity for detecting significant cancer. Current guidance now recommends its use prior to biopsy. However, the impact of DCE is currently under debate regarding test accuracy. Biparametric MRI (bpMRI), using only T2 and DWI has been proposed as a viable alternative. We conducted a contemporary systematic review and meta-analysis to further examine the diagnostic performance of bpMRI in the diagnosis of any and clinically significant prostate cancer.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature from 01/01/2017 to 06/07/2019 was performed by two independent reviewers using predefined search criteria. The index test was biparametric MRI and the reference standard whole-mount prostatectomy or prostate biopsy. Quality of included studies was assessed by the QUADAS-2 tool. Statistical analysis included pooled diagnostic performance (sensitivity; specificity; AUC), meta-regression of possible covariates and head-to-head comparisons of bpMRI and mpMRI where both were performed in the same study.

RESULTS

Forty-four articles were included in the analysis. The pooled sensitivity for any cancer detection was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.80-0.88), specificity 0.75 (95% CI, 0.68-0.81) for bpMRI. The summary ROC curve yielded a high AUC value (AUC = 0.86). The pooled sensitivity for clinically significant prostate cancer was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.78-0.93), specificity 0.72 (95% CI, 0.56-0.84) and the AUC value was 0.87. Meta-regression analysis revealed no difference in the pooled diagnostic estimates between bpMRI and mpMRI.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis on contemporary studies shows that bpMRI offers comparable test accuracies to mpMRI in detecting prostate cancer. These data are broadly supportive of the bpMRI approach but heterogeneity does not allow definitive recommendations to be made. There is a need for prospective multicentre studies of bpMRI in biopsy naïve men.

Prostate Volume Estimation on MRI: Accuracy and Effects of Ellipsoid and Bullet-Shaped Measurements on PSA Density

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

PSA density (PSAd), an important decision-making parameter for patients with suspected prostate cancer (PCa), is dependent on magnetic resonance imaging prostate volume (PV) estimation. We aimed to compare the accuracy of the ellipsoid and bullet-shaped formulas with manual whole-gland segmentation as reference standard and to evaluate the corresponding PSAd diagnostic accuracy in predicting clinically significant PCa.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analysed 195 patients with suspected PCa who underwent magnetic resonance imaging and prostate biopsy. Patients with PCa were categorized according to ISUP score. PV and corresponding PSAd were calculated with manual segmentation (mPV and mPSAd) as well as with ellipsoid (ePV and ePSAd) and bullet-shaped (bPV and bPSAd) formulas. Inter and intra-reader reproducibility were assessed with Lin's concordance correlation coefficient and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). A 2-way analysis of variance with post-hoc Bonferroni test was used for assessing PV differences. Predictive values of PSAd calculated with different methods for detecting clinically significant PCa were evaluated by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis and Youden's index.

RESULTS

Both intra (ρ = 0.99, ICC = 0.99) and inter-reader (ρ = 0.98, ICC = 0.98) reproducibility were excellent. No significant difference was found between ePV and reference standard (p = 1.00). bPV was significantly different from both (p = 0.00). PSAd (mPSAd/ePSAd cut-off ≥ 0.15, bPSAd cut-off ≥ 0.12) had sensitivity = 69-70%, specificity = 72-75%, areas under the curve = 0.757-0.760 (p = 0.70-0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

Our work shows that when using bullet-shaped formula, a different PSAd cut-off must be considered to avoid PCa under-diagnosis and inaccurate risk-stratification.

Prebiopsy multiparametric MRI and PI-RADS version 2.0 for differentiating histologically benign prostate disease from prostate cancer in biopsies: A retrospective single-center comparison

PURPOSE

To investigate the diagnostic performance of Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System version 2.0 (PI-RADSv2.0) for differentiating clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) from benign prostate disease on prebiopsy multiparametric MRI stratified by total prostate specific antigen (PSA) concentration.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

150 patients who had prebiopsy mpMRI, serum PSA concentration and subsequent biopsy were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were stratified by PSA concentration (Group1 ≥ 10 ng/mL; Group2 4.0-<10 ng/mL). MRI findings were assessed using PI-RADSv2.0 by two blinded radiologists. Lesions were graded histopathologically using the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) score. Diagnostic performance of PI-RADSv2.0 was evaluated and compared to PSA and PSA Density (PSAD). The performance of the radiologists was compared including inter-observer agreement for PI-RADSv2.0. The correlation between imaging and histopathological biopsy results was analyzed.

RESULTS

The differences in total PSA, free/total PSA ratio and PSAD between benign (n = 78) and malignant (n = 72) groups were significant (p < 0.05). The PI-RADSv2.0 scores of the radiologists were strongly correlated (r = 0.912, p < 0.001) with excellent agreement, κ = 0.97 (95%CI: 0.90-1.03; p < 0.005). Receiver operating characteristics curve analysis showed significantly high predictive power for PI-RADSv2.0, total PSA and PSAD alone. Comparison of age, prostate volume, PSAD, free/total PSA ratio and total PSA values between ISUP1 and ISUP ≥ 2 cases revealed significantly increased PSAD (p < 0.001) and total PSA (p = 0.001) in the ISUP ≥ 2 group.

CONCLUSION

PI-RADSv2.0 had high diagnostic accuracy in both PSA groups. PI-RADSv2.0, PSAD and total PSA alone had significant high predictive power to detect csPCa. However, the combination of PI-RADSv2.0 and PSAD or total PSA for each reader showed no statistically significant improvement when compared to PI-RADSv2.0 alone.

Deep Learning Whole-Gland and Zonal Prostate Segmentation on a Public MRI Dataset

BACKGROUND

Prostate volume, as determined by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), is a useful biomarker both for distinguishing between benign and malignant pathology and can be used either alone or combined with other parameters such as prostate-specific antigen.

PURPOSE

This study compared different deep learning methods for whole-gland and zonal prostate segmentation.

STUDY TYPE

Retrospective.

POPULATION

A total of 204 patients (train/test = 99/105) from the PROSTATEx public dataset.

FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE

A 3 T, TSE T₂ -weighted.

ASSESSMENT

Four operators performed manual segmentation of the whole-gland, central zone + anterior stroma + transition zone (TZ), and peripheral zone (PZ). U-net, efficient neural network (ENet), and efficient residual factorized ConvNet (ERFNet) were trained and tuned on the training data through 5-fold cross-validation to segment the whole gland and TZ separately, while PZ automated masks were obtained by the subtraction of the first two.

STATISTICAL TESTS

Networks were evaluated on the test set using various accuracy metrics, including the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC). Model DSC was compared in both the training and test sets using the analysis of variance test (ANOVA) and post hoc tests. Parameter number, disk size, training, and inference times determined network computational complexity and were also used to assess the model performance differences. A P < 0.05 was selected to indicate the statistical significance.

RESULTS

The best DSC (P < 0.05) in the test set was achieved by ENet: 91% ± 4% for the whole gland, 87% ± 5% for the TZ, and 71% ± 8% for the PZ. U-net and ERFNet obtained, respectively, 88% ± 6% and 87% ± 6% for the whole gland, 86% ± 7% and 84% ± 7% for the TZ, and 70% ± 8% and 65 ± 8% for the PZ. Training and inference time were lowest for ENet.

DATA CONCLUSION

Deep learning networks can accurately segment the prostate using T₂ -weighted images.

EVIDENCE LEVEL

4 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.

Role of MRI for the detection of prostate cancer

The use of multiparametric MRI has been hastened under expanding, novel indications for its use in the diagnostic and management pathway of men with prostate cancer. This has helped drive a large body of the literature describing its evolving role over the last decade. Despite this, prostate cancer remains the only solid organ malignancy routinely diagnosed with random sampling. Herein, we summarize the components of multiparametric MRI and interpretation, and present a critical review of the current literature supporting is use in prostate cancer detection, risk stratification, and management.

How Fast Can We Go: Abbreviated Prostate MR Protocols

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI), composed of T2WI, DWI, and DCE sequences, is effective in identifying prostate cancer (PCa), but length and cost preclude its application as a PCa screening tool. Here we review abbreviated MRI protocols that shorten or omit conventional mpMRI components to reduce scan time and expense without forgoing diagnostic accuracy.

RECENT FINDINGS

The DCE sequence, which plays a limited diagnostic role in PI-RADS, is eliminated in variations of the biparametric MRI (bpMRI). T2WI, the lengthiest sequence, is truncated by only acquiring the axial plane or utilizing 3D acquisition with subsequent 2D reconstruction. DW-EPI_SMS further accelerates DWI acquisition. The fastest protocol described to date consists of just DW-EPI_SMS and axial-only 2D T2WI and runs less than 5 min. Abbreviated protocols can mitigate scan expense and increase scan access, allowing prostate MRI to become an efficient PCa screening tool.

Combined Use of Prostate-specific Antigen Density and Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Biopsy Decision Planning: A Retrospective Multi-institutional Study Using the Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging Outcome Database (PROMOD)

BACKGROUND

Previous studies suggested that prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density (PSAd) combined with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may help avoid unnecessary prostate biopsy (PB) with a limited risk of missing clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa; Gleason grade group [GGG] >1).

OBJECTIVE

To define optimal diagnostic strategies based on the combined use of PSAd and MRI in patients at risk of prostate cancer (PCa).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A retrospective analysis of the international multicenter Prostate MRI Outcome Database (PROMOD), including 2512 men having undergone PSAd and prostate MRI before PB between 2013 and 2019, was performed.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Rates of avoided PB, missed GGG 1, and csPCa according to 10 strategies based on PSAd values and MRI reporting scores (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System [PI-RADS]/Likert/IMPROD biparametric prostate MRI Likert). Decision curve analysis (DCA) was used to statistically compare the net benefit of each strategy. Combined systematic and targeted biopsies were used for reference.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

According to DCA, the best strategy in biopsy-naive patients was #7 (PI-RADS/Likert 4-5 or PI-RADS/Likert 3 if PSAd >0.2), which avoided 41.2% PBs while missed 44% of GGG 1 and 10.9% of csPCa cases. From a clinical standpoint, however, strategies with a lower risk of missing csPCa included #10 (PI-RADS/Likert 4-5 or PI-RADS 3 if PSAd >0.10 or PSAd >0.2), which avoided 27% PBs while missing 24.4% GGG 1 and 4% csPCa cases, or #5 (PI-RADS/Likert 3-5 or PSAd>0.15), which avoided 14.7% PBs while missing 9.3% GGG 1 and 1.7% csPCa cases. Similar results were found in patients with a previous negative biopsy. This study is limited by its retrospective nature, and no central review of MRI and histopathological findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined PSAd and MRI findings allows individualization of the decision to perform PB on the basis of the risk of missing PCa that both patients and clinicians are ready to accept to avoid this procedure.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We compared several biopsy strategies based on a combination of prostate magnetic resonance imaging findings and prostate-specific antigen density, providing a readily available tool for each center and practicing urologist to counsel patients about their individual risk of significant prostate cancer.

Prostate magnetic resonance imaging technique

Multiparametric magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of the prostate is an excellent tool to detect clinically significant prostate cancer, and it has widely been incorporated into clinical practice due to its excellent tissue contrast and image resolution. The aims of this article are to describe the prostate MR imaging technique for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer according to PI-RADS v2.1, as well as alternative sequences and basic aspects of patient preparation and MR imaging artifact avoidance.

Is dynamic contrast enhancement still necessary in multiparametric magnetic resonance for diagnosis of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The purpose of this study is to systematically review the literatures assessing the value of dynamic contrast enhancement (DCE) in the multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) for the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa).

Methods

We searched Embase, PubMed and Web of science until January 2019 to extract articles exploring the possibilities whether the pre-biopsy biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) can replace the position of mpMRI in the diagnosis of PCa. The sensitivity and specificity of bpMRI were all included. The study quality was assessed by QUADAS-2. Bivariate random effects meta-analyses and a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic plot were performed for further study through Revman 5 and Stata12.

Results

After searching, we acquired 752 articles among which 45 studies with 5,217 participants were eligible for inclusion. The positive likelihood ratio for the detection of PCa was 2.40 (95% CI: 1.50–3.80) and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.31 (95% CI: 0.18–0.53). The sensitivity and specificity were 0.77 (95% CI: 0.73–0.81) and 0.81 (95% CI: 0.76–0.85) respectively. Based on our result, pooled specificity demonstrated little difference between bpMRI and mpMRI [bpMRI, 0.81 (95% CI, 0.76–0.85); mpMRI, 0.82 (95% CI, 0.72–0.88); P=0.169]. The sensitivity, however, indicated a significant difference between these two groups [bpMRI, 0.77 (95% CI, 0.73–0.81); mpMRI, 0.84 (95% CI, 0.78–0.89); P=0.001].

Conclusions

bpMRI with high b-value is a sensitive tool for diagnosing PCa. Consistent results were found in multiple subgroup analysis.

Biparametric versus multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate: detection of clinically significant cancer in a perfect match group

Background

Biparametric (bp) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) could be an alternative MRI for the detection of the clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa).

Purpose

To compare the accuracies of prostate cancer detection and localization between prebiopsy bpMRI and postbiopsy multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) taken on different days, using radical prostatectomy specimens as the reference standards.

Material and methods

Data of 41 total consecutive patients who underwent the following examinations and procedures between September 2015 and March 2017 were collected: (1) magnetic resonance- and/or ultrasonography-guided biopsy after bpMRI; (2) postbiopsy mpMRI; and (3) radical prostatectomy with csPCa. Two radiologists scored suspected lesions on bpMRI and mpMRI independently using Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2. The diagnostic accuracy of detecting csPCa and the Dice similarity coefficient were obtained. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) ratios were also obtained for quantitative comparison between bpMRI and mpMRI.

Results

Diagnostic accuracies on bpMRI and mpMRI were 0.83 and 0.82 for reader 1; 0.80 and 0.82 for reader 2. There are no significantly different values of diagnostic sensitivities or specificities between the readers or between MRI protocols. Intra-observer Dice similarity coefficient was significantly lower in reader 2, compared to that in reader 1 between the two MRI protocols. The range of mean ADC ratio was 0.281-0.635. There was no statistically significant difference in the ADC ratio between bpMRI and mpMRI.

Conclusions

Diagnostic performance of bpMRI without dynamic contrast enhancement MRI is not significantly different from mpMRI with dynamic contrast enhancement MRI in the detection of csPCa.

Prostatic-specific antigen density behavior according to multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging result

OBJECTIVE

To analyze prostatic-specific antigen density (PSAD) according to the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PIRADSv.2) score, in order to determine how it should be used.

METHODS

This correlative series considered 952 men with prostatic-specific antigen >3 ng/ml and/or abnormal digital rectal examination who were subjected to prostatic biopsy (PB) between 2016 and 2017. Of these men, 768 had no previous 5-α-reductase inhibitor use or history of prostate cancer (CaP) and had previously undergone 3-T multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI). In this sample, 549 men were biopsy-naïve and 219 had at least 1 previous negative PB. A 12-core transrectal ultrasound-guided PB was performed in all participants, as well as at least 2-core targeted biopsies of every detected lesion with a PIRADSv.2 score ≥3. Significant CaP (sCaP) was defined as an International Society of Uropathologist grade >1 or tumor length >4 mm.

RESULTS

The overall CaP detection was 41.7%, with sCaP detected in 37.4%. sCaP was detected in 4.3% of PIRADSv.2 <3, 21.5% of PIRADSv.2 =3, 56.6% of PIRADSv.2 =4, and 78.5% of PIRADSv.2 =5, (P < 0.001). Insignificant CaP detection ranged from 6.5% to 1.5% respectively (P = 0.099). PSAD was an independent predictor of sCaP (odds ratios 1.971, 95% confidence interval [1.633, 2.378], P <0.001) and mpMRI (OR 3.179, 95%CI [2.593, 4.950], P < 0.001). Age (P = 0.013), family history of CaP (P = 0.021), and the type of PB (initial vs. repeated, P < 0.001) were also independent predictors of sCaP. PSAD was determined by PIRADSv.2 (P = 0.013) and the presence of sCaP (P < 0.001). PSAD increased with PIRADSv.2 score, even in men with CaP (P < 0.001) and slightly in men without CaP (P = 0.019). The area under the curve for mpMRI increased from 0.830 to 0.869 when PSAD was associated, (P < 0.001). The area under the curve of PSAD decreased from 0.727 in men with a PIRADSv.2 score <3 to 0.706 in those with a score of 5.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of PSAD to detect sCaP decreases with PIRADSv.2. Predictors other than mpMRI and PSAD exist. Considering these conditions, independent predictors should be integrated in a nomogram and risk-calculator to personalize PB recommendation.

Accuracy of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosing prostate Cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The application of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) for diagnosis of prostate cancer has been recommended by the European Association of Urology (EAU), National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), and European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) guidelines. The purpose of this study is to systematically review the literature on assessing the accuracy of mpMRI in patients with suspicion of prostate cancer.

Method

We searched Embase, Pubmed and Cochrane online databases from January 12,000 to October 272,018 to extract articles exploring the possibilities that the pre-biopsy mpMRI can enhance the diagnosis accuracy of prostate cancer. The numbers of true- and false-negative results and true- and false-positive ones were extracted to calculate the corresponding sensitivity and specificity of mpMRI. Study quality was assessed using QUADAS-2 tool. Random effects meta-analysis and a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) plot were performed for further study.

Results

After searching, we acquired 3741 articles for reference, of which 29 studies with 8503 participants were eligible for inclusion. MpMRI maintained impressive diagnostic value, the area under the HSROC curve was 0.87 (95%CI,0.84–0.90). The sensitivity and specificity for mpMRI were 0.87 [95%CI, 0.81–0.91] and 0.68 [95%CI,0.56–0.79] respectively. The positive likelihood ratio was 2.73 [95%CI 1.90–3.90]; negative likelihood ratio was 0.19 [95% CI 0.14,-0.27]. The risk of publication bias was negligible with P = 0.96.

Conclusion

Results of the meta-analysis suggest that mpMRI is a sensitive tool to diagnose prostate cancer. However, because of the high heterogeneity existing among the included studies, further studies are needed to apply the results of this meta-analysis in clinic.

Developments in MRI-targeted prostate biopsy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

MRI-targeted prostate biopsy may be an attractive alternative to systematic biopsy for diagnosing clinically significant prostate cancer. In this narrative review, we discuss the new developments that have occurred in the advancement of MRI-targeted prostate biopsy, over the past 24 months.

RECENT FINDINGS

MRI-targeted biopsy offers enhanced diagnostic accuracy, when compared with the current standard of care of systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided (TRUS) biopsy, by decreasing the overall number of biopsies needed, maintaining or improving significant prostate cancer detection, and reducing the detection of clinically insignificant prostate cancer. The necessity of combining systematic prostate biopsy with MRI-targeted biopsy is still debated. The use of MRI--ultrasound fusion systems for lesion-targeting is promising for optimizing significant cancer detection, but recent evidence suggests that additional cognitive biopsy cores are still useful in detecting additional cancers.

SUMMARY

MRI-targeted biopsy in selected men with positive MRI offers a number of benefits over systematic biopsy in all men, and as such, may emerge as the new standard of care for the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer.

Necessity of differentiating small (< 10 mm) and large (≥ 10 mm) PI-RADS 4

PURPOSE

Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADSv2) provides reasonable performance in detecting significant cancers. Still, it is unclear about whether all PI-RADS 4 lesions show the same cancer detection rate (CDR) regardless of tumor size. The aim was to compare the CDRs of small (< 10 mm) and large (≥ 10 mm) PI-RADS 4.

METHODS

After magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was performed in 684 men, a radiologist interpreted the MR images and detected 281 index lesions categorized as PI-RADS 4 in 281 men. PI-RADS 4 lesions were divided into small and large groups on size of 10 mm. Overall and significant CDRs were compared between the groups. A significant cancer was defined as one with Gleason score (GS) ≥ 7 or tumor volume ≥ 0.5 ml. Tumor volumes were roughly calculated as πr³4/3 (π = 3.14 and r = a half of tumor size) and were compared between the groups. Standard reference was a biopsy examination. Fisher's exact and Mann-Whitney tests were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

The overall CDRs of small and large groups were 39.0% (53/136) and 59.3% (86/145), respectively, (p = 0.0008). The median tumor volumes of cancer-proven small and large groups were 0.18 ml (0.01-0.38 ml) and 0.70 ml (0.52-1.44 ml), respectively (p < 0.0001). Using GS or tumor volume, the significant CDRs of these groups were 26.5% (36/136) and 59.3% (86/145), respectively (p < 0.0001), and using GS alone, 26.5% (36/136) and 39.3% (57/145), respectively (p = 0.0232).

CONCLUSIONS

PI-RADS 4 lesions should be sub-divided on size of 10 mm because of different significant CDRs.

Prostate MRI and transperineal TRUS/MRI fusion biopsy for prostate cancer detection: clinical practice updates

This narrative review summarizes the current knowledge about multiparametric and biparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate. This is provided from both a radiological and a urological point of view analyzing the technical aspects of fusion-targeted biopsy using the transperineal approach. We report practical considerations concerning pure cognitive and software-assisted settings, discuss the principal transperineal fusion software now available, and debate the pros and cons of choosing one approach over the other.

Financial implications of biparametric prostate MRI

BACKGROUND

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MP-MRI) targeted biopsy has been shown to identify more clinically-significant cancers and reduce the detection of clinically-insignificant disease when compared to systematic biopsy; however, the wide-spread accessibility of MP-MRI is limited. A potential strategy for reducing the cost, study time, and contrast-associated risks associated with MP-MRI is elimination of the dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) sequence, relying instead on biparametric MRI (BP-MRI). BP-MRI has been shown to have a diagnostic accuracy and cancer detection rate that are equivalent to those of MP-MRI.

METHODS

We modeled the potential cost of BP-MRI compared to MP-MRI to determine what cost savings would occur if DCE was eliminated from these studies.

RESULTS

When controlled for a 45 min time window that allows for one full MP-MRI or three full BP-MRI studies, the BP-MRI 45 min gross profit is $1531.32. This is an increase in gross profit of $892.58 for the 45 min time window or $10,710.98 in a 9-h business day when performing BP-MRI compared to MP-MRI for prostate cancer detection.

CONCLUSIONS

BP-MRI has the potential to result in substantial cost benefit and increased access to MRI in the diagnostic workflow and risk-stratification of men being evaluated for prostate cancer when compared to conventional MP-MRI.

Use and early mortality outcomes of active surveillance in patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Certain patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa) may be appropriate candidates for active surveillance (AS). In the current study, the authors sought to characterize AS use and early mortality outcomes for patients with intermediate-risk PCa in the United States.

METHODS

The novel Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Active Surveillance/Watchful Waiting database identified 52,940 men diagnosed with National Comprehensive Cancer Network intermediate-risk PCa (cT2b-c, Gleason score of 7, or a prostate-specific antigen level of 10-20 ng/mL) and actively managed (AS, radiotherapy, or radical prostatectomy) from 2010 through 2015. The Cuzick test assessed AS time trends, and logistic multivariable regression characterized features associated with AS. Fine-Gray and Cox modeling determined PCa-specific mortality (PCSM) and overall survival, respectively.

RESULTS

The rate of AS increased from 3.7% in 2010 to 7.3% in 2015, and from 7.2% to 11.7% among men aged ≥70 years. Among men with favorable and unfavorable intermediate-risk disease, the use of AS increased from 7.2% to 14.9% and from 2.2% to 3.8%, respectively (all P value for trend, <.001). The mean age of those patients managed with AS decreased from 69.9 years to 67.9 years (P = .0004). Factors found to be associated with AS included favorable risk disease; black race; higher socioeconomic status; older age; and diagnosis in the West, Northwest, or Midwest regions of the United States. The 5-year PCSM rate was comparable to AS versus treatment among patients with low-risk and favorable intermediate-risk disease, but was worse with AS among those with unfavorable intermediate-risk disease (PCSM, 1.3% vs 0.5%; adjusted hazard ratio, 2.48 [95% CI, 1.11-5.50; P = .026]) and intermediate-risk disease overall (PCSM, 1.1% vs 0.4%; adjusted hazard ratio, 2.34 [95% CI, 1.25-4.37; P = .008]).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of AS for patients with intermediate-risk PCa is increasing across the United States, particularly for older men and those with favorable intermediate-risk disease. Early estimates of cancer-specific and overall mortality rates are low with AS, although significantly higher compared with treatment.

How Often is the Dynamic Contrast Enhanced Score Needed in PI-RADS Version 2?

BACKGROUND

Prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 (PI-RADS v2) relegates dynamic contrast enhanced (DCE) imaging to a minor role. We sought to determine how often DCE is used in PI-RADS v2 scoring.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed data from 388 patients who underwent prostate magnetic resonance imaging and subsequent biopsy from January 2016 through December 2017. In accordance with PI-RADS v2, DCE was deemed necessary if a peripheral-zone lesion had a diffusion-weighted imaging score of 3, or if a transition-zone lesion had a T2 score of 3 and diffusion-weighted imaging experienced technical failure. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis assessed the accuracy of prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) at different threshold values for differentiating lesions that would be equivocal with noncontrast technique. Accuracy of PSAD was compared to DCE using McNemar's test.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine lesions in 62 patients (16%) required DCE for PI-RADS scoring. Biopsy of 10 (14%) of these lesions showed clinically significant cancer (Gleason score ≥7). In the subgroup of patients with equivocal lesions, those with clinically significant cancer had significantly higher PSADs than those with clinically insignificant lesions (means of 0.18 and 0.13 ng/mL/mL, respectively; P= 0.038). In this subgroup, there was no statistical difference in accuracy in determining clinically significant cancer between a PSAD threshold value of 0.13 and DCE (P= 0.25).

CONCLUSIONS

Only 16% of our patients needed DCE to generate the PI-RADS version 2 score, raising the possibility of limiting the initial screening prostate MRI to a noncontrast exam. PSAD may also be used to further decrease the need for or to replace DCE altogether.

Prostate cancer detection with biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) by readers with different experience: performance and comparison with multiparametric (mpMRI)

PURPOSE

To study the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa) by readers with different experience, comparing performance with biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bmMRI) and with the reference multiparametric (mpMRI).

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 68 patients with mpMRI of the prostate at 1.5 Tesla using a 32 phased-array coil. Forty-five patients (cases) underwent radical prostatectomy, whereas 23 (controls) had a negative prostate biopsy and ≥ 2.5 years of negative follow-up. Six observers (two with 1000 cases interpreted, two with 300, two with 100) performed the analysis first with bpMRI including diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps and T2-weighted (T2W) imaging in three planes and, after 1 month, with mpMRI, adding dynamic contrast enhancement (DCE). The performance was quantified by sensitivity (SNS), specificity (SPC) and area under the curve (AUC) of the ROC (Receiver Operating Characteristics) procedure.

RESULTS

Concordance within observers of equivalent experience was good (weighted Cohen's k ≈ 0.7). The two expert readers performed as well in bpMRI as in mpMRI (SNS = 0.91-0.96, AUC = 0.86-0.93; p ≥ 0.10); readers with 300 cases performed well in mpMRI, but significantly worse in bpMR: SNS = 0.58 versus 0.91 (p < 0.0001) and AUC = 0.73 versus 0.86 (p = 0.01); the limited experience of readers with 100 cases showed in mpMRI (SNS = 0.71; AUC = 0.77) and even more in bpMRI (SNS = 0.50; AUC = 0.68).

CONCLUSION

The study revealed the impact of the readers' experience when using bpMRI. The bpMRI without contrast media was a valid alternative for expert readers, whereas less experienced ones needed DCE to significantly boost SNS and AUC. Results indicate 700-800 cases as threshold for reliable interpretation with bpMRI.

Effectiveness of Bi-Parametric MR/US Fusion Biopsy for Detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in Prostate Biopsy Naïve Men

PURPOSE

To explore the effect of bi-parametric MRI-ultrasound (MR/US) fusion prostate biopsy on the detection of overall cancer and significant prostate cancer (sPCa).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We examined 140 patients with suspected prostate cancer lesions on MRI from August 2016 to March 2018. All patients had undergone 3T pre-biopsy bi-parametric (T2 weighted and diffusion-weighted) prostate MRI (bpMRI), and their MRI images were evaluated with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2.0. MR/US fusion targeted prostate biopsy was performed for lesions with a PI-RADS score ≥3 before systemic biopsy. The results of targeted and systemic biopsy were evaluated in regards to detection rate according to PI-RADS score.

RESULTS

Of the patients (mean age=67.2 years, mean prostate-specific antigen level=8.1 ng/mL), 66 (47.1%) and 37 (26.4%) patients were diagnosed with cancer and significant prostate cancer, respectively. The rate of positive targeted biopsy increased with higher PI-RADS score (3: 40.4%, 4: 56.7%, 5: 90.0%). The proportion of significant prostate cancer among positive target lesions was 65.3% (32/49).

CONCLUSION

bpMRI is a feasible tool with which to identify sPCa. MR/US fusion biopsy, rather than systemic biopsy, can help identify sPCa. We recommend using supplemental tools to increase prostate cancer detection in patients with PI-RADS 3 lesions.

Comparison between multiparametric MRI with and without post - contrast sequences for clinically significant prostate cancer detection

Background:

Dynamic-contrast enhanced (DCE) sequence is used to increase detection of small lesions, based on increased vascularization. However, literature is controversy about the real incremental value of DCE in detection of clinically significant (CS) prostate cancer (PCa), since absence of enhancement does not exclude cancer, and enhancement alone is not definitive for tumor. Purpose: To test the hypothesis that DCE images do not increase CS PCa detection on MRI prior to biopsy, comparing exams without and with contrast sequences. Material and Materials and Methods: All men who come to our institution to perform MRI on a 3T scanner without a prior diagnosis of CS PCa were invited to participate in this study. Reference standard was transrectal prostate US with systematic biopsy and MRI/US fusion biopsy of suspicious areas. Radiologists read the MRI images prospectively and independently (first only sequences without contrast, and subsequently the entire exam) and graded them on 5-points scale of cancer suspicion.

Results:

102 patients were included. Overall detection on biopsy showed CS cancer in 43 patients (42.2%), clinically non-significant cancer in 11 (10.8%) and negative results in 48 patients (47%). Positivities for CS PCa ranged from 8.9% to 9.8% for low suspicion and 75.0% to 88.9% for very high suspicion. There was no statistical difference regarding detection of CS PCa (no statistical difference was found when compared accuracies, sensitivities, specificities, PPV and NPV in both types of exams). Inter-reader agreement was 0.59.

Conclusion:

Exams with and without contrast-enhanced sequences were similar for detection of CS PCa on MRI.

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.

MRI/US fusion-guided prostate biopsy allows for equivalent cancer detection with significantly fewer needle cores in biopsy-naive men

PURPOSE

We aimed to investigate the efficiency and cancer detection of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) / ultrasonography (US) fusion-guided prostate biopsy in a cohort of biopsy-naive men compared with standard-of-care systematic extended sextant transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)-guided biopsy.

METHODS

From 2014 to 2016, 72 biopsy-naive men referred for initial prostate cancer evaluation who underwent MRI of the prostate were prospectively evaluated. Retrospective review was performed on 69 patients with lesions suspicious for malignancy who underwent MRI/US fusion-guided biopsy in addition to systematic extended sextant biopsy. Biometric, imaging, and pathology data from both the MRI-targeted biopsies and systematic biopsies were analyzed and compared.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in overall prostate cancer detection when comparing MRI-targeted biopsies to standard systematic biopsies (P = 0.39). Furthermore, there were no significant differences in the distribution of severity of cancers based on grade groups in cases with cancer detection (P = 0.68). However, significantly fewer needle cores were taken during the MRI/US fusion-guided biopsy compared with systematic biopsy (63% less cores sampled, P < 0.001) CONCLUSION: In biopsy-naive men, MRI/US fusion-guided prostate biopsy offers equal prostate cancer detection compared with systematic TRUS-guided biopsy with significantly fewer tissue cores using the targeted technique. This approach can potentially reduce morbidity in the future if used instead of systematic biopsy without sacrificing the ability to detect prostate cancer, particularly in cases with higher grade disease.

Prospective comparison of a fast 1.5-T biparametric with the 3.0-T multiparametric ESUR magnetic resonance imaging protocol as a triage test for men at risk of prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE

To compare prospectively the diagnostic performance of a biparametric (T2-weighted imaging [T2WI] and diffusion-weighted imaging [DWI]) 1.5-T fast magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) protocol with the standard 3.0-T multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) protocol of the European Society of Urological Imaging (ESUR) in men referred for a prostate biopsy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Ninety patients with a prostate cancer (PCa) risk of ≥10% according to the SWOP calculator 4 underwent first fMRI and then the reference mpMRI. Patients with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) v.2 lesions ≥3/5 on the mpMRI were scheduled for MRI/ultrasonography (US) fusion-guided prostate biopsy. Performance of fMRI was assessed using receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis and mpMRI as reference. Calculation of inter-technique agreement on PI-RADS v.2 score by Cohen's κ.

RESULTS

The diagnostic accuracy of fMRI shown by the lesion-based analysis was excellent: area under the curve (AUC) 0.961 (P < 0.001), sensitivity 95%, specificity 97%, positive predictive value (PPV) 99%, negative predictive value (NPV) 89%. The patient-based analysis showed an AUC for fMRI of 0.975 (P < 0.001), a sensitivity of 98%, a specificity of 97%, a PPV of 98% and an NPV of 97%. Agreement on the PI-RADS score between both protocols was found to be good (κ = 0.78 [0.57; 0.99]); fMRI missing PI-RADS 4 lesions in three patients. Biopsy results showed no cancer in two patients (two cores per nodule) and Gleason 6 cancer in one patient. There was only one false-positive fMRI, with a PI-RADS score of 4, whose biopsy was negative.

CONCLUSION

In the triage of men with a high risk of PCa for prostate biopsy, an f MRI protocol (1.5-T magnet, T2WI + DWI, <15 min) may safely replace the traditional ESUR 3.0-T mpMRI protocol, saving time and contrast injection.

Diagnostic Performance of Biparametric MRI for Detection of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the diagnostic performance of biparametric MRI (bpMRI) for detection of prostate cancer (PCa).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two independent reviewers performed a systematic review of the literature published from January 2000 to July 2017 by using predefined search terms. The standard of pathologic reference was established at prostatectomy or prostate biopsy. The numbers of true- and false-positive and true- and false-negative results were extracted. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool was used to assess the quality of the selected studies. Statistical analysis included pooling of diagnostic accuracy, meta-regression, subgroup analysis, head-to-head comparison, and identification of publication bias.

RESULTS

Thirty-three studies were used for general data pooling. The overall sensitivity was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.76-0.85), and overall specificity was 0.77 (95% CI, 0.69-0.84). As for clinically relevant PCa, bpMRI maintained high diagnostic value (AUC, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.82-0.88). There was no evidence of publication bias (p = 0.67). From head-to-head comparison for detection of PCa, multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) had significantly higher pooled sensitivity (0.85; 95% CI, 0.78-0.93) than did bpMRI (0.80; 95% CI, 0.71-0.90) (p = 0.01). However, the pooled specificity values were not significantly different (mpMRI, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.58-0.95]; bpMRI, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.64-0.96]; p = 0.82).

CONCLUSION

The results of this meta-analysis suggest that bpMRI has high diagnostic accuracy in the detection of PCa and maintains a high detection rate for clinically relevant PCa. However, owing to high heterogeneity among the included studies, caution is needed in applying the results of the meta-analysis.

Multiparametric MRI reporting using Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2.0 (PI-RADSv2) retains clinical efficacy in a predominantly post-biopsy patient population

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) using Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2.0 (PI-RADSv2) definitions in detecting organ-confined prostate cancer.

Methods

All patients who underwent radical prostatectomy between January 1, 2014 and December 30, 2014 were identified. All underwent mp-MRI within 180 days before surgery. Those with prior pelvic irradiation or androgen deprivation therapy were excluded. Fully embedded, whole-mount histopathology was centrally reviewed and correlated with imaging for tumour location, Gleason score (GS) and stage.

Results

There were 39 patients included, of which 35 (90%) had mp-MRI done post-biopsy. A total of 93 cancer foci were identified on whole-mount pathology, of which mp-MRI detected 63 (68%). Of those detected by mp-MRI, 14 were PI-RADS 3 (n = 6 for GS 6, n = 8 for GS 7, no GS ≥ 8) and 49 were PI-RADS 4–5 (n = 7 for GS 6, n = 33 for GS 7, and n = 9 for GS ≥ 8). There were 30 (32%) cancer foci missed by mp-MRI (n = 15 for GS 6, n = 13 for GS 7 and n = 2 for GS ≥ 8). A lesion classified as PI-RADS 4–5 predicted a higher grade cancer on pathology as compared to PI-RADS 3 (for GS 7 lesions, odds ratio [OR] = 3.53, 95% CI: 0.93–13.45, p = 0.064). The mp-MRI size detection limit was 20 mm² and 100 mm² for 50% and 75% probability of cancer, respectively. In associating with radiological and pathologic stage, the weighted Kappa value was 0.69 (p < 0.0001). The sensitivity and positive predictive values for this study were 68% (95% CI: 57%–77%) and 78% (95% CI: 67%–86%), respectively.

Conclusion

In this predominantly post-biopsy cohort, mp-MRI using PI-RADSv2 reporting has a reasonably high diagnostic accuracy in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer.