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

Evaluation of tumor microvasculature with 3D ultrasound localization microscopy based on 2D matrix array

OBJECTIVE

Evaluation of tumor microvascular morphology is of great significance in tumor diagnosis, therapeutic effect prediction, and surgical planning. Recently, two-dimensional ultrasound localization microscopy (2DULM) has demonstrated its superiority in the field of microvascular imaging. However, it suffers from planar dependence and is unintuitive. We propose a novel three-dimensional ultrasound localization microscopy (3DULM) to avoid these limitations.

METHODS

We investigated 3DULM based on a 2D array for tumor microvascular imaging. After intravenous injection of contrast agents, all elements of the 2D array transmit and receive signals to ensure a high and stable frame rate. Microbubble signal extraction, filtering, positioning, tracking, and other processing were used to obtain a 3D vascular map, flow velocity, and flow direction. To verify the effectiveness of 3DULM, it was validated on double helix tubes and rabbit VX2 tumors. Cisplatin was used to verify the ability of 3DULM to detect microvascular changes during tumor treatment.

RESULTS

In vitro, the sizes measured by 3DULM at 3 mm and 13 mm were 178 [Formula: see text] and 182 [Formula: see text], respectively. In the rabbit tumors, we acquired 9000 volumes to reveal vessels about 30 [Formula: see text] in diameter, which surpasses the diffraction limit of ultrasound in traditional ultrasound imaging, and the results matched with micro-angiography. In addition, there were significant changes in vascular density and curvature between the treatment and control groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness of 3DULM was verified in vitro and in vivo. Hence, 3DULM may have potential applications in tumor diagnosis, tumor treatment evaluation, surgical protocol guidance, and cardiovascular disease.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

3D ultrasound localization microscopy is highly sensitive to microvascular changes; thus, it has clinical potential for tumor diagnosis and treatment evaluation.

KEY POINTS

• 3D ultrasound localization microscopy is demonstrated on double helix tubes and rabbit VX2 tumors. • 3D ultrasound localization microscopy can reveal vessels about 30 [Formula: see text] in diameter-far smaller than traditional ultrasound. • This form of imaging has potential applications in tumor diagnosis, tumor treatment evaluation, surgical protocol guidance, and cardiovascular disease.

Patient-related characteristics predict prostate cancers in men with PI-RADS 4-5 to further optimize the diagnostic performance of MRI

PURPOSE

To develop a prediction model based on patient-related characteristics for detecting prostate cancer (PCa) in patients with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) 4-5 in multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI), aiming to optimize pre-biopsy risk stratification in MRI.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The patient-related characteristics including the lesion location, age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), free prostate-specific antigen (fPSA), fPSA/PSA, prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) and body mass index (BMI) were collected for patients who underwent mp-MRI and prostate biopsy between February 2014 and October 2022. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to select independent predictors of PCa and further create a prediction model. The diagnostic performance was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Moreover, sensitivity, specificity, positive-predictive value (PPV) and negative-predictive value (NPV) were also calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 833 patients were included in this study. In the subgroup PI-RADS 4, the independent characteristics of lesion location, age, fPSA/PSA and PSAD were selected to create the prediction model with an AUC of 0.748 (95% CI 0.694-0.803), sensitivity of 61.88%, specificity of 85.32%, PPV of 92.52%, and NPV of 43.26%. Besides, the prediction model in PI-RADS 5 was created using PSA and PSAD with an AUC of 0.893 (95% CI 0.844-0.941), sensitivity of 81.40%, specificity of 84.85%, PPV of 98.37% and NPV of 28.87%.

CONCLUSION

The patient-related clinical characteristics were significant predictors of PCa and the prediction model based on selected characteristics could achieve a medium risk prediction of PCa in PI-RADS 4-5.

Fusion-targeted biopsy significantly improves prostate cancer detection in biopsy-naïve men

OBJECTIVE

The precise diagnosis of prostate cancer (PC) is crucial to avoid underdiagnosis, overdiagnosis, and overtreatment. We aimed to compare clinically significant PC (csPC) detection between MRI/ultrasound fusion-targeted prostate (TBx) compared to systematic biopsy (SBx) in biopsy-naïve Japanese men.

METHODS

We included patients with suspect PC due to elevated PSA level or abnormal digital rectal examination, or both. csPC was defined as International Society Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade group ≥2 (csPC-A) and ISUP grade group ≥3 (csPC-B).

RESULTS

This study included 143 patients. Overall PC detection was 66.4% for SBx and 67.8% for MRI-TBx. MRI-TBx presented a significantly higher rate of csPC detection (csPC-A 67.1% vs. 58.7%, p = 0.04, and csPC-B 49.6% vs. 39.9%, p < 0.001) and significantly lower detection of non-csPC-A (0.6% vs. 6.7%). Importantly, MRI-TBx missed 4.9% (7/143) of csPC-A and only 0.7% (1/143) of csPC-B. On the other hand, SBx alone missed 13.3% (19/143) of csPC-A and 4.2% (6/143) of csPC-B.

CONCLUSION

MRI-TBx significantly outperformed 12-cores SBx for csPC detection and decreased non-csPC detection in biopsy-naive men. Performing MRI-TBx without SBx would have missed some csPC, supporting that MRI-TBx synergizes with SBx to increase csPC detection.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Free-Hand and Fixed-Arm Spatial Tracking Methodologies in Software-Guided MRI-TRUS Fusion Prostate Biopsy Platforms

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cancer detection rate (CDR) between the 2 dominant spatial tracking methodologies in software-guided MRI-transrectal ultrasound fusion prostate biopsy (SGF-Bx) platforms: fixed-arm and free-hand.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis on published primary analyses of prospective trials and cohort studies that enrolled biopsy-naïve patients for SFG-Bx. Inclusion criteria included the use of the Prostate Imaging Reporting & Data System (PI-RADS) v2.0 or later and the targeting of lesions graded as PI-RADS 3 or higher. Random effects models were used to assess the overall prostate cancer (PCa) CDR and the clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) CDR for both platforms. csPCa was standardized to a definition of Gleason Grade Group 2 or higher when possible. Subgroup analysis was performed by stratifying studies into the average number of cores taken per lesion.

RESULTS

The PCa CDR was 0.674 for free-hand systems and 0.681 for fixed-arm systems. The csPCa CDR was 0.492 for free-hand systems and 0.500 for fixed-hand systems. There was no significant difference between free-hand and fixed-arm cancer detection rates for both overall PCa (P = .88) and csPCa (P = .90). Subgroup analyses revealed significant PCa CDR and csPCa CDR differences (P < .001) between free-hand and fixed-arm platforms only when 2 cores per lesion were taken, in favor of fixed-arm platforms.

CONCLUSIONS

Fixed-arm platforms performed similarly in cancer detection to free-hand platforms but show a minor benefit on fewer samples. While tracking methodology differences appear subtle, further investigation into the clinical impact of platform-specific features are warranted.

Follow-up of men with a PI-RADS 4/5 lesion after negative MRI/Ultrasound fusion biopsy

Magnetic resonance imaging/Ultrasound (MRI/US) fusion targeted biopsy (TB) in combination with a systematic biopsy (SB) improves cancer detection but limited data is available how to manage patients with a Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) ≥ 4 lesion and a negative biopsy. We evaluate the real-world management and the rate of clinically significant Prostate Cancer (csPCa) during follow-up. 1546 patients with a multi-parametric MRI (mpMRI) and a PI-RADS ≥ 3 who underwent SB and TB between January 2012 and May 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. 222 men with a PI-RADS ≥ 4 and a negative biopsy were included until 2019. For 177/222 (80%) complete follow-up data was obtained. 66/84 (78%) had an initial PI-RADS 4 and 18 (22%) a PI-RADS 5 lesion. 48% (84/177) received a repeat mpMRI; in the follow-up mpMRI, 39/84 (46%) lesions were downgraded to PI-RADS 2 and 11 (13%) to PI-RADS 3; three cases were upgraded and 28 lesions remained consistent. 18% (32/177) men underwent repeated TB and csPCa was detected in 44% (14/32). Our study presents real world data on the management of men with a negative TB biopsy. Men with a positive mpMRI and lesions with high suspicion (PI-RADS4/5) and a negative targeted biopsy should be critically reviewed and considered for repeat biopsy or strict surveillance. The optimal clinical risk assessment remains to be further evaluated.

Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Transperineal Prostate Biopsy: Diagnostic Accuracy from a Single Center Retrospective Study

Simple Summary

The introduction of imaging techniques has improved the diagnostic pathway for prostate cancer. In this study we compared the diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric MRI with fusion ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy and standard biopsy, both performed through the transperineal route. Our results support the combined targeted and standard biopsy pathway to reduce the risk of missing clinically significant prostate cancer.

Abstract

The management of prostate biopsy in men with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer has changed in the last few years, especially with the introduction of imaging techniques, to overcome the low efficacy of risk stratification based on PSA levels. Here, we aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric MRI with fusion ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy and standard biopsy, both performed through the transperineal route. To this end, we retrospectively analyzed 272 patients who underwent combined transperineal targeted and standard biopsy during the same session. The primary outcome was to compare the cancer detection rate between targeted and standard biopsy. The secondary outcome was to evaluate the added value of combined targeted and standard biopsy approach as compared to only targeted or standard biopsy. Results showed that a rate of 16.7% clinically significant tumors (International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade ≥ 2) would have been lost if only the standard biopsy had been used. The combined targeted and standard biopsy showed an added value of 10.3% and 9.9% in reducing the risk of prostate cancer missing after targeted or standard biopsy alone, respectively. The combined targeted and standard biopsy pathway is recommended to reduce the risk of missing clinically significant prostate cancer.

Use of TDI during MRI/US fusion-guided biopsy for suspected prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Tissue Doppler imaging (TDI) uses the Doppler principle to quantify the movement of biological tissues.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the contribution of TDI parameters derived during magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound (MRI/US) fusion-guided biopsy for prostate cancer (PCa) discrimination.

METHODS

From March 2016 to Dec. 2018, 75 men with suspected PCa prospectively underwent fusion-guided prostate biopsy. TDI overlaid on predefined target lesion were compared to the confirmed contralateral tumor-free area of the prostate gland (using Image J). Diagnostic value of TDI parameters was assessed using histopathology as standard of reference.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven patients were diagnosed with PCa (49.3%), among them 27 with clinically significant PCa (Gleason score >  3 + 3 = 6 (ISUP 1). The LES/REF ratio was lower in confirmed PCa patients compared to patients without PCa (0.42, IQR, 0.22-0.59 vs. 0.52, IQR, 0.40-0.72, p = 0.017). TDI parameters allowed differentiation of low-risk from high-to-intermediate-risk PCa (ISUP 2 versus ISUP 3) based on lower pixel counts within the target ROI (1340, IQR 596-2430 vs. 2687, IQR 2453-3216, p = 0.004), lower pixel percentage (16.4 IQR 11.4-29.5 vs. 27.3, IQR 22.1-39.5; p = 0.005), and lower LES/REF ratios (0.29, IQR 0.19-0.51 vs. 0.52, IQR 0.47-0.74, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

TDI of prostate lesions prelocated by MRI discriminates between cancerous and noncancerous lesions and further seems to enable characterization of PCa aggressiveness. This widely available US technique may improve confidence in target lesion localization for tissue sampling.

Impact of MRI/US fusion‐guided prostate biopsy on biopsy‐naïve patients: A single urologist’s experience

Objectives

To report our experience with imaging‐guided targeted prostate biopsy (IGTpBx) for patients undergoing initial prostate biopsy in a clinical setting.

Materials and methods

From July 2014 to February 2020, 305 men who had IGTpBx performed as their first prostate biopsy were enrolled. Two dedicated magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) radiologists segmented at least 1 region of interest (ROI) for each of these men using screening 1.5T MRI images. A single urologist employed the robotic‐assisted Artemis MRI/ultrasonography (US) fusion platform to obtain 2‐3 targeted samples from each ROI and additional random samples from the zones of the prostate outside the ROIs (a total of 12 zonal samples). Biopsy outcomes were categorized based on the Gleason score (GS) grade group (GG) as no cancer, favorable (GG < 3 or GS < 4 + 3), or clinically significant (GG ≥ 3 or GS ≥ 4 + 3) cancer.

Results

The overall cancer detection rate was 75%:31% clinically significant, 44% favorable, and 25% no cancer. These findings triggered active interventions in 176 (58%) patients. A prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) level of 0–4 ng/mL was detected in 39 (66%) of 59 patients (32 favorable, 7 significant), 4–10 ng/mL in 147 (77%) of 190 patients (85 favorable, 62 significant), and 10 ng/mL and over in 44 (80%) of 55 patients (17 favorable, 27 significant).

Conclusions

The tumor detection rate was 75% with IGTpBx in patients without a previous biopsy. In addition, about 42% of detected cancers were deemed clinically significant and led to active interventions. IGTpBx as a patient’s first prostate biopsy improves the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer when compared with historical data for random systematic prostate biopsy.

MRI-targeted prostate biopsy: the next step forward!

Aim

For decades, the gold standard technique for diagnosing prostate cancer was the 10 to 12 core systematic transrectal or transperineal biopsy, under ultrasound guidance. Over the past years, an increased rate of false negative results and detection of clinically insignificant prostate cancer has been noted, resulting into overdiagnosis and overtreatment. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the changes in diagnosis and management of prostate cancer brought by MRI-targeted prostate biopsy.

Methods

A critical review of literature was carried out using the Medline database through a PubMed search, 37 studies meeting the inclusion criteria: prospective studies published in the past 8 years with at least 100 patients per study, which used multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging as guidance for targeted biopsies.

Results

In-Bore MRI targeted biopsy and Fusion targeted biopsy outperform standard systematic biopsy both in terms of overall and clinically significant prostate cancer detection, and ensure a lower detection rate of insignificant prostate cancer, with fewer cores needed. In-Bore MRI targeted biopsy performs better than Fusion biopsy especially in cases of apical lesions.

Conclusion

Targeted biopsy is an emerging and developing technique which offers the needed improvements in diagnosing clinically significant prostate cancer and lowers the incidence of insignificant ones, providing a more accurate selection of the patients for active surveillance and focal therapies.

How does a prebiopsy mri approach for prostate cancer diagnosis affect prostatectomy upgrade rates?

BACKGROUND

To compare the pathologic upgrade and downgrade rates after radical prostatectomy (RP) between patients diagnosed by prebiopsy prostate MRI followed by a combination of systematic and fusion biopsy (ComBx) versus patients undergoing systematic biopsy only (SBx).

METHODS

A retrospective review of men undergoing RP at our institution between Jan 2014 and Mar 2020 was performed. These patients were separated into two independent cohorts based on two approaches: Patients receiving prebiopsy prostate MRI during initial evaluation and those who did not receive MRI. Patients with positive MRI findings underwent subsequent ComBx to confirm diagnosis while those without MRI underwent standard trans-rectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided systematic 12-core biopsy (SBx). Primary outcomes were rates of pathological upgrade (prostatectomy grade higher than grade determined at time of biopsy) and downgrade (prostatectomy grade lower than biopsy grade).

RESULTS

A total of 213 patients undergoing radical prostatectomy, 91 diagnosed via a prebiopsy MRI and ComBx approach and 122 diagnosed by a traditional SBx approach, were included in the study. There was no significant difference between age, PSA, or positive family history between the two cohorts. Of the 91 patients who received prebiopsy MRI, 88 patients were determined to have a PIRADS 4 or 5 lesion. Patients who received MRI and subsequent ComBx had a lower rate of any pathological upgrade after RP (9.89% vs. 22.13%, P = 0.018) without a significant difference in pathologic downgrade rate (28.57% vs. 18.85%, P = 0.095). On multivariable logistic regression, receiving prebiopsy MRI during initial evaluation was the single negative independent predictor of pathologic upgrade (OR = 0.23, P = 0.017). A prebiopsy MRI approach was also the single predictor of pathologic downgrade (OR = 3.13, P = 0.041).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients receiving prebiopsy MRI during prostate cancer evaluation were less likely to have their PCa upgraded. Furthermore, although diagnosis via MRI and subsequent ComBx was associated with an increased rate of downgrades after RP, relatively few resulted in a downgrade from clinically significant to clinically insignificant cancer.

Comparative Effectiveness of Techniques in Targeted Prostate Biopsy

Simple Summary

Prostate cancer is one of the most common cancers in men. Traditionally, prostate cancer is diagnosed via transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy, using a systematic random template. Using multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, lesions suspicious for prostate cancer can be identified, and subsequently targeted on biopsy, allowing for increased diagnostic accuracy. This article reviewed the current literature surrounding various types of targeted biopsy, such as transperineal biopsy, allowing for comparison not only between targeted biopsy and systematic biopsy, but also between different varieties of targeted biopsy.

Abstract

In this review, we evaluated literature regarding different modalities for multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and mpMRI-targeted biopsy (TB) for the detection of prostate cancer (PCa). We identified studies evaluating systematic biopsy (SB) and TB in the same patient, thereby allowing each patient to serve as their own control. Although the evidence supports the accuracy of TB, there is still a proportion of clinically significant PCa (csPCa) that is detected only in SB, indicating the importance of maintaining SB in the diagnostic pathway, albeit with additional cost and morbidity. There is a growing subset of data which supports the role of TB alone, which may allow for increased efficiency and decreased complications. We also compared the literature on transrectal (TR) vs. transperineal (TP) TB. Although further high-level evidence is necessary, current evidence supports similar csPCa detection rate for both approaches. We also evaluated various TB techniques such as cognitive fusion biopsy (COG-TB) and in-bore biopsy (IB-TB). COG-TB has comparable detection rates to software fusion, but is operator-dependent and may have reduced accuracy for smaller lesions. IB-TB may allow for greater precision as lesions are directly targeted; however, this is costly and time-consuming, and does not account for MRI-invisible lesions.

Positive Predictive Value of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 for the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

CONTEXT

The variability of the positive predictive value (PPV) represents a significant factor affecting the diagnostic performance of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI).

OBJECTIVE

To analyze published studies reporting mpMRI PPV and the reasons behind the variability of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection rates on targeted biopsies (TBx) according to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2 categories.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A search of PubMed, Cochrane library's Central, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Scopus databases, from January 2015 to June 2020, was conducted. The primary and secondary outcomes were to evaluate the PPV of PI-RADS version 2 in detecting csPCa and any prostate cancer (PCa), respectively. Individual authors' definitions for csPCa and PI-RADS thresholds for positive mpMRI were accepted. Detection rates, used as a surrogate of PPV, were pooled using random-effect models. Preplanned subgroup analyses tested PPV after stratification for PI-RADS scores, previous biopsy status, TBx technique, and number of sampled cores. PPV variation over cancer prevalence was evaluated.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Fifty-six studies, with a total of 16 537 participants, were included in the quantitative synthesis. The PPV of suspicious mpMRI for csPCa was 40% (95% confidence interval 36-43%), with large heterogeneity between studies (I² 94%, p < 0.01). PPV increased according to PCa prevalence. In subgroup analyses, PPVs for csPCa were 13%, 40%, and 69% for, respectively, PI-RADS 3, 4, and 5 (p < 0.001). TBx missed 6%, 6%, and 5% of csPCa in PI-RADS 3, 4, and 5 lesions, respectively. In biopsy-naïve and prior negative biopsy groups, PPVs for csPCa were 42% and 32%, respectively (p = 0.005). Study design, TBx technique, and number of sampled cores did not affect PPV.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis underlines that the PPV of mpMRI is strongly dependent on the disease prevalence, and that the main factors affecting PPV are PI-RADS version 2 scores and prior biopsy status. A substantially low PPV for PI-RADS 3 lesions was reported, while it was still suboptimal in PI-RADS 4 and 5 lesions. Lastly, even if the added value of a systematic biopsy for csPCa is relatively low, this rate can improve patient risk assessment and staging.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Targeted biopsy of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System 3 lesions should be considered carefully in light of additional individual risk assessment corroborating the presence of clinically significant prostate cancer. On the contrary, the positive predictive value of highly suspicious lesions is not high enough to omit systematic prostate sampling.

mpMRI-targeted biopsy versus systematic biopsy for clinically significant prostate cancer diagnosis: a systematic review and metaanalysis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We aimed to compare the accuracy of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) diagnosis by magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy (MRI-TB) versus systematic biopsy (SB) in men suspected of having prostate cancer (PCa).

RECENT FINDINGS

In biopsy-naïve patients, MRI-TB was more accurate to identify csPCa than SB. However, when comparing specifically MRI-TB versus transperineal (SB), we did not find any difference. Furthermore, in a repeat biopsy scenario, MRI-TB found more csPCa than SB as well. Finally, postanalysis comparing combined biopsy (SB plus MRI-TB) suggests that the later alone may play a role in both scenarios for identifying csPCa.

SUMMARY

MRI-TB found more csPCa than SB in patients with suspected PCa in both scenarios, naïve and repeat biopsies, but more studies comparing those methods are warranted before any recommendation on this topic.

Systematic sampling during MRI-US fusion prostate biopsy can overcome errors of targeting-prospective single center experience after 300 cases in first biopsy setting

Background

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and targeted biopsy have become an integral part of the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa), as recommended by the European Association of Urology Guidelines. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the performance of MRI and MRI-transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) fusion prostate biopsy as first biopsy setting in a tertiary center.

Methods

A cohort of 300 patients was included in the current analysis. All patients presented with clinical or biochemical suspicion of PCa and harbored at least one suspect lesion on mpMRI. MRI-TRUS fusion prostate biopsy, followed by 12 core systematic prostate biopsy were performed by the same operator using a rigid registration system.

Results

The mean age of the patients was 64 years (IQR: 58–68.5 years) and the mean PSA was 6.35 ng/mL (IQR: 4.84–9.46 ng/mL). Overall cancer and csPCa diagnosis rates were 47% and 40.66%. Overall PCa/csPCa detection rates were 20.4%/11.1%, 52%/45% and 68.5%/66.7% for PI-RADS lesions 3, 4 and 5 (P<0.001/P<0.0001). Larger lesion diameter and lesion volume were associated with PCa diagnosis (P=0.006 and P=0.001, respectively). MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy missed PCa diagnosis in 37 cases (of whom 48.6% ISUP 1) in comparison with 9 patients missed by systematic biopsy (of whom 11.1% ISUP 1). In terms of csPCa, systematic biopsy missed 77.7% of the tumors located in the anterior and transitional areas. The rate of csPCa was highest when targeted biopsy was associated with systematic biopsy: 86.52% vs. 68.79% for targeted biopsy vs. 80.14% for systematic biopsy, P=0.0004. In 60.6% of cases, systematic biopsy was positive for PCa at the same site as the targeted lesion. Of these patients, eight harbored csPCa and were diagnosed exclusively on systematic biopsy.

Conclusions

MRI-TRUS fusion prostate biopsy improves the diagnosis of csPCa. The main advantage of an MRI-guided approach is the diagnosis of anterior and transitional area tumors. The best results in terms of csPCa diagnosis are obtained by the combination of MRI-TRUS fusion with systematic biopsy. The systematic biopsy performed during MRI-targeted biopsy could have an important role in overcoming errors of MRI-TRUS fusion systems.

Diagnostic performance of PI-RADS version 2.1 compared to version 2.0 for detection of peripheral and transition zone prostate cancer

The purpose of this study is to compare diagnostic performance of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version (v) 2.1 and 2.0 for detection of Gleason Score (GS) ≥ 7 prostate cancer on MRI. Three experienced radiologists provided PI-RADS v2.0 scores and at least 12 months later v2.1 scores on lesions in 333 prostate MRI examinations acquired between 2012 and 2015. Diagnostic performance was assessed retrospectively by using MRI/transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy and 10-core systematic biopsy as the reference. From a total of 359 lesions, GS ≥ 7 tumor was present in 135 lesions (37.60%). Area under the ROC curve (AUC) revealed slightly lower values for peripheral zone (PZ) and transition zone (TZ) scoring in v2.1, but these differences did not reach statistical significance. A significant number of score 2 lesions in the TZ were downgraded to score 1 in v2.1 showing 0% GS ≥ 7 tumor (0/11). The newly introduced diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) upgrading rule in v2.1 was applied in 6 lesions from a total of 143 TZ lesions (4.2%). In summary, PI-RADS v2.1 showed no statistically significant differences in overall diagnostic performance of TZ and PZ scoring compared to v2.0. Downgraded BPH nodules showed favorable cancer frequencies. The new DWI upgrading rule for TZ lesions was applied in only few cases.

Evaluating the efficacy of a low-cost cognitive MRI-targeted prostate biopsy protocol: is there still a role for lower volume centers in the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2 era?

PURPOSE

MRI-targeted biopsy has improved prostate biopsy yield. However, cost constraints have made it difficult for many institutions to implement the newer methods. We evaluated the performance of a low-cost cognitive-targeting biopsy protocol based on 1.5 T multiparametric MRI graded with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2 to examine the role for these institutions moving forward.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 251 consecutive patients with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) under 50 who underwent MRI and subsequent prostate biopsy at a single facility. In addition to systematic biopsy, targeted cores were obtained with cognitive recognition under ultrasound. A control group of 267 consecutive patients with PSA under 50 biopsied without prior MRI was analyzed.

RESULTS

Prostate biopsy preceded by MRI had a significantly higher probability of detecting both prostate cancer (68.1% vs. 51.3%) and clinically significant prostate cancer (57.4% vs. 39.7%) (p values < 0.01). Combination of systematic and targeted biopsy outperformed either regimen alone. PSA density and PI-RADS score were identified as independent risk factors, and a proposed diagnostic model (PSA density ≥ 0.25 or PI-RADS score ≥ 4) showed sensitivity of 88.6%, specificity of 55%, PPV of 81.2%, NPV of 68.8%, and accuracy of 78.0%.

CONCLUSIONS

Both pre-biopsy MRI and cognitive-targeted biopsy contributed to improvement of cancer yield. Future alterations of possible benefit included increasing target cores per lesion, and combining PI-RADS score and PSA density as indicators for biopsy. Similar protocols may represent an on-going role for lower volume centers in the diagnosis of prostate cancer.

PI-RADS score v.2 in predicting malignancy in patients undergoing 5α-reductase inhibitor therapy

BACKGROUND

To investigate if the PI-RADS score represents an effective tool in detecting prostate cancer in patients treated with a 5α-reductase inhibitor (dutasteride) and to identify dedicated total serum PSA and PSA density thresholds.

METHODS

Between April 2015 and March 2018, 75 patients under dutasteride treatment underwent multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) scans and US/MRI fusion prostate biopsy. Lesions were classified into two groups: Group 1 included PI-RADS 4 and 5 lesions, whilst Group 2 included PI-RADS 3-4-5 lesions. Lesions in groups 1 and 2 were further divided according to the patients' history of previous prostate biopsy.

RESULTS

Ninety-seven lesions were detected. In PI-RADS 4-5 group, mpMRI showed a sensitivity of 78.0% and a specificity of 78.7%. The positive predictive value (PPV) was 79.6% and the negative predictive value (NPV) 77.1%. In PI-RADS 3-4-5 group, sensitivity was 100%, specificity 21.3%, PPV 57.5%, NPV 100%. In PI-RADS 4-5 biopsy-naive group sensitivity was 71.4%, specificity 75.0%. PPV 78.9% and NPV 66.7%. In PI-RADS 4-5 non-biopsy-naive group sensitivity was 82.8%, specificity 80.6%, PPV 80%, and NPV 83.3%. PI-RADS 3-4-5 biopsy-naive group showed sensitivity 100%, specificity 31.3%, PPV 65.6%, NPV 100%. PI-RADS 3-4-5 non-biopsy-naive group showed sensitivity 100%, specificity 16.1%, PPV 52.7%, and NPV 100%. ROC curve analysis indicated a serum total PSA threshold of 6 ng/ml (AUC: 0.71-95% confidence interval: 0.60-0.81) and a PSA density >0.22 (AUC: 0.70-95% confidence interval: 0.6-0.81) as optimal cut-offs for recommending prostate biopsy.

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience the PI-RADS score proved to be sufficiently accurate in predicting prostate cancer in patients under dutasteride therapy.

Comparison of Targeted vs Systematic Prostate Biopsy in Men Who Are Biopsy Naive: The Prospective Assessment of Image Registration in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer (PAIREDCAP) Study

Importance

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) guidance improves the accuracy of prostate biopsy for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer, but the optimal use of such guidance is not yet clear.

Objective

To determine the cancer detection rate (CDR) of targeting MRI-visible lesions vs systematic prostate sampling in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer in men who were biopsy naive.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This paired cohort trial, known as the Prospective Assessment of Image Registration in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer (PAIREDCAP) study, was conducted in an academic medical center from January 2015 to April 2018. Men undergoing first-time prostate biopsy were enrolled. Paired-cohort participants were a consecutive series of men with MRI-visible lesions (defined by a Prostate Imaging Reporting & Data System version 2 score  ≥ 3), who each underwent 3 biopsy methods at the same sitting: first, a systematic biopsy; second, an MRI-lesion biopsy targeted by cognitive fusion; and third, an MRI-lesion targeted by software fusion. Another consecutive series of men without MRI-visible lesions underwent systematic biopsies to help determine the false-negative rate of MRI during the trial period.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point was the detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer (Gleason grade group ≥2) overall and by each biopsy method separately. The secondary end points were the effects of the Prostate Imaging Reporting & Data System version 2 grade, prostate-specific antigen density, and prostate volume on the primary end point. Tertiary end points were the false-negative rate of MRI and concordance of biopsy-method results by location of detected cancers within the prostate.

Results

A total of 300 men participated; 248 had MRI-visible lesions (mean [SD] age, 65.5 [7.7] years; 197 were white [79.4%]), and 52 were control participants (mean [SD] age, 63.6 [5.9] years; 39 were white [75%]). The overall CDR was 70% in the paired cohort group, achieved by combining systematic and targeted biopsy results. The CDR by systematic sampling was 15% in the group without MRI-visible lesions. In the paired-cohort group, CDRs varied from 47% (116 of 248 men) when using cognitive fusion biopsy alone, to approximately 60% when using systematic biopsy (149 of 248 men) or either fusion method alone (154 of 248 men), to 70% (174 of 248 men) when combining systematic and targeted biopsy. Discordance of tumor locations suggests that the different biopsy methods detect different tumors. Thus, combining targeting and systematic sampling provide greatest sensitivity for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. For all biopsy methods, the Prostate Imaging Reporting & Data System version 2 grade and prostate-specific antigen density were directly associated with CDRs, and prostate volume was inversely associated.

Conclusions and Relevance

An MRI-visible lesion in men undergoing first-time prostate biopsy identifies those with a heightened risk of clinically significant prostate cancer. Combining targeted and systematic biopsy offers the best chances of detecting the cancer.

MRI-targeted prostate biopsy: key considerations for pathologists

We discuss the role of the pathologist for MRI-targeted prostate biopsy with a focus on specimen processing, reporting of pathological findings and quality assurance in establishing a successful MRI-targeted biopsy programme. The authors discuss the current issues relevant to pathologists regarding MRI-targeted prostate biopsy. In addition, a brief review of the recently published literature was performed using an English literature search on PubMed with a focus on original investigations related to MRI-targeted prostate biopsy. Our search terms included the following: 'prostate cancer', 'pathology', 'histology', 'reporting', 'cores', 'imaging', 'MRI' and 'mpMRI'. Prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) and MRI-targeted biopsy has been shown to improve the diagnosis of clinically significant prostatic adenocarcinoma and can affect the management of patients with prostate cancer. The current active surveillance guidelines were based on data from TRUS biopsies and not MRI-targeted biopsies. MRI-targeted biopsy acquires multiple cores of tissue from one or more suspicious lesions found on mp-MRI. The way in which multiple targeted core biopsies obtained from a single image-directed region of interest are analysed and reported can potentially alter the Gleason score and tumour burden as reported on biopsy, which could undoubtedly alter patient management. Pathologists play an important role in the reporting of MRI-targeted prostate biopsies. How we report prostate cancer grade and extent on these biopsies can influence patient management. In addition, the pathologist should be involved in the quality assurance for patients undergoing MRI-targeted prostate biopsy.

The role of MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer

Background

The aim of this work is to evaluate the detection rate of magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound (MRI/TRUS) fusion-guided biopsy for clinically significant prostate cancers (Cs PCas), with particular interest in biopsy-naive patients and patients in active surveillance. MRI-targeted biopsy improves cancer detection rate (DR) in patients with prior negative biopsies; the current literature focuses on biopsy naive patients. We also evaluated the pathologic concordance between biopsies and surgical specimens.

Methods

MRI/TRUS fusion-guided biopsies were performed between February 2016 and February 2019. Patients with previous negative biopsies, biopsy-naive or in active surveillance (AS) were included. Cs PCas were defined through Epstein's criteria.

Results

A total of 416 men were enrolled. The overall DRs and Cs PCa DRs were 49% and 34.3%, respectively. Cs PCas were 17.2%, 44.9% and 73.4%, respectively for PI-RADS 3, 4 or 5. Among biopsy-naive patients, 34.8% were found to have a Cs PCa, while a 43.6% tumour upgrading was achieved in men with a low risk of PCa. In patients who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP), the concordance between biopsy Gleason score (GS) (bGS) and pathological GS (pGS) was 90.8%.

Conclusion

Our study highlights the role of MRI/TRUS fusion prostate biopsy in the detection of PCa in patients with previous negative biopsies focusing on Cs PCa diagnosis. The MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy is also emerging as a diagnostic tool in biopsy-naïve patients and deserves a fundamental role in AS protocols. A greater concordance between bGS and pGS can be achieved with targeted biopsies.

Validation of the PI-RADS language: predictive values of PI-RADS lexicon descriptors for detection of prostate cancer

OBJECTIVES

To assess the discriminatory power of lexicon terms used in PI-RADS version 2 to describe MRI features of prostate lesions.

METHODS

Four hundred fifty-four patients were included in this retrospective, institutional review board-approved study. Patients received multiparametric (mp) MRI and subsequent prostate biopsy including MRI/transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy and 10-core systematic biopsy. PI-RADS lexicon terms describing lesion characteristics on mpMRI were assigned to lesions by experienced readers. Positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV) of each lexicon term were assessed using biopsy results as a reference standard.

RESULTS

From a total of 501 lesions, clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) was present in 175 lesions (34.9%). Terms related to findings of restricted diffusion showed PPVs of up to 52.0%/43.9% and NPV of up to 91.8%/89.7% (peripheral zone or PZ/transition zone or TZ). T2-weighted imaging (T2W)-related terms showed a wide range of predictive values. For PZ lesions, high PPVs were found for "markedly hypointense," "lenticular," "lobulated," and "spiculated" (PPVs between 67.2 and 56.7%). For TZ lesions, high PPVs were found for "water-drop-shaped" and "erased charcoal sign" (78.6% and 61.0%). The terms "encapsulated," "organized chaos," and "linear" showed to be good predictors for benignity with distinctively low PPVs between 5.4 and 6.9%. Most T2WI-related terms showed improved predictive values for TZ lesions when combined with DWI-related findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Lexicon terms with high discriminatory power were identified (e.g., "markedly hypointense," "water-drop-shaped," "organized chaos"). DWI-related terms can be useful for excluding TZ cancer. Combining T2WI- with DWI findings in TZ lesions markedly improved predictive values.

KEY POINTS

• Lexicon terms describing morphological and functional features of prostate lesions on MRI show a wide range of predictive values for prostate cancer. • Some T2-related terms have favorable PPVs, e.g., "water-drop-shaped" and "organized chaos" while others show less distinctive predictive values. DWI-related terms have noticeable negative predictive values in TZ lesions making DWI feature a useful tool for exclusion of TZ cancer. • Combining DWI- and T2-related lexicon terms for assessment of TZ lesions markedly improves PPVs. Most T2-related lexicon terms showed a significant decrease in PPV when combined with negative findings for "DW hyperintensity."

Investigating the equivalent performance of biparametric compared to multiparametric MRI in detection of clinically significant prostate cancer

PURPOSE

PIRADS v2 stipulates that dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) imaging be used to categorize diffusion-weighted-imaging (DWI) score 3 (DWI 3) peripheral zone (PZ) lesions as PIRADS score 3 (PIRADS 3; DCE -) or PIRADS 4 (DCE +). It's controversial for the value of DCE in improving clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection. We aimed to figure out whether DCE improves csPCa detection and explore new available measures to improve csPCa detection.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively enrolled 375 patients who underwent mp MRI before MRI/ultrasound (US) fusion-targeted biopsy (TB) with transperineal systematic biopsy (SB). All lesions were classified as DWI 3/DCE -, DWI 3/DCE +, DWI 4/PIRADS 4 lesions. Detection rates of csPCa for each lesion group were analyzed. The diagnostic performance of each approach was analyzed by receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis and decision curve analysis.

RESULTS

Totally, 109 DWI 3 or DWI 4 single lesions in PZ were analyzed (n = 109). The rates of csPCa detection for Group A, Group B, Group C is 10.3%, 13.9%, 55.9%, respectively (A vs. B, p = 0.625; B vs. C, p < 0.001). ROC analysis and decision curve analysis showed the method of combining Age, PSA Density (PSAD) and the mean apparent diffusion coefficient value (ADC_mean) outperforms individual approaches for csPCa detection.

CONCLUSION

For DWI 3 lesions in PZ, DCE sequence has not additional value for improving detection of csPCa. The integration of clinical characteristics and bpMRI parameter improves the detection of csPCa.

Comparison of prostate cancer detection rates between magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy and transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy according to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System in patients with PSA ≥4 ng/mL: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Previous studies have investigated magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy (MRI-TBx) on the detection for prostate cancer (PCa). Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS), as a standardized MRI reporting system, has widely been used in the management of PCa. However, basing the PI-RADS score, the comparability between MRI-TBx and transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS-Bx) in diagnosing PCa remained inconsistent or even controversial. Thus, this systematic meta-analysis aimed to assess the value of PI-RADS in sifting better prostate biopsy method.

Methods

A meta-analysis including 10 articles was performed. In these included studies, biopsy-naive subjects with concerning PSA levels and/or an abnormal digital rectal examination (DRE) were consecutively enrolled by referral from urologists. All subjects underwent multiparameter MRI (mpMRI) prostate and the results were scored independently by PI-RADS. Subjects with equivocal (PI-RADS 3) and intermediate/high-risk (PI-RADS 4/5) lesions underwent MRI-TBx and followed by TRUS-Bx performed by a urologist. The online databases PubMed, Embase and Web of Science were searched to find all correlated articles until October 1^st, 2019. Data were pooled by odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to assess the strength of the associations. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on Gleason score.

Results

Overall, 10 studies were included in this meta-analysis from January, 2015 to June, 2019. In the comparison of the detection of MRI-TBx and TRUS-Bx in PCa patients, TRUS-Bx had a significant advantage in overall PCa detection compared with MRI-TBx (OR =0.78, 95% CI: 0.62-0.98) in PI-RADS 3. Basing subgroup analysis of Gleason score (csPCa: Gleason score ≥7; non-csPCa: Gleason score <7), a summary analysis of the detection rate of csPCa showed that no significant difference was found (OR =0.82, 95% CI: 0.58-1.16); Meanwhile, no significant difference in non-csPCa patients was also detected (OR =0.83, 95% CI: 0.53-1.28). In PI-RADS 4 or 5, no significant results were detected between MRI-TBx and TRUS-Bx (OR =0.96, 95% CI: 0.87-1.06) for overall PCa detection. The stratification analyses by Gleason score found that TRUS-Bx had an advantage over MRI-TBx in non-csPCa patients (OR =0.76, 95% CI: 0.60-0.98); However, there was no significant difference in the detection rate of csPCa (OR =1.05, 95% CI: 0.93-1.20).

Conclusions

This meta-analysis indicated that using TRUS-Bx was better than MRI-TBx for the diagnosis of PCa in PI-RADS 3; Besides, TRUS-Bx have an advantage over MRI-TBx in the detection for non-csPCa in PI-RADS 4 or 5. Therefore, PI-RADS could be used as a MRI evaluation system in the selection of prostate biopsy.

Magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasonography fusion targeted prostate biopsy finds more significant prostate cancer in biopsy-naïve Japanese men compared with the standard biopsy

OBJECTIVE

To assess the clinical benefits of magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound fusion-targeted biopsy for biopsy-naïve Japanese men.

METHODS

Between February 2017 and August 2018, 131 biopsy-naïve men who underwent targeted biopsy together with 10-core systematic biopsy at Hiroshima University Hospital were retrospectively investigated. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging findings were reported based on Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2.

RESULTS

The overall cancer detection rates per patient were 69.5% in systematic biopsy + targeted biopsy cores, 61.1% in systematic biopsy cores and 61.1% in targeted biopsy cores. The detection rates for clinically significant prostate cancer were 43.5% in targeted biopsy cores and 35.9% in systematic biopsy cores (P = 0.04), whereas the detection rates for clinically insignificant prostate cancer were 17.6% and 25.2% respectively (P = 0.04). Lesions in the peripheral zone were diagnosed more with clinically significant prostate cancer (54.8% vs 20.7%, P < 0.001) and International Society of Urological Pathology grade (3.2 vs 2.7, P = 0.02) than that in the inner gland. Just 4.2% (3/71) of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System category 2 and 3 lesions in the middle or base of the inner gland were found to have clinically significant prostate cancer. The cancer detection rate per core was 42.3% in targeted biopsy cores, whereas it was 17.9% in systematic biopsy cores (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Targeted biopsy is able to improve the diagnostic accuracy of biopsy in detection of clinically significant prostate cancer by reducing the number of clinically insignificant prostate cancer detections compared with 10-core systematic biopsy in biopsy-naïve Japanese men. In addition, the present findings suggest that patients with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System category 2 or 3 lesions at the middle or base of the inner gland might avoid biopsies.

MRI-Fusion Targeted vs. Systematic Prostate Biopsy-How Does the Biopsy Technique Affect Gleason Grade Concordance and Upgrading After Radical Prostatectomy?

Introduction: MRI-targeted biopsy (TB) increases overall prostate-cancer (PCa) detection-rates and decreases the risk of insignificant PCa detection. However, the impact of these findings on the definite pathology after radical prostatectomy (RP) is under debate. Materials and Methods: Between 01/2014 and 12/2018, 366 patients undergoing prostate biopsy and RP were retrospectively analyzed. The correlation between biopsy Gleason-score (highest Gleason-score in a core) and the RP Gleason-score in patients undergoing systematic biopsy (SB-group) (n = 221) or TB+SB (TB-group, n = 145) was tested using the ISUP Gleason-group grading (GGG, scale 1-5). Sub analyses focused on biopsy GGG 1 and GGG ≥ 2. Results: Proportions of biopsy GGG 1-5 in the SB-group and TB-group were 24.4, 37.6, 19, 10.9, 8.1% and 13.8, 43.4, 24.2, 13.8, 4.8%, respectively (p = 0.07). Biopsy and pathologic GGG were concordant in 108 of 221 (48.9%) in SB- and 74 of 145 (51.1%) in TB-group (p = 0.8). Gleason upgrading was recorded in 33.5 and 31.7% in SB- vs. TB-group (p = 0.8). Patients with biopsy GGG 1 undergoing RP showed an upgrading in 68.5%(37/54) in SB- and 75%(15/20) in TB-group (p = 0.8). In patients with biopsy GGG ≥ 2 concordance increased for both biopsy approaches (54.5 vs. 55.2% for SB- vs. TB-group, p = 0.9). Discussion: Irrespective of differences in PCa detection-rates between TB- and SB-groups, no significant differences in GGG concordance and upgrading between patients of both groups undergoing biopsy, followed by RP, were recorded. Concordance rates increased in men with biopsy GGG ≥ 2. TB seems to detect more patients with PCa without a difference in concordance with final pathology.

Performance of Combined Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion-guided and Systematic Biopsy of the Prostate in Biopsy-naïve Patients and Patients with Prior Biopsies

BACKGROUND

As recent prospective studies showed targeted biopsies (TBs) to be superior to systematic biopsies (SBs), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is gaining wider acceptance in the diagnostic setup of prostate cancer (PCa).

OBJECTIVE

To examine the performance of MRI/ultrasound fusion-guided TB in combination with SB in the detection of PCa in patients with and without prior biopsy.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A total of 219 men undergoing combined transrectal TB and 12-core SB from February 2014 to November 2018 were analysed. For all patients showing a suspicion of PCa in multiparametric MRI, TB was performed using fusion imaging with real-time virtual sonography.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Cancer detection rates (CDRs) and significant CDRs for TB, SB, and TB+SB were analysed. Further stratification was performed for a number of previous biopsy sessions and Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score. Significant PCa was defined as any PCa with Gleason score ≥3+4.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Of all, 141 patients were biopsy naïve, while 78 patients had at least one prior biopsy. Median prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level prior to biopsy was 8.4ng/ml (interquartile range 5.5-11.8ng/ml). The overall CDR was 63.5% (139/219), while the PI-RADS-dependent CDRs for the combination of TB+SB were 29.1%, 67.7%, and 86.2% for patients with PI-RADS 3, 4, and 5, respectively. Looking at TB or SB alone, CDRs were 55.7% and 57.5%. The overall CDR for significant PCa was 51.6%. (18.2%, 50.5%, and 81.5% for PI-RADS 3, 4, and 5, respectively). CDRs were significantly higher for biopsy-naïve patients (65.2% vs 67.4% vs 71.6% for TB vs SB vs TB+SB) than for patients with one previous negative biopsy (38.2% vs 43.6% vs 50.9% for TB vs SB vs TB+SB; all p<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Multiparametric MRI can raise the CDR in patients with and without biopsies performed earlier. With higher PI-RADS lesions, the risk of harbouring PCa increases. Combining TB with SB further improved the diagnostic accuracy in biopsy-naïve patients and after one previous negative biopsy.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging before prostate biopsy increases cancer detection rates in biopsy-naïve patients and patients with a previous negative biopsy. The combination of targeted biopsy with systematic biopsy improved the diagnostic accuracy in biopsy-naïve patients and after one previous negative biopsy.