Differentiating clinically significant prostate cancer from clinically insignificant prostate cancer using qualitative and semi-quantitative indices of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI

PURPOSE

To investigate the utility of qualitative and semi-quantitative evaluation of DCE-MRI for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer (csPC).

METHODS

This retrospective study analyzed 307 lesions in 231 patients who underwent 3.0T MRI. Experienced radiologists assessed PI-RADS v 2.1 assessment category, qualitative contrast enhancement (QCE), contrast enhancement pattern (CEP: type 1, 2, 3), tumor contrast ratio, and tumor size of PC lesions in consensus. Mean and 0-10th-percentile ADC value of the lesion (ADCmean and ADC0-10) were calculated. Specimens obtained from MRI-ultrasound fusion-guided prostate biopsy were used as the pathological reference standard.

RESULTS

In assessment of tumor aggressiveness, PI-RADS assessment category, QCE, tumor size, and ratio of CEP 2 + 3 were significantly higher in PC with Gleason score (GS) ≥ 3 + 4 (n = 256) than in PC with GS = 6 (n = 51) (P ≤ 0.001). Tumor ADCmean and tumor ADC0-10 were comparable between PC with GS ≥ 3 + 4 and PC with GS = 6 (P = 0.164 to 0.504). Regarding diagnostic performance of csPC in 45 PI-RADS 3 transition zone lesions, only ratio of CEP 2 + 3 was significantly higher in PC with GS ≥ 3 + 4 (n = 31) than in PC with GS = 6 (n = 14) (P = 0.008).

CONCLUSION

Qualitative DCE-MRI indices may contribute to PC aggressiveness and improve detection of csPC in PI-RADS assessment category 3 lesions.

MRI software and cognitive fusion biopsies in people with suspected prostate cancer: a systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis

Background

Magnetic resonance imaging localises cancer in the prostate, allowing for a targeted biopsy with or without transrectal ultrasound-guided systematic biopsy. Targeted biopsy methods include cognitive fusion, where prostate lesions suspicious on magnetic resonance imaging are targeted visually during live ultrasound, and software fusion, where computer software overlays the magnetic resonance imaging image onto the ultrasound in real time. The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of software fusion technologies compared with cognitive fusion biopsy are uncertain.

Objectives

To assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness of software fusion biopsy technologies in people with suspected localised and locally advanced prostate cancer. A systematic review was conducted to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy, clinical efficacy and practical implementation of nine software fusion devices compared to cognitive fusion biopsies, and with each other, in people with suspected prostate cancer. Comprehensive searches including MEDLINE, and Embase were conducted up to August 2022 to identify studies which compared software fusion and cognitive fusion biopsies in people with suspected prostate cancer. Risk of bias was assessed with quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies-comparative tool. A network meta-analysis comparing software and cognitive fusion with or without concomitant systematic biopsy, and systematic biopsy alone was conducted. Additional outcomes, including safety and usability, were synthesised narratively. A de novo decision model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of targeted software fusion biopsy relative to cognitive fusion biopsy with or without concomitant systematic biopsy for prostate cancer identification in biopsy-naive people. Scenario analyses were undertaken to explore the robustness of the results to variation in the model data sources and alternative assumptions.

Results

Twenty-three studies (3773 patients with software fusion, 2154 cognitive fusion) were included, of which 13 informed the main meta-analyses. Evidence was available for seven of the nine fusion devices specified in the protocol and at high risk of bias. The meta-analyses show that patients undergoing software fusion biopsy may have: (1) a lower probability of being classified as not having cancer, (2) similar probability of being classified as having non-clinically significant cancer (International Society of Urological Pathology grade 1) and (3) higher probability of being classified at higher International Society of Urological Pathology grades, particularly International Society of Urological Pathology 2. Similar results were obtained when comparing between same biopsy methods where both were combined with systematic biopsy. Evidence was insufficient to conclude whether any individual devices were superior to cognitive fusion, or whether some software fusion technologies were superior to others. Uncertainty in the relative diagnostic accuracy of software fusion versus cognitive fusion reduce the strength of any statements on its cost-effectiveness. The economic analysis suggests incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for software fusion biopsy versus cognitive fusion are within the bounds of cost-effectiveness (£1826 and £5623 per additional quality-adjusted life-year with or with concomitant systematic biopsy, respectively), but this finding needs cautious interpretation.

Limitations

There was insufficient evidence to explore the impact of effect modifiers.

Conclusions

Software fusion biopsies may be associated with increased cancer detection in relation to cognitive fusion biopsies, but the evidence is at high risk of bias. Sufficiently powered, high-quality studies are required. Cost-effectiveness results should be interpreted with caution given the limitations of the diagnostic accuracy evidence.

Study registration

This trial is registered as PROSPERO CRD42022329259.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Evidence Synthesis programme (NIHR award ref: 135477) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 61. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further information.

Direct MRI-guided In-Bore Targeted Biopsy of the Prostate: A Step-by-Step How To and Lessons Learned

Multiparametric MRI-the most accurate imaging technique for detection of prostate cancer-has transformed the landscape of prostate cancer diagnosis by enabling targeted biopsies. In a targeted biopsy, tissue samples are obtained from suspicious regions identified at prebiopsy diagnostic MRI. The authors briefly compare the different strategies available for targeting an MRI-visible suspicious lesion, followed by a step-by-step description of the direct MRI-guided in-bore approach and an illustrated review of its application in challenging clinical scenarios. In this technique, direct visualization of the needle, needle guide, and needle trajectory during the procedure provides a precise and versatile strategy to accurately sample suspicious lesions, improving detection of clinically significant cancers. Published under a CC BY 4.0 license Test Your Knowledge questions for this article are available in the supplemental material.

Targeted Prostate Biopsies-What the Radiologist Needs to Know

The emergence of multiparametric MR imaging has enabled a more reliable targeted approach to diagnosis of prostate cancer. Targeted biopsies are central to the MR imaging-dependent pathway to prostate cancer diagnosis and potentially improve the detection of clinically significant prostate cancers. In a targeted biopsy, tissue samples are obtained from suspicious regions identified on a prebiopsy diagnostic MR imaging. This article describes and compares principles, advantages, and disadvantages of the different strategies available for targeting an MR imaging-visible suspicious lesion.

Comparative diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy versus systematic biopsy for clinically significant prostate cancer

Purpose

To examine the accuracy of transperineal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-ultrasound (US) fusion biopsy (FB) in identifying men with prostate cancer (PCa) that has reached a clinically relevant stage.

Methods

This investigation enrolled 459 males. In 210 of these patients (FB group), transperineal MRI/US fusion-guided biopsies were performed on the suspicious region, and in 249 others, a systematic biopsy (SB) was performed (SB group). We compared these groups using Gleason scores and rates of cancer detection.

Results

PCa cases counted 198/459 (43.1%), including 94/249 (37.8%) in the SB group and 104/210 (49.5%) in the FB group. FB was associated with higher overall diagnostic accuracy relative to SB (88.5% and 72.3%, P = 0.024). FB exhibited greater sensitivity than SB (88.9% and 71.2%, P = 0.025). The area under the curve for FB and SB approaches was 0.837 and 0.737, respectively, such that FB was associated with an 11.9% increase in accuracy as determined based upon these AUC values. Relative to SB, FB was better able to detect high-grade tumors (GS ≥ 7) (78.85% vs. 60.64%, P = 0.025).

Conclusion

Transperineal MRI-US fusion targeted biopsy is superior to the systematic one as an approach to diagnosing clinically significant PCa, as it is a viable technical approach to prostate biopsy.

[MR-Guided Targeted Prostate Biopsy from Radiologists' Perspective]

The prostate cancer diagnosis has traditionally been based on a systematic biopsy method in which tissue samples are randomly obtained from the prostate 10-12 sites. However, there are concerns as the method can fail to diagnose all prostate cancers or lead to over-detection of clinically insignificant cancers. MRI-guided prostate targeted biopsy has been proposed to address these shortcomings. This method involves identifying suspicious lesions using MRI and performing targeted biopsies under ultrasound or MRI guidance. We review the methods of MRI-based targeted biopsy and discuss recent guidelines and trends in prostate cancer diagnosis.

Comparative Effectiveness of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Versus In-bore Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsy

OBJECTIVE

To examine the comparative effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound (MRI-U/S) fusion biopsy and in-bore MRI-targeted biopsy.

METHODS

We identified men aged 18-89 with a diagnosis of elevated prostate specific antigen (PSA) or Gleason 6 prostate cancer on active surveillance who underwent MRI-U/S fusion prostate biopsy (12-core + targeted) in the office or in-bore MRI-targeted biopsy (MRI-IB; targeted only). The cancer detection rate (CDR; Gleason 6-10) and clinically significant CDR (csCDR; Gleason 7-10) were compared across biopsy techniques, adjusted for patient and radiographic features.

RESULTS

A total of 280 patients (346 lesions) were included, of whom 23.9% were on active surveillance for Gleason 6 prostate cancer. In the per-patient analyses, there was no statistically significant difference in adjusted overall CDR (64.1% vs 54.2%; P = .24) or csCDR (36.5% vs 37.9%; P = .85) between MRI-U/S and MRI-IB biopsy. In the per-lesion analyses, there was no statistically significant difference in adjusted overall CDR (45.7% vs 50.1%; P = .49) between MRI-U/S and MRI-IB biopsy, but MRI-IB biopsy was associated with a higher csCDR than MRI-U/S biopsy (32.8% vs 21.4%; P = .02).

CONCLUSION

We observed no statistically significant differences in cancer detection rates between MRI-U/S fusion biopsy and MRI-IB biopsy in per-patient analyses. However, MRI-IB biopsy was associated with higher csCDR when considering targeted biopsy cores only. These results suggest that systematic cores should be obtained when performing MRI-U/S fusion biopsy.

Recent Advances in Tracking Devices for Biomedical Ultrasound Imaging Applications

With the rapid advancement of tracking technologies, the applications of tracking systems in ultrasound imaging have expanded across a wide range of fields. In this review article, we discuss the basic tracking principles, system components, performance analyses, as well as the main sources of error for popular tracking technologies that are utilized in ultrasound imaging. In light of the growing demand for object tracking, this article explores both the potential and challenges associated with different tracking technologies applied to various ultrasound imaging applications, including freehand 3D ultrasound imaging, ultrasound image fusion, ultrasound-guided intervention and treatment. Recent development in tracking technology has led to increased accuracy and intuitiveness of ultrasound imaging and navigation with less reliance on operator skills, thereby benefiting the medical diagnosis and treatment. Although commercially available tracking systems are capable of achieving sub-millimeter resolution for positional tracking and sub-degree resolution for orientational tracking, such systems are subject to a number of disadvantages, including high costs and time-consuming calibration procedures. While some emerging tracking technologies are still in the research stage, their potentials have been demonstrated in terms of the compactness, light weight, and easy integration with existing standard or portable ultrasound machines.

A Fusion Biopsy Framework for Prostate Cancer Based on Deformable Superellipses and nnU-Net

In prostate cancer, fusion biopsy, which couples magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with transrectal ultrasound (TRUS), poses the basis for targeted biopsy by allowing the comparison of information coming from both imaging modalities at the same time. Compared with the standard clinical procedure, it provides a less invasive option for the patients and increases the likelihood of sampling cancerous tissue regions for the subsequent pathology analyses. As a prerequisite to image fusion, segmentation must be achieved from both MRI and TRUS domains. The automatic contour delineation of the prostate gland from TRUS images is a challenging task due to several factors including unclear boundaries, speckle noise, and the variety of prostate anatomical shapes. Automatic methodologies, such as those based on deep learning, require a huge quantity of training data to achieve satisfactory results. In this paper, the authors propose a novel optimization formulation to find the best superellipse, a deformable model that can accurately represent the prostate shape. The advantage of the proposed approach is that it does not require extensive annotations, and can be used independently of the specific transducer employed during prostate biopsies. Moreover, in order to show the clinical applicability of the method, this study also presents a module for the automatic segmentation of the prostate gland from MRI, exploiting the nnU-Net framework. Lastly, segmented contours from both imaging domains are fused with a customized registration algorithm in order to create a tool that can help the physician to perform a targeted prostate biopsy by interacting with the graphical user interface.

MRI/Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion-Guided Targeted Biopsy and Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Systematic Biopsy for Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Purpose

For men suspected of having prostate cancer (PCa), the transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided systematic biopsy (SB) was performed. MRI/TRUS fusion guided-targeted biopsy (MRI-TB) could enhance PCa detection, allowing sampling of sites at higher risk which were not obvious with TRUS alone. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the detection rates of prostate cancer by MRI-TB or MRI-TB plus SB versus SB, mainly for diagnosis of high-risk PCa.

Methods

A literature Search was performed on PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases. We searched from inception of the databases up to January 2021.

Results

A total of 5831 patients from 26 studies were included in the present meta-analysis. Compared to traditional TRUS-guided biopsy, MRI-TB had a significantly higher detection rate of clinically significant PCa (RR=1.27; 95%CI 1.15-1.40; p<0.001) and high-risk PCa (RR=1.41; 95% CI 1.22-1.64; p<0.001), while the detection rate of clinically insignificant PCa was lower (RR=0.65; 95%CI 0.55-0.77; p<0.001). MRI-TB and SB did not significantly differ in the detection of overall prostate cancer (RR=1.04; 95%CI 0.95-1.12; p=0.41). Compared with SB alone, we found that MRI-TB plus SB diagnosed more cases of overall, clinically significant and high-risk PCa (p<0.001).

Conclusion

Compared with systematic protocols, MRI-TB detects more clinically significant and high-risk PCa cases, and fewer clinically insignificant PCa cases. MRI-TB combined with SB enhances PCa detection in contrast with either alone but did not reduce the diagnosis rate of clinically insignificant PCa.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#searchadvanced, CRD42021218475.

Impact of Surgeon's Experience in Rigid versus Elastic MRI/TRUS-Fusion Biopsy to Detect Significant Prostate Cancer Using Targeted and Systematic Cores

Simple Summary

For the transfer of suspicious lesions in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to ultrasound in prostate fusion biopsy, biopsy platforms can be distinguished by rigid or elastic image registration. This study evaluates the detection rate of these different platforms for transperineal fusion-guided prostate biopsy to detect clinically significant prostate cancer under consideration of the surgeon’s learning curve. In our cohort, rigid and elastic registration systems showed a similar prostate cancer detection rate in experienced surgeons, whereas novices seem to benefit from rigid fusion. In the total cohort, targeted fusion biopsy with a rigid registration system outperformed elastic registration target biopsy with a superior significant prostate cancer detection rate, each compared to systematic saturation biopsy. Thus, rigid target biopsy aided in reducing targeting errors that result in missing MRI-visualized significant prostate cancer. These results can provide valuable decision support in selecting a biopsy fusion platform to increase the detection rate and risk stratification of prostate cancer, especially at the beginning of the surgeon’s learning curve.

Abstract

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and MRI/ultrasound fusion-targeted prostate biopsy (FB) have excellent sensitivity in detecting significant prostate cancer (sPC). FB platforms can be distinguished by rigid (RTB) or elastic image registration (ETB). We compared RTB and ETB by analyzing sPC detection rates of both RTB and ETB at different stages of the surgeons’ learning curve. Patients undergoing RTB between 2015–2017 (n = 502) were compared to patients undergoing ETB from 2017–2019 (n = 437). SPC detection rates were compared by Chi-square-test on patient-basis. Combination of transperineal systematic biopsy and each TB served as reference and sub-analyses were performed for different grades of surgeon’s experience. In the RTB subgroup, 233 men (46%) had sPC, compared to 201 (46%) in the ETB subgroup. RTB alone detected 94% of men with sPC and ETB 87% (p = 0.02). However, for at least intermediate-experienced surgeons (>100 FB), no differences occurred between RTB and ETB. In the total cohort, at least intermediate-experienced surgeons detected significantly more sPC (10%, p = 0.008) than novices. Thus, targeted transperineal MRI/TRUS-FB with a RTB registration system showed a similar sPC detection rate to ETB in experienced surgeons but a superior sPC detection rate to ETB in the total cohort. Low-experienced surgeons seem to benefit from RTB.

Textured-Based Deep Learning in Prostate Cancer Classification with 3T Multiparametric MRI: Comparison with PI-RADS-Based Classification

The current standardized scheme for interpreting MRI requires a high level of expertise and exhibits a significant degree of inter-reader and intra-reader variability. An automated prostate cancer (PCa) classification can improve the ability of MRI to assess the spectrum of PCa. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the performance of a texture-based deep learning model (Textured-DL) for differentiating between clinically significant PCa (csPCa) and non-csPCa and to compare the Textured-DL with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS)-based classification (PI-RADS-CLA), where a threshold of PI-RADS ≥ 4, representing highly suspicious lesions for csPCa, was applied. The study cohort included 402 patients (60% (n = 239) of patients for training, 10% (n = 42) for validation, and 30% (n = 121) for testing) with 3T multiparametric MRI matched with whole-mount histopathology after radical prostatectomy. For a given suspicious prostate lesion, the volumetric patches of T2-Weighted MRI and apparent diffusion coefficient images were cropped and used as the input to Textured-DL, consisting of a 3D gray-level co-occurrence matrix extractor and a CNN. PI-RADS-CLA by an expert reader served as a baseline to compare classification performance with Textured-DL in differentiating csPCa from non-csPCa. Sensitivity and specificity comparisons were performed using Mcnemar's test. Bootstrapping with 1000 samples was performed to estimate the 95% confidence interval (CI) for AUC. CIs of sensitivity and specificity were calculated by the Wald method. The Textured-DL model achieved an AUC of 0.85 (CI [0.79, 0.91]), which was significantly higher than the PI-RADS-CLA (AUC of 0.73 (CI [0.65, 0.80]); p < 0.05) for PCa classification, and the specificity was significantly different between Textured-DL and PI-RADS-CLA (0.70 (CI [0.59, 0.82]) vs. 0.47 (CI [0.35, 0.59]); p < 0.05). In sub-analyses, Textured-DL demonstrated significantly higher specificities in the peripheral zone (PZ) and solitary tumor lesions compared to the PI-RADS-CLA (0.78 (CI [0.66, 0.90]) vs. 0.42 (CI [0.28, 0.57]); 0.75 (CI [0.54, 0.96]) vs. 0.38 [0.14, 0.61]; all p values < 0.05). Moreover, Textured-DL demonstrated a high negative predictive value of 92% while maintaining a high positive predictive value of 58% among the lesions with a PI-RADS score of 3. In conclusion, the Textured-DL model was superior to the PI-RADS-CLA in the classification of PCa. In addition, Textured-DL demonstrated superior performance in the specificities for the peripheral zone and solitary tumors compared with PI-RADS-based risk assessment.

Comparison of Accuracies between Real-Time Nonrigid and Rigid Registration in the MRI-US Fusion Biopsy of the Prostate

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly important in the detection and localization of prostate cancer. Regarding suspicious lesions on MRI, a targeted biopsy using MRI fused with ultrasound (US) is widely used. To achieve a successful targeted biopsy, a precise registration between MRI and US is essential. The purpose of our study was to show any decrease in errors using a real-time nonrigid registration technique for prostate biopsy. Nineteen patients with suspected prostate cancer were prospectively enrolled in this study. Registration accuracy was calculated by the measuring distance of corresponding points by rigid and nonrigid registration between MRI and US, and compared for rigid and nonrigid registration methods. Overall cancer detection rates were also evaluated by patient and by core. Prostate volume was measured automatically from MRI and manually from US, and compared to each other. Mean distances between the corresponding points in MRI and US were 5.32 ± 2.61 mm for rigid registration and 2.11 ± 1.37 mm for nonrigid registration (p < 0.05). Cancer was diagnosed in 11 of 19 patients (57.9%), and in 67 of 266 biopsy cores (25.2%). There was no significant difference in prostate-volume measurement between the automatic and manual methods (p = 0.89). In conclusion, nonrigid registration reduces targeting errors.

Usability and diagnostic accuracy of different MRI/ultrasound-guided fusion biopsy systems for the detection of clinically significant and insignificant prostate cancer: a prospective cohort study

PURPOSE

To explore the usability and diagnostic accuracy for prostate cancer of three multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)/transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided fusion biopsy systems operated by the same urologists.

METHODS

We performed a prospective, observational study including patients that underwent prostate biopsy due to a visible lesion in mpMRI (PI-RADS ≥ 3). We consecutively assessed two platforms with a rigid image registration (BioJet, D&K Technologies and UroNav, Invivo Corporation) and one with an elastic registration (Trinity, KOELIS). Four urologists evaluated each fusion system in terms of usability based on the System Usability Scale and diagnostic accuracy based on the detection of prostate cancer.

RESULTS

We enrolled 60 consecutive patients that received mpMRI/TRUS-guided prostate biopsy with the BioJet (n = 20), UroNav (n = 20) or Trinity (n = 20) fusion system. Comparing the rigid with the elastic registration systems, the rigid registration systems were more user-friendly compared to the elastic registration systems (p = 0.012). Similarly, the prostate biopsy with the rigid registration systems had a shorter duration compared to the elastic registration system (p < 0.001). Overall, 40 cases of prostate cancer were detected. Of them, both the BioJet and UroNav fusion systems detected 13 prostate cancer cases, while the Trinity detected 14. No significant differences were demonstrated among the three fusion biopsy systems in terms of highest ISUP Grade Group (p > 0.99).

CONCLUSIONS

Rigid fusion biopsy systems are easier to use and provide shorter operative time compared to elastic systems, while both types of platforms display similar detection rates for prostate cancer. Still, further high-quality, long-term results are mandatory.

Impact of the Number of Cores on the Prostate Cancer Detection Rate in Men Undergoing in-Bore Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Guided Targeted Biopsies

OBJECTIVE

To determine the incremental detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) provided by sequential cores during in-bore magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided prostate biopsies.

METHODS

Single-center, retrospective interpretation of prospectively acquired data in men without previous diagnosis of csPCa who underwent in-bore MRI-guided prostate biopsy between May 2017 and December 2019. Endpoints included detection of csPCa (grade group [GG] ≥ 2) and rate of GG upgrade provided by additional cores. Descriptive statistics presented as mean and standard deviation for the continuous variables, and frequency and percentage for the categorical variables.

RESULTS

Four hundred and forty-three men with 747 lesions met eligibility criteria. Clinically significant prostate cancer was detected in 43.1% (322/747) of the biopsied lesions and GG 2 PCa or greater was identified by the first core in 78.3% (252/322) of them. On a per-core basis, cores 2, 3, 4, and 5 found new csPCa in 6% (42/744), 4% (26/719), 1% (2/137), and 0% (0/11) of the cases. Core biopsy 2, 3, 4, and 5 resulted in GG upgrade in 12% (91/744), 7% (49/719), 7% (9/137), and 0% (0/11) of the lesions, respectively. Each additional core was associated with a mean increase of 5 minutes in the duration of the biopsy.

CONCLUSIONS

In men undergoing in-bore MRI-guided prostate biopsies, 3 targeted cores per lesion provide an optimal trade-off between detection of clinically significant tumors and biopsy duration.

Gleason Grade Group Concordance between Preoperative Targeted Biopsy and Radical Prostatectomy Histopathologic Analysis: A Comparison Between In-Bore MRI-guided and MRI-Transrectal US Fusion Prostate Biopsies

Purpose

To determine and compare rates of grade group (GG) discrepancies between different targeted biopsy techniques (in-bore vs fusion) after propensity score weighting using whole-mount radical prostatectomy (RP) histopathologic analysis as the reference standard.

Materials and Methods

This retrospective study evaluated men who underwent targeted (fusion or in-bore) biopsy between April 2017 and January 2019 followed by prostatectomy. The primary endpoint of the study was a change in GG from biopsy to RP at a patient level. For downgrade and upgrade analysis, men with biopsy GG1 (downgrade not possible) and GG5 (upgrade not possible) were excluded, respectively. GG upgrade, downgrade, and concordance rates of each targeting approach were compared using propensity score weighting and logistic regression with inverse probability of treatment weighting. Significance level was set at .05. Index lesion GG on RP specimen served as the reference standard.

Results

A total of 191 men (90 in the in-bore [mean age, 63 years ± 7 (standard deviation)] and 101 in the fusion biopsy group [mean age, 65 years ± 7]) were eligible and included. Fewer GG upgrades were noted in the in-bore biopsy group (14%; 12 of 85) compared with the fusion plus systematic biopsy group (30%; 28 of 93) (P = .012). The incidence of GG downgrade in the in-bore group (25%; 21 of 84) was higher than in the fusion group (17%; 16 of 93); however, the difference was not statistically significant (P = .2). Of the 77 men misclassified by both biopsy techniques, the majority (56%, n = 43) had a change in GG of 2 to 3 or 3 to 2.

Conclusion

Superior sampling accuracy with MRI-guided in-bore biopsies offers a lower incidence of GG upgrades compared with MRI-transrectal US fusion biopsies upon RP.Keywords: Biopsy/Needle Aspiration, MR-Imaging, Oncology, Pathology, Prostate Supplemental material is available for this article.© RSNA, 2021.

Reasons for missing clinically significant prostate cancer by targeted magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluates cases with clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) missed by targeted biopsy (TB) and analyzes the diagnostic impact of an additional systematic biopsy (SB) in a large patient collective.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with a 3 T multiparametric prostate MRI (mpMRI) and a subsequent MRI/US fusion-guided TB plus 12-core US-guided SB from 01/2014 to 04/2019 were included in this study. Primary study endpoint was the analysis of cases with a csPCa missed by TB and detected by SB. Secondary study objectives were the PCa detection and the correlation with clinical and MRI parameters.

RESULTS

In total 785 patients met the inclusion criteria. 342 patients had a csPCa (median PSAD 0.29 ng/mL/cm³). In 42 patients (13 %), a csPCa was detected only by SB. In 36 of these cases, the localization of the positive SB cores matched with the cancer suspicious region described on mpMRI (mCSR). Cases with a csPCA missed by TB showed either an insufficient MRI segmentation (prostate boundary correlation) (31 %) and/or insufficient lesion registration (lesion transfer, tracking, and/or matching) (48 %), a missed small lesion (14 %), or a failed center of a large lesion (10 %). Median PSAD of patients with non-significant PCa detected by SB was 0.15 ng/mL/cm³.

CONCLUSIONS

Main reasons for missing a csPCa by TB were insufficient prostate segmentation or imprecise lesion registration within MRI/US fusion-guided biopsy. Consequently, verification of MRI quality, exact mCSR assessment, and advanced biopsy experience may improve accuracy. Altogether, an additional SB adds limited clinical benefit in men with PSAD ≤ 0.15 ng/mL/cm³.

Detecting prostate cancer using deep learning convolution neural network with transfer learning approach

Prostate Cancer in men has become one of the most diagnosed cancer and also one of the leading causes of death in United States of America. Radiologists cannot detect prostate cancer properly because of complexity in masses. In recent past, many prostate cancer detection techniques were developed but these could not diagnose cancer efficiently. In this research work, robust deep learning convolutional neural network (CNN) is employed, using transfer learning approach. Results are compared with various machine learning strategies (Decision Tree, SVM different kernels, Bayes). Cancer MRI database are used to train GoogleNet model and to train Machine Learning classifiers, various features such as Morphological, Entropy based, Texture, SIFT (Scale Invariant Feature Transform), and Elliptic Fourier Descriptors are extracted. For the purpose of performance evaluation, various performance measures such as specificity, sensitivity, Positive predictive value, negative predictive value, false positive rate and receive operating curve are calculated. The maximum performance was found with CNN model (GoogleNet), using Transfer learning approach. We have obtained reasonably good results with various Machine Learning Classifiers such as Decision Tree, Support Vector Machine RBF kernel and Bayes, however outstanding results were obtained by using deep learning technique.

MRI/TRUS fusion vs. systematic biopsy: intra-patient comparison of diagnostic accuracy for prostate cancer using PI-RADS v2

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of multiparametric magnetic resonance/transrectal ultrasound fusion (MRI/TRUS fusion) biopsy versus systematic biopsy and its association with PI-RADS v2 categories in patients with suspected prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

122 patients undergoing both MRI/TRUS fusion and systematic biopsy, with suspicion of prostate cancer, with suspicious findings on MRI based on PI-RADS v2, were included between April 2016 and March 2017. Comparison of tumor detection rates using each technique and combined techniques was performed for all lesions as well as those that are traditionally difficult to access (i.e., anterior lesions).

RESULTS

Prostate cancer was detected in 83/122 patients (68%) with 74.6% clinically significant lesions (Gleason 3 + 4 or greater). There was a statistically significant difference in presence of clinically significant prostate cancer in PI-RADS v2 categories of 3, 4, and 5 (20%, 52% and 77%, respectively, p < 0.001). Fusion biopsy was positive in a significantly higher percentage of patients versus systematic biopsy (56% versus 48%, respectively, p < 0.05). The fusion biopsy alone was positive in 20%. Of 34 patients with anterior lesions on MRI, 44% were detected only by fusion biopsy, with a joint yield of 71%. In patients with previous negative systematic biopsies, 48.7% lesions were found by fusion biopsy with 20.5% being exclusively positive by this method. The percentage of positive cores for fusion biopsies was significantly higher than for systematic biopsies (26% vs. 12.3%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The incorporation of MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy significantly improves the detection rate of prostate cancer versus systematic biopsy, particularly for anterior lesions.

Comparative analysis of the expression of metalloproteases (MMP-2, MMP-9, MMP-11 and MMP-13) and the tissue inhibitor of metalloprotease 3 (TIMP-3) between previous negative biopsies and radical prostatectomies

Metalloproteases (MMPs) and tissue inhibitor of metalloprotease-3 (TIMP-3) have been associated to the risk of having cancer and tumor aggressiveness. When facing the difficulties of prostate cancer diagnosis, the expression of MMPs and TIMP-3 in negative biopsies could be helpful to evaluate a diagnostic suspicion. Our objective is to carry out a comparative study of the expression of MMPs and TIMP-3 in previous negative biopsies and radical prostatectomies (RP).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis of a hospital-based cohort including 21 patients with suspicion of prostate carcinoma, whose expressions of MMP-2, 9, 11 and 13 and TIMP-3 were evaluated by immunohistochemistry in the tumor area from previous negative biopsies and RP.

RESULTS

Immunohistochemical staining values (Score) for MMPs (-11 and -13) and TIMP-3 showed no significant differences when comparing the areas of negative biopsies where tumors subsequently developed with those of the RP. However, we did observe a significant difference in the increased expression of MMP-2 (P=.002) and MMP-9 (P=.001) in the tumor area of the RP with respect to the corresponding area of the previous negative biopsy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data indicate a higher overall expression of MMP-2 and MMP-9 in the tumor area of the RP compared to the corresponding areas of the negative previous biopsy, which seems to be associated to the process of malignant transformation.

[Artificial intelligence and radiomics in MRI-based prostate diagnostics]

CLINICAL/METHODICAL ISSUE

In view of the diagnostic complexity and the large number of examinations, modern radiology is challenged to identify clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa) with high sensitivity and specificity. Meanwhile overdiagnosis and overtreatment of clinically nonsignificant carcinomas need to be avoided.

STANDARD RADIOLOGICAL METHODS

Increasingly, international guidelines recommend multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) as first-line investigation in patients with suspected PCa.

METHODICAL INNOVATIONS

Image interpretation according to the PI-RADS criteria is limited by interobserver variability. Thus, rapid developments in the field of automated image analysis tools, including radiomics and artificial intelligence (AI; machine learning, deep learning), give hope for further improvement in patient care.

PERFORMANCE

AI focuses on the automated detection and classification of PCa, but it also attempts to stratify tumor aggressiveness according to the Gleason score. Recent studies present good to very good results in radiomics or AI-supported mpMRI diagnosis. Nevertheless, these systems are not widely used in clinical practice.

ACHIEVEMENTS AND PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS

In order to apply these innovative technologies, a growing awareness for the need of structured data acquisition, development of robust systems and an increased acceptance of AI as diagnostic support are needed. If AI overcomes these obstacles, it may play a key role in the quantitative and reproducible image-based diagnosis of ever-increasing prostate MRI examination volumes.

Advances of Zinc Signaling Studies in Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer (PCa) is one of the most common cancers and the second leading cause of cancer-related death among men worldwide. Despite progresses in early diagnosis and therapeutic strategies, prognosis for patients with advanced PCa remains poor. Noteworthily, a unique feature of healthy prostate is its highest level of zinc content among all soft tissues in the human body, which dramatically decreases during prostate tumorigenesis. To date, several reviews have suggested antitumor activities of zinc and its potential as a therapeutic strategy of PCa. However, an overview about the role of zinc and its signaling in PCa is needed. Here, we review literature related to the content, biological function, compounds and clinical application of zinc in PCa. We first summarize zinc content in prostate tissue and sera of PCa patients with their clinical relevance. We then elaborate biological functions of zinc signaling in PCa on three main aspects, including cell proliferation, death and tumor metastasis. Finally, we discuss clinical applications of zinc-containing compounds and proteins involved in PCa signaling pathways. Based on currently available studies, we conclude that zinc plays a tumor suppressive role and can serve as a biomarker in PCa diagnosis and therapies.

The Evolution of MRI of the Prostate: The Past, the Present, and the Future

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article is to discuss the evolution of MRI in prostate cancer from the early 1980s to the current day, providing analysis of the key studies on this topic. CONCLUSION. The rapid diffusion of MRI technology has meant that residual variability remains between centers regarding the quality of acquisition and the quality and standardization of reporting.

Artificial intelligence at the intersection of pathology and radiology in prostate cancer

Pathologic grading plays a key role in prostate cancer risk stratification and treatment selection, traditionally assessed from systemic core needle biopsies sampled throughout the prostate gland. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has become a well-established clinical tool for detecting and localizing prostate cancer. However, both pathologic and radiologic assessment suffer from poor reproducibility among readers. Artificial intelligence (AI) methods show promise in aiding the detection and assessment of imaging-based tasks, dependent on the curation of high-quality training sets. This review provides an overview of recent advances in AI applied to mpMRI and digital pathology in prostate cancer which enable advanced characterization of disease through combined radiology-pathology assessment.

Use of prostate systematic and targeted biopsy on the basis of multiparametric MRI in biopsy-naive patients (MRI-FIRST): a prospective, multicentre, paired diagnostic study

BACKGROUND

Whether multiparametric MRI improves the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer and avoids the need for systematic biopsy in biopsy-naive patients remains controversial. We aimed to investigate whether using this approach before biopsy would improve detection of clinically significant prostate cancer in biopsy-naive patients.

METHODS

In this prospective, multicentre, paired diagnostic study, done at 16 centres in France, we enrolled patients aged 18-75 years with prostate-specific antigen concentrations of 20 ng/mL or less, and with stage T2c or lower prostate cancer. Eligible patients had been referred for prostate multiparametric MRI before a first set of prostate biopsies, with a planned interval of less than 3 months between MRI and biopsies. An operator masked to multiparametric MRI results did a systematic biopsy by obtaining 12 systematic cores and up to two cores targeting hypoechoic lesions. In the same patient, another operator targeted up to two lesions seen on MRI with a Likert score of 3 or higher (three cores per lesion) using targeted biopsy based on multiparametric MRI findings. Patients with negative multiparametric MRI (Likert score ≤2) had systematic biopsy only. The primary outcome was the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer of International Society of Urological Pathology grade group 2 or higher (csPCa-A), analysed in all patients who received both systematic and targeted biopsies and whose results from both were available for pathological central review, including patients who had protocol deviations. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02485379, and is closed to new participants.

FINDINGS

Between July 15, 2015, and Aug 11, 2016, we enrolled 275 patients. 24 (9%) were excluded from the analysis. 53 (21%) of 251 analysed patients had negative (Likert ≤2) multiparametric MRI. csPCa-A was detected in 94 (37%) of 251 patients. 13 (14%) of these 94 patients were diagnosed by systematic biopsy only, 19 (20%) by targeted biopsy only, and 62 (66%) by both techniques. Detection of csPCa-A by systematic biopsy (29·9%, 95% CI 24·3-36·0) and targeted biopsy (32·3%, 26·5-38·4) did not differ significantly (p=0·38). csPCa-A would have been missed in 5·2% (95% CI 2·8-8·7) of patients had systematic biopsy not been done, and in 7·6% (4·6-11·6) of patients had targeted biopsy not been done. Four grade 3 post-biopsy adverse events were reported (3 cases of prostatitis, and 1 case of urinary retention with haematuria).

INTERPRETATION

There was no difference between systematic biopsy and targeted biopsy in the detection of ISUP grade group 2 or higher prostate cancer; however, this detection was improved by combining both techniques and both techniques showed substantial added value. Thus, obtaining a multiparametric MRI before biopsy in biopsy-naive patients can improve the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer but does not seem to avoid the need for systematic biopsy.

FUNDING

French National Cancer Institute.

Initial experience of magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasonography fusion transperineal biopsy: Biopsy techniques and results for 75 patients

Purpose

The aim of this study is to describe the technique and to report early results of transperineal magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography (MRI-US) fusion biopsy.

Materials and Methods

A total of 75 patients underwent MRI-US fusion transperineal biopsy. Targeted biopsy via MRI-US fusion imaging was carried out for cancer-suspicious lesions with additional systematic biopsy. Detection rates for overall and clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) were evaluated and compared between systematic and targeted biopsy. In addition, further investigation into the detection rate according to prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) score was done. Results of repeat biopsies were also evaluated.

Results

Overall cancer detection rate was 61.3% (46 patients) and the detection rate for csPCa was 42.7% (32 patients). Overall detection rates for systematic and targeted biopsy were 41.3% and 57.3% (p<0.05), respectively. Detection rates for csPCa were 26.7% and 41.3%, respectively (p<0.05). The cancer detection rates via MRI fusion target biopsy were 30.8% in PI-RADS 3, 62.1% in PI-RADS 4 and 89.4% in PI-RADS 5. Rates of csPCa missed by targeted biopsy and systematic biopsy were 0.0% and 25.0%, respectively. The cancer detection rate in repeat biopsies was 61.1% (11 among 18 patients) in which 55.5% of cancer suspected lesions were located in the anterior portion.

Conclusions

Transperineal MRI-US fusion biopsy is useful for improving overall cancer detection rate and especially detection of csPCa. Transperineal MRI-US targeted biopsy show potential benefits to improve cancer detection rate in patients with high PI-RADS score, tumor located at the anterior portion and in repeat biopsies.

Risk Stratification of Prostate Cancer Using the Combination of Histogram Analysis of Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Across Tumor Diffusion Volume and Clinical Information: A Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of quantitative MRI and clinical information in the risk stratification of prostate cancer (PCa) patients was evaluated separately in previous research; however, the differentiation power of combining quantitative MRI and clinical information has yet to be investigated.

PURPOSE

To investigate the power of combining histogram analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) of tumor diffusion volume (tDv) with clinical information for the differentiation of low-grade (Gleason score [GS] ≤6) and high-grade (GS ≥7) PCa.

STUDY TYPE

Retrospective.

POPULATION

Fifty-nine PCa patients who underwent preoperative diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) (acquired with b = 0, 1000 mm² /s) and followed by radical prostatectomy within 6 months.

SEQUENCES

T₂ -weighted, DWI, and ADC images at 3.0T.

ASSESSMENT

tDv defined with different ADC thresholds were analyzed for each patient and combined with age and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level. Binary logistic regression with backward feature selection was applied to determine the best discrimination and corresponding combination of parameters.

STATISTICAL TESTS

Kolmogorov-Smirnov test; independent samples t-test; Mann-Whitney U-test; Spearman's rank correlation; receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis; binary logistical regression.

RESULTS

PSA and the 10^th percentile ADC value of tDv defined with different diffusion thresholds were significantly different between low-grade and high-grade PCa groups (P < 0.05 for all). Median ADC of tDv based on a threshold of 1.008 × 10^-3 mm² /s exhibited the best performance (AUC = 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.75-0.94), whereas binary logistic regression with backward feature selection achieved 97.20% accuracy with AUC = 0.978 (95% CI: 0.929-0.997).

DATA CONCLUSION

The discriminatory power of a single histogram variable of ADC in tDv was not significantly superior to that of a single clinical parameter. The combination of histogram analysis of ADC of tDv and clinical information using logistic regression might significantly improve the risk stratification of PCa and achieve reasonably high accuracy.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;49:556-564.

Comparison of Elastic and Rigid Registration during Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion-Guided Prostate Biopsy: A Multi-Operator Phantom Study

PURPOSE

The relative value of rigid or elastic registration during magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion guided prostate biopsy has been poorly studied. We compared registration errors (the distance between a region of interest and fiducial markers) between rigid and elastic registration during fusion guided prostate biopsy using a prostate phantom model.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Four gold fiducial markers visible on magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound were placed throughout 1 phantom prostate model. The phantom underwent magnetic resonance imaging and the fiducial markers were labeled as regions of interest. An experienced user and a novice user of fusion guided prostate biopsy targeted regions of interest and then the corresponding fiducial markers on ultrasound after rigid and then elastic registration. Registration errors were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 224 registration error measurements were recorded. Overall elastic registration did not provide significantly improved registration error over rigid registration (mean ± SD 4.87 ± 3.50 vs 4.11 ± 2.09 mm, p = 0.05). However, lesions near the edge of the phantom showed increased registration errors when using elastic registration (5.70 ± 3.43 vs 3.23 ± 1.68 mm, p = 0.03). Compared to the novice user the experienced user reported decreased registration error with rigid registration (3.25 ± 1.49 vs 4.98 ± 2.10 mm, p <0.01) and elastic registration (3.94 ± 2.61 vs 6.07 ± 4.16 mm, p <0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

We found no difference in registration errors between rigid and elastic registration overall but rigid registration decreased the registration error of targets near the prostate edge. Additionally, operator experience reduced registration errors regardless of the registration method. Therefore, elastic registration algorithms cannot serve as a replacement for attention to detail during the registration process and anatomical landmarks indicating accurate registration when beginning the procedure and before targeting each region of interest.

Follow-up of negative MRI-targeted prostate biopsies: when are we missing cancer?

INTRODUCTION

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has improved clinicians' ability to detect clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). Combining or fusing these images with the real-time imaging of transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) allows urologists to better sample lesions with a targeted biopsy (Tbx) leading to the detection of greater rates of csPCa and decreased rates of low-risk PCa. In this review, we evaluate the technical aspects of the mpMRI-guided Tbx procedure to identify possible sources of error and provide clinical context to a negative Tbx.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted of possible reasons for false-negative TBx. This includes discussion on false-positive mpMRI findings, termed "PCa mimics," that may incorrectly suggest high likelihood of csPCa as well as errors during Tbx resulting in inexact image fusion or biopsy needle placement.

RESULTS

Despite the strong negative predictive value associated with Tbx, concerns of missed disease often remain, especially with MR-visible lesions. This raises questions about what to do next after a negative Tbx result. Potential sources of error can arise from each step in the targeted biopsy process ranging from "PCa mimics" or technical errors during mpMRI acquisition to failure to properly register MRI and TRUS images on a fusion biopsy platform to technical or anatomic limits on needle placement accuracy.

CONCLUSIONS

A better understanding of these potential pitfalls in the mpMRI-guided Tbx procedure will aid interpretation of a negative Tbx, identify areas for improving technical proficiency, and improve both physician understanding of negative Tbx and patient-management options.

Improved Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Pathology Correlation With Imaging-Derived, 3D-Printed, Patient-Specific Whole-Mount Molds of the Prostate

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare the anatomical registration of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and prostate whole-mount obtained with 3D-printed, patient-specific, MRI-derived molds (PSM) versus conventional whole-mount sectioning (WMS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Based on an a priori power analysis, this institutional review board-approved study prospectively included 50 consecutive men who underwent 3 T multiparametric prostate MRI followed by radical prostatectomy. Two blinded and independent readers (R1 and R2) outlined the contours of the prostate, tumor, peripheral, and transition zones in the MRI scans using regions of interest. These were compared with the corresponding regions of interest from the whole-mounted histopathology, the reference standard, using PSM whole-mount results obtained in the study group (n = 25) or conventional WMS in the control group (n = 25). The spatial overlap across the MRI and histology data sets was calculated using the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) for the prostate overall (DSCprostate), tumor (DSCtumor), peripheral (DSCPZ), and transition (DSCTZ) zone. Results in the study and control groups were compared using Wilcoxon rank sum test.

RESULTS

The MRI histopathology anatomical registration for the prostate gland overall, tumor, peripheral, and transition zones were significantly superior with the use of PSMs (DSCs for R1: 0.95, 0.86, 0.84, and 0.89; for R2: 0.93, 0.75, 0.78, and 0.85, respectively) than with the use of standard WMS (R1: 0.85, 0.46, 0.66, and 0.69; R2: 0.85, 0.46, 0.66, and 0.69) (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of PSMs for prostate specimen whole-mount sectioning provides significantly superior anatomical registration of in vivo multiparametric MRI and ex vivo prostate whole-mounts than conventional WMS.

Prostate Cancer Molecular Imaging Standardized Evaluation (PROMISE): Proposed miTNM Classification for the Interpretation of PSMA-Ligand PET/CT

Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-ligand PET imaging provides unprecedented accuracy for whole-body staging of prostate cancer. As PSMA-ligand PET/CT is increasingly adopted in clinical trials and routine practice worldwide, a unified language for image reporting is urgently needed. We propose a molecular imaging TNM system (miTNM, version 1.0) as a standardized reporting framework for PSMA-ligand PET/CT or PET/MRI. miTNM is designed to organize findings in comprehensible categories to promote the exchange of information among physicians and institutions. Additionally, flowcharts integrating findings of PSMA-ligand PET and morphologic imaging have been designed to guide image interpretation. Specific applications, such as assessment of prognosis or impact on management, should be evaluated in future trials. miTNM is a living framework that evolves with clinical experience and scientific data.

Support Vector Machines (SVM) classification of prostate cancer Gleason score in central gland using multiparametric magnetic resonance images: A cross-validated study

PURPOSE

To assess the performance of Support Vector Machines (SVM) classification to stratify the Gleason Score (GS) of prostate cancer (PCa) in the central gland (CG) based on image features across multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board, and informed consent was waived. One hundred fifty-two CG cancerous ROIs were identified through radiological-pathological correlation. Eleven parameters were derived from the mpMRI and histogram analysis, including mean, median, the 10th percentile, skewness and kurtosis, was performed for each parameter. In total, fifty-five variables were calculated and processed in the SVM classification. The classification model was developed with 10-fold cross-validation and was further validated mutually across two separated datasets.

RESULTS

With six variables selected by a feature-selection and variation test, the prediction model yielded an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) of 0.99 (95% CI: 0.98, 1.00) when trained in dataset A2 and 0.91 (95% CI: 0.85, 0.95) for the validation in dataset B2. When the data sets were reversed, an AUC of 0.99 (95% CI: 0.99, 1.00) was obtained when the model was trained in dataset B2 and 0.90 (95% CI: 0.85, 0.95) for the validation in dataset A2.

CONCLUSION

The SVM classification based on mpMRI derived image features obtains consistently accurate classification of the GS of PCa in the CG.

Detection of prostate cancer in multiparametric MRI using random forest with instance weighting

A prostate computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) based on random forest to detect prostate cancer using a combination of spatial, intensity, and texture features extracted from three sequences, T2W, ADC, and B2000 images, is proposed. The random forest training considers instance-level weighting for equal treatment of small and large cancerous lesions as well as small and large prostate backgrounds. Two other approaches, based on an AutoContext pipeline intended to make better use of sequence-specific patterns, were considered. One pipeline uses random forest on individual sequences while the other uses an image filter described to produce probability map-like images. These were compared to a previously published CAD approach based on support vector machine (SVM) evaluated on the same data. The random forest, features, sampling strategy, and instance-level weighting improve prostate cancer detection performance [area under the curve (AUC) 0.93] in comparison to SVM (AUC 0.86) on the same test data. Using a simple image filtering technique as a first-stage detector to highlight likely regions of prostate cancer helps with learning stability over using a learning-based approach owing to visibility and ambiguity of annotations in each sequence.

Biomarker, Molecular, and Technologic Advances in Urologic Pathology, Oncology, and Imaging

Urologic pathology is evolving rapidly. Emerging trends include the expanded diagnostic utility of biomarkers and molecular testing, as well as adapting to the plethora of technical advances occurring in genitourinary oncology, surgical practice, and imaging. We illustrate those trends by highlighting our approach to the diagnostic workup of a few selected disease entities that pathologists may encounter, including newly recognized subtypes of renal cell carcinoma, pheochromocytoma, and prostate cancer, some of which harbor a distinctive chromosomal translocation, gene loss, or mutation. We illustrate applications of immunohistochemistry for differential diagnosis of needle core renal biopsies, intraductal carcinoma of the prostate, and amyloidosis and cite encouraging results from early studies using targeted gene expression panels to predict recurrence after prostate cancer surgery. At our institution, pathologists are working closely with urologic surgeons and interventional radiologists to explore the use of intraoperative frozen sections for margins and nerve sparing during robotic prostatectomy, to pioneer minimally invasive videoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy, and to refine image-guided needle core biopsies and cryotherapy of prostate cancer as well as blue-light/fluorescence cystoscopy. This collaborative, multidisciplinary approach enhances clinical management and research, and optimizes the care of patients with urologic disorders.

The Potential Use of Ultrasound-Magnetic Resonance Imaging Fusion Applications in Musculoskeletal Intervention

We sought to assess the potential use of an application allowing real-time ultrasound spatial registration with previously acquired magnetic resonance imaging in musculoskeletal procedures. The ultrasound fusion application was used to perform a range of outpatient procedures including piriformis, sacroiliac joint, pudendal and intercostal nerve perineurial injections, hamstring-origin calcific tendonopathy barbotage, and 2 soft tissue biopsies at our institution in 2015. The application was used in a total of 7 procedures in 7 patients, all of which were technically successful. The ages of patients ranged from 19 to 86 years. Particular use of the fusion application compared to sonography alone was noted in the biopsy of certain soft tissue lesions and in perineurial therapeutic injections.

Accuracy of Elastic Fusion of Prostate Magnetic Resonance and Transrectal Ultrasound Images under Routine Conditions: A Prospective Multi-Operator Study

Purpose

To evaluate in unselected patients imaged under routine conditions the co-registration accuracy of elastic fusion between magnetic resonance (MR) and ultrasound (US) images obtained by the Koelis Urostation^™.

Materials and Methods

We prospectively included 15 consecutive patients referred for placement of intraprostatic fiducials before radiotherapy and who gave written informed consent by signing the Institutional Review Board-approved forms. Three fiducials were placed in the prostate under US guidance in standardized positions (right apex, left mid-gland, right base) using the Koelis Urostation^™. Patients then underwent prostate MR imaging. Four operators outlined the prostate on MR and US images and an elastic fusion was retrospectively performed. Fiducials were used to measure the overall target registration error (TRE_3D), the error along the antero-posterior (TRE_AP), right-left (TRE_RL) and head-feet (TRE_HF) directions, and within the plane orthogonal to the virtual biopsy track (TRE_2D).

Results

Median TRE_3D and TRE_2D were 3.8–5.6 mm, and 2.5–3.6 mm, respectively. TRE_3D was significantly influenced by the operator (p = 0.013), fiducial location (p = 0.001) and 3D axis orientation (p<0.0001). The worst results were obtained by the least experienced operator. TRE_3D was smaller in mid-gland and base than in apex (average difference: -1.21 mm (95% confidence interval (95%CI): -2.03; -0.4) and -1.56 mm (95%CI: -2.44; -0.69) respectively). TRE_AP and TRE_HF were larger than TRE_RL (average difference: +1.29 mm (95%CI: +0.87; +1.71) and +0.59 mm (95%CI: +0.1; +0.95) respectively).

Conclusions

Registration error values were reasonable for clinical practice. The co-registration accuracy was significantly influenced by the operator’s experience, and significantly poorer in the antero-posterior direction and at the apex.

An initial negative round of targeted biopsies in men with highly suspicious multiparametric magnetic resonance findings does not exclude clinically significant prostate cancer-Preliminary experience

BACKGROUND

Targeted prostate biopsies are changing the landscape of prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis with the degree of suspicion on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) being a strong predictor of targeted biopsy outcome. Data regarding the rate and potential causes of false-negative magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound (MRI-TRUS) fusion-targeted biopsy in patients with highly suspicious mpMRI findings are lacking.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the rate of clinically significant PCa detection in repeat targeted biopsy or surgery in patients with highly suspicious mpMRI findings and in an initial negative MRI-TRUS fusion-targeted biopsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this single-center, retrospective study of prospectively generated data, men with highly suspicious lesions (Likert 5 score) on mpMRI and an initial negative MRI-TRUS fusion-targeted biopsy were reviewed. The rate of PCa detection in a subsequent MRI-TRUS fusion-targeted biopsy or radical prostatectomy was determined. Tumors in the intermediate- and high-risk groups according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria were considered clinically significant.

RESULTS

A total of 32 men with 38 Likert 5 lesions were identified. Repeat targeted biopsy or surgery detected cancer in 42% (16/38) of the Likert 5 lesions with initial negative targeted biopsy. Most of these cancers were intermediate- (69%; 11/16) or high-risk (25%; 4/16) tumors.

CONCLUSION

A negative round of targeted biopsies does not exclude clinically significant PCa in men with highly suspicious mpMRI findings. Patients with imaging-pathology disagreement should be carefully reviewed and considered for repeat biopsy or for strict surveillance.

TRUS-MR Fusion Biopsy of the Prostate: Radiological and Histological Correlation

Objective

Targeted magnetic resonance/ultrasound fusion prostate biopsy has been shown to improve the detection of high-grade prostate cancer and to reduce sampling errors. Our objective is to assess MR-TRUS targeted fusion biopsy versus standard biopsy for the detection of clinically significant tumors.

Materials and Methods

Patients were referred for abnormal digital rectal examination (DRE) or risen prostate-specific antigen (PSA). If an MRI-visible lesion was detected, they were included in the study. In total, 102 men underwent MRI followed by MR-TRUS fusion biopsy between November 2014 and January 2016. Tumor grading was done with the clinical relevance in mind; a cutoff was used at Gleason 7 or higher. Standard biopsy results were collected from clinical practice during 2005 at the same institution to provide baseline values.

Results

A comparable rate of prostate cancer is found whether sampling is done at random (42.4%) or with the use of fusion biopsy (44.1%). However, these percentages are histologically different: fewer low-grade tumors are detected with MR-TRUS fusion biopsy (-19.1%), while more high-grade tumors are diagnosed (+26%). If there is an ultrasound-visible lesion in the prostate, the gain of combined MRI and fusion biopsy is less impressive.

Conclusion

Fusion biopsy can provide more accurate information for optimal patient management, as it detects a higher percentage of high-grade prostate cancers than random sampling. Furthermore, nonrelevant tumors are less commonly detected using fusion biopsy.

Zinc-sensitive MRI contrast agent detects differential release of Zn(II) ions from the healthy vs. malignant mouse prostate

Many secretory tissues release Zn(II) ions along with other molecules in response to external stimuli. Here we demonstrate that secretion of Zn(II) ions from normal, healthy prostate tissue is stimulated by glucose in fasted mice and that release of Zn(II) can be monitored by MRI. An ∼50% increase in water proton signal enhancement is observed in T1-weighted images of the healthy mouse prostate after infusion of a Gd-based Zn(II) sensor and an i.p. bolus of glucose. Release of Zn(II) from intracellular stores was validated in human epithelial prostate cells in vitro and in surgically exposed prostate tissue in vivo using a Zn(II)-sensitive fluorescent probe known to bind to the extracellular surface of cells. Given the known differences in intracellular Zn(II) stores in healthy versus malignant prostate tissues, the Zn(II) sensor was then evaluated in a transgenic adenocarcinoma of the mouse prostate (TRAMP) model in vivo. The agent proved successful in detecting small malignant lesions as early as 11 wk of age, making this noninvasive MR imaging method potentially useful for identifying prostate cancer in situations where it may be difficult to detect using current multiparametric MRI protocols.

Evaluation of Focal Ablation of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Defined Prostate Cancer Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging Controlled Transurethral Ultrasound Therapy with Prostatectomy as the Reference Standard

PURPOSE

We evaluated magnetic resonance imaging controlled transurethral ultrasound therapy as a treatment for magnetic resonance imaging defined focal prostate cancer using subsequent prostatectomy and histology as the reference standard.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Five men completed this pilot study, which was approved by the institutional review board. Prior to radical prostatectomy focal tumors identified by magnetic resonance imaging were treated by coagulating targeted subtotal 3-dimensional volumes of prostate tissue using magnetic resonance imaging controlled transurethral focused ultrasound. Treatment was performed with a 3 Tesla clinical magnetic resonance imaging unit combined with modified clinical planning software for high intensity focused ultrasound therapy. After prostatectomy whole mount histological sections parallel to the magnetic resonance imaging treatment planes were used to compare magnetic resonance imaging measurements with thermal damage at the cellular level and, thus, evaluate treatment and target accuracy.

RESULTS

Three-dimensional target volumes of 4 to 20 cc and with radii up to 35 mm from the urethra were treated successfully. Mean ± SD temperature control accuracy at the target boundary was -1.6 ± 4.8C and the mean spatial targeting accuracy achieved was -1.5 ± 2.8 mm. Mean treatment accuracy with respect to histology was -0.4 ± 1.7 mm with all index tumors falling inside the histological outer limit of thermal injury.

CONCLUSIONS

Magnetic resonance imaging guided transurethral ultrasound therapy is capable of generating thermal coagulation and tumor destruction in targeted 3-dimensional angular sectors out to the prostate capsule for prostate glands up to 70 cc in volume. Ultrasound parameters needed to achieve ablation at the prostate capsule were determined, providing a foundation for future studies.