151
|
Simopoulos DN, Sisk AE, Priester A, Felker ER, Kwan L, Delfin MK, Reiter RE, Marks LS. Cancer core length from targeted biopsy: an index of prostate cancer volume and pathological stage. BJU Int 2019; 124:275-281. [PMID: 30694605 PMCID: PMC6641990 DOI: 10.1111/bju.14691] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To study the relationship of maximum cancer core length (MCCL), on targeted biopsy (TB) of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-visible index lesions, to volume of that tumour found at radical prostatectomy (RP). PATIENTS AND METHODS In all, 205 men undergoing fusion biopsy and RP were divided into two groups: 136 in whom the MCCL came from an index MRI-visible lesion (TB) and 69 in whom MCCL came from a non-targeted lesion (non-targeted biopsy [NTB]). MRI was 3-T multi-parametric and biopsy was via MRI-ultrasonography fusion. RESULTS In the TB group, MCCL correlated with volume of clinically significant index tumours (ρ = 0.44-0.60, P < 0.01). The correlation was similar for first and repeat biopsy and for transition and peripheral zone lesions (ρ = 0.42-0.49, P < 0.01). No correlations were found in the NTB group. TB MCCL (6-10 and >10 mm) and MRI lesion diameter (>20 mm) were independently associated with tumour volume. TB MCCLs >10 mm and Gleason scores >7 were each associated with pathological T3 disease (odds ratios 5.73 and 5.04, respectively), but MRI lesion diameter lesion was not. CONCLUSIONS MCCL on a TB from an MRI-visible lesion is an independent predictor of both cancer volume and pathological stage. This relationship does not exist for MCCL from a NTB core. Quantifying CCL on MRI-TBs may have a value, not previously described, to risk-stratify patients with prostate cancer before treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Demetrios N. Simopoulos
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, 300 Stein Plaza, 3 Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90095
| | - Anthony E. Sisk
- Department of Pathology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, 10833 Le Conte Avenue, A3-240 CHS, Los Angeles, CA 90095
| | - Alan Priester
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, 300 Stein Plaza, 3 Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90095
| | - Ely R. Felker
- Department of Radiology, Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center, 757 Westwood Plaza, Ste 1638, Los Angeles, CA 90095
| | - Lorna Kwan
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, 300 Stein Plaza, 3 Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90095
| | - Merdie K. Delfin
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, 300 Stein Plaza, 3 Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90095
| | - Robert E. Reiter
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, 300 Stein Plaza, 3 Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90095
| | - Leonard S. Marks
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, 300 Stein Plaza, 3 Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90095
| |
Collapse
|
152
|
Bhakdi SC, Suriyaphol P, Thaicharoen P, Grote STK, Komoltri C, Chaiyaprasithi B, Charnkaew K. Accuracy of Tumour-Associated Circulating Endothelial Cells as a Screening Biomarker for Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer. Cancers (Basel) 2019; 11:cancers11081064. [PMID: 31357651 PMCID: PMC6721410 DOI: 10.3390/cancers11081064] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/01/2019] [Revised: 07/21/2019] [Accepted: 07/24/2019] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Even though more than 350,000 men die from prostate cancer every year, broad-based screening for the disease remains a controversial topic. Guidelines demand that the only commonly accepted screening tool, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing, must be followed by prostate biopsy if results are elevated. Due to the procedure’s low positive predictive value (PPV), however, over 80% of biopsies are performed on healthy men or men with clinically insignificant cancer—prompting calls for new ways of vetting equivocal PSA readings prior to the procedure. Responding to the challenge, the present study investigated the diagnostic potential of tumour-associated circulating endothelial cells (tCECs), which have previously been described as a novel, blood-based biomarker for clinically significant cancers. Specifically, the objective was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of a tCEC-based blood test to detect clinically significant prostate cancer (defined as Gleason score ≥ 3 + 4) in high-risk patients. Performed in a blinded, prospective, single-centre set-up, it compared a novel tCEC index test with transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy as a reference on a total of 170 patients and found that a tCEC add-on test will almost double the PPV of a standalone PSA test (32% vs. 17%; p = 0.0012), while retaining a negative predictive value above 90%.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sebastian Chakrit Bhakdi
- Department of Pathobiology, Mahidol University, Bangkok 10400, Thailand.
- X-ZELL, 133 Cecil Street, #06-02 Keck Seng Tower, Singapore 069535, Singapore.
| | - Prapat Suriyaphol
- Department of Research and Development, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok 10700, Thailand
| | - Ponpan Thaicharoen
- X-ZELL, 133 Cecil Street, #06-02 Keck Seng Tower, Singapore 069535, Singapore
| | | | - Chulaluk Komoltri
- Department of Research and Development, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok 10700, Thailand
| | - Bansithi Chaiyaprasithi
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok 10700, Thailand
| | - Komgrid Charnkaew
- Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok 10700, Thailand
| |
Collapse
|
153
|
Frost JM, Smith LA, Sharma P, de Riese WT. Possible clinical implications of peripheral zone changes depending on prostate size. Int Urol Nephrol 2019; 51:1721-1726. [DOI: 10.1007/s11255-019-02221-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2019] [Accepted: 06/22/2019] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
|
154
|
Performance of Combined Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion-guided and Systematic Biopsy of the Prostate in Biopsy-naïve Patients and Patients with Prior Biopsies. Eur Urol Focus 2019; 7:39-46. [PMID: 31296485 DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2019.06.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/17/2019] [Revised: 05/30/2019] [Accepted: 06/26/2019] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
155
|
Is There Still a Need for Repeated Systematic Biopsies in Patients with Previous Negative Biopsies in the Era of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsies of the Prostate? Eur Urol Oncol 2019; 3:216-223. [PMID: 31239236 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2019.06.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/15/2019] [Revised: 05/18/2019] [Accepted: 06/05/2019] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The role of targeted prostate biopsies (TBs) in patients with cancer suspicious lesions on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) following negative systematic biopsies (SBs) is undebated. However, whether they should be combined with repeated SBs remains unclear. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the value of repeated SBs in addition to TBs in patients with a prior negative SB and a persistent suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A prospective study as part of a multicenter randomized controlled trial conducted between 2014 and 2017, including 665 men with a prior negative SB and a persistent suspicion of PCa (suspicious digital rectal examination and/or prostate-specific antigen >4.0ng/ml). INTERVENTION All patients underwent 3T mpMRI according to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) v2. Patients with PI-RADS ≥3 were randomized 1:1:1 for three TB techniques: MRI-TRUS fusion TB (FUS-TB), cognitive registration fusion TB (COG-TB), or in-bore MRI TB. FUS-TB and COG-TB were combined with repeated SBs. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) was defined as Gleason ≥3+4. Differences in detection rates of csPCa, clinically insignificant PCa (cisPCa), and overall PCa between TBs (FUS-TB and COG-TB) and repeated SBs were compared using McNemar's test. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS In the 152 patients who underwent both TB and SB, PCa was detected by TB in 47% and by SB in 32% (p<0.001, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.0-22%). TB detected significantly more csPCa than SB (32% vs 16%; p<0.001, 95% CI: 11-25%). Clinically significant PCa was missed by TB in 1.3% (2/152). Combining SB and TB resulted in detection rate differences of 6.0% for PCa, 5.0% for cisPCa, and 1.0% for csPCa compared with TB alone. CONCLUSIONS In case of a persistent suspicion of PCa following a negative SB, TB detected significantly more csPCa cases than SB. The additional value of SB was limited, and only 1.3% of csPCa would have been missed when SB had been omitted. PATIENT SUMMARY We evaluated the role of systematic biopsies and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsies for the diagnosis of prostate cancer in patients with prior negative systematic biopsies. MRI-targeted biopsies perform better in detecting prostate cancer in these patients. The value of repeated systematic biopsies is limited.
Collapse
|
156
|
Salami SS, Kaplan JB, Nallandhighal S, Takhar M, Tosoian JJ, Lee M, Yoon J, Hovelson DH, Plouffe KR, Kaffenberger SD, Schaeffer EM, Karnes RJ, Lotan TL, Morgan TM, George AK, Montgomery JS, Davenport MS, You S, Tomlins SA, Curci NE, Kim HL, Spratt DE, Udager AM, Palapattu GS. Biologic Significance of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Invisibility in Localized Prostate Cancer. JCO Precis Oncol 2019; 3:1900054. [PMID: 32914029 DOI: 10.1200/po.19.00054] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 04/22/2019] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is used widely for prostate cancer (PCa) evaluation. Approximately 35% of aggressive tumors, however, are not visible on mpMRI. We sought to identify the molecular alterations associated with mpMRI-invisible tumors and determine whether mpMRI visibility is associated with PCa prognosis. METHODS Discovery and validation cohorts included patients who underwent mpMRI before radical prostatectomy and were found to harbor both mpMRI-visible (Prostate Imaging and Reporting Data System 3 to 5) and -invisible (Prostate Imaging and Reporting Data System 1 or 2) foci on surgical pathology. Next-generation sequencing was performed to determine differential gene expression between mpMRI-visible and -invisible foci. A genetic signature for tumor mpMRI visibility was derived in the discovery cohort and assessed in an independent validation cohort. Its association with long-term oncologic outcomes was evaluated in a separate testing cohort. RESULTS The discovery cohort included 10 patients with 26 distinct PCa foci on surgical pathology, of which 12 (46%) were visible and 14 (54%) were invisible on preoperative mpMRI. Next-generation sequencing detected prioritized genetic mutations in 14 (54%) tumor foci (n = 8 mpMRI visible, n = 6 mpMRI invisible). A nine-gene signature (composed largely of cell organization/structure genes) associated with mpMRI visibility was derived (area under the curve = 0.89), and the signature predicted MRI visibility with 75% sensitivity and 100% specificity (area under the curve = 0.88) in the validation cohort. In the testing cohort (n = 375, median follow-up 8 years) there was no significant difference in biochemical recurrence, distant metastasis, or cancer-specific mortality in patients with predicted mpMRI-visible versus -invisible tumors (all P > .05). CONCLUSION Compared with mpMRI-invisible disease, mpMRI-visible tumors are associated with underexpression of cellular organization genes. mpMRI visibility does not seem to be predictive of long-term cancer outcomes, highlighting the need for biopsy strategies that detect mpMRI-invisible tumors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Simpa S Salami
- Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI.,University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Junhee Yoon
- Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA
| | | | | | - Samuel D Kaffenberger
- Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI.,University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI
| | | | | | | | - Todd M Morgan
- Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI.,University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - Arvin K George
- Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI.,University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - Jeffrey S Montgomery
- Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI.,University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI
| | | | | | - Scott A Tomlins
- Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI.,University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI
| | | | - Hyung L Kim
- Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Daniel E Spratt
- University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI.,Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - Aaron M Udager
- Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI.,University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - Ganesh S Palapattu
- Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI.,University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI.,Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
157
|
Padhani AR, Barentsz J, Villeirs G, Rosenkrantz AB, Margolis DJ, Turkbey B, Thoeny HC, Cornud F, Haider MA, Macura KJ, Tempany CM, Verma S, Weinreb JC. PI-RADS Steering Committee: The PI-RADS Multiparametric MRI and MRI-directed Biopsy Pathway. Radiology 2019; 292:464-474. [PMID: 31184561 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2019182946] [Citation(s) in RCA: 160] [Impact Index Per Article: 32.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
High-quality evidence shows that MRI in biopsy-naive men can reduce the number of men who need prostate biopsy and can reduce the number of diagnoses of clinically insignificant cancers that are unlikely to cause harm. In men with prior negative biopsy results who remain under persistent suspicion, MRI improves the detection and localization of life-threatening prostate cancer with greater clinical utility than the current standard of care, systematic transrectal US-guided biopsy. Systematic analyses show that MRI-directed biopsy increases the effectiveness of the prostate cancer diagnosis pathway. The incorporation of MRI-directed pathways into clinical care guidelines in prostate cancer detection has begun. The widespread adoption of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) for multiparametric MRI data acquisition, interpretation, and reporting has promoted these changes in practice. The PI-RADS MRI-directed biopsy pathway enables the delivery of key diagnostic benefits to men suspected of having cancer based on clinical suspicion. Herein, the PI-RADS Steering Committee discusses how the MRI pathway should be incorporated into routine clinical practice and the challenges in delivering the positive health impacts needed by men suspected of having clinically significant prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anwar R Padhani
- From the Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Rickmansworth Rd, Northwood, Middlesex HA6 2RN, England (A.R.P.); Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands (J.B.); Department of Radiology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium (G.V.); Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY (A.B.R.); Weill Cornell Imaging, Cornell University, New York, NY (D.J.M.); Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.T.); Department of Radiology, Hôpital Cantonal de Fribourg HFR, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland (H.C.T.); Paris Descartes University, Department of Radiology, Hôpital Cochin, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France (F.C.); University of Toronto, Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (M.A.H.); Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (K.J.M.); Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Mass (C.M.T.); Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati, College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (S.V.); and Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn (J.C.W.)
| | - Jelle Barentsz
- From the Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Rickmansworth Rd, Northwood, Middlesex HA6 2RN, England (A.R.P.); Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands (J.B.); Department of Radiology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium (G.V.); Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY (A.B.R.); Weill Cornell Imaging, Cornell University, New York, NY (D.J.M.); Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.T.); Department of Radiology, Hôpital Cantonal de Fribourg HFR, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland (H.C.T.); Paris Descartes University, Department of Radiology, Hôpital Cochin, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France (F.C.); University of Toronto, Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (M.A.H.); Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (K.J.M.); Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Mass (C.M.T.); Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati, College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (S.V.); and Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn (J.C.W.)
| | - Geert Villeirs
- From the Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Rickmansworth Rd, Northwood, Middlesex HA6 2RN, England (A.R.P.); Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands (J.B.); Department of Radiology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium (G.V.); Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY (A.B.R.); Weill Cornell Imaging, Cornell University, New York, NY (D.J.M.); Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.T.); Department of Radiology, Hôpital Cantonal de Fribourg HFR, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland (H.C.T.); Paris Descartes University, Department of Radiology, Hôpital Cochin, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France (F.C.); University of Toronto, Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (M.A.H.); Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (K.J.M.); Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Mass (C.M.T.); Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati, College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (S.V.); and Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn (J.C.W.)
| | - Andrew B Rosenkrantz
- From the Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Rickmansworth Rd, Northwood, Middlesex HA6 2RN, England (A.R.P.); Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands (J.B.); Department of Radiology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium (G.V.); Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY (A.B.R.); Weill Cornell Imaging, Cornell University, New York, NY (D.J.M.); Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.T.); Department of Radiology, Hôpital Cantonal de Fribourg HFR, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland (H.C.T.); Paris Descartes University, Department of Radiology, Hôpital Cochin, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France (F.C.); University of Toronto, Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (M.A.H.); Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (K.J.M.); Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Mass (C.M.T.); Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati, College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (S.V.); and Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn (J.C.W.)
| | - Daniel J Margolis
- From the Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Rickmansworth Rd, Northwood, Middlesex HA6 2RN, England (A.R.P.); Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands (J.B.); Department of Radiology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium (G.V.); Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY (A.B.R.); Weill Cornell Imaging, Cornell University, New York, NY (D.J.M.); Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.T.); Department of Radiology, Hôpital Cantonal de Fribourg HFR, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland (H.C.T.); Paris Descartes University, Department of Radiology, Hôpital Cochin, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France (F.C.); University of Toronto, Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (M.A.H.); Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (K.J.M.); Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Mass (C.M.T.); Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati, College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (S.V.); and Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn (J.C.W.)
| | - Baris Turkbey
- From the Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Rickmansworth Rd, Northwood, Middlesex HA6 2RN, England (A.R.P.); Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands (J.B.); Department of Radiology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium (G.V.); Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY (A.B.R.); Weill Cornell Imaging, Cornell University, New York, NY (D.J.M.); Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.T.); Department of Radiology, Hôpital Cantonal de Fribourg HFR, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland (H.C.T.); Paris Descartes University, Department of Radiology, Hôpital Cochin, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France (F.C.); University of Toronto, Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (M.A.H.); Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (K.J.M.); Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Mass (C.M.T.); Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati, College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (S.V.); and Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn (J.C.W.)
| | - Harriet C Thoeny
- From the Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Rickmansworth Rd, Northwood, Middlesex HA6 2RN, England (A.R.P.); Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands (J.B.); Department of Radiology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium (G.V.); Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY (A.B.R.); Weill Cornell Imaging, Cornell University, New York, NY (D.J.M.); Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.T.); Department of Radiology, Hôpital Cantonal de Fribourg HFR, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland (H.C.T.); Paris Descartes University, Department of Radiology, Hôpital Cochin, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France (F.C.); University of Toronto, Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (M.A.H.); Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (K.J.M.); Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Mass (C.M.T.); Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati, College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (S.V.); and Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn (J.C.W.)
| | - François Cornud
- From the Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Rickmansworth Rd, Northwood, Middlesex HA6 2RN, England (A.R.P.); Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands (J.B.); Department of Radiology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium (G.V.); Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY (A.B.R.); Weill Cornell Imaging, Cornell University, New York, NY (D.J.M.); Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.T.); Department of Radiology, Hôpital Cantonal de Fribourg HFR, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland (H.C.T.); Paris Descartes University, Department of Radiology, Hôpital Cochin, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France (F.C.); University of Toronto, Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (M.A.H.); Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (K.J.M.); Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Mass (C.M.T.); Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati, College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (S.V.); and Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn (J.C.W.)
| | - Masoom A Haider
- From the Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Rickmansworth Rd, Northwood, Middlesex HA6 2RN, England (A.R.P.); Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands (J.B.); Department of Radiology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium (G.V.); Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY (A.B.R.); Weill Cornell Imaging, Cornell University, New York, NY (D.J.M.); Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.T.); Department of Radiology, Hôpital Cantonal de Fribourg HFR, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland (H.C.T.); Paris Descartes University, Department of Radiology, Hôpital Cochin, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France (F.C.); University of Toronto, Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (M.A.H.); Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (K.J.M.); Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Mass (C.M.T.); Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati, College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (S.V.); and Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn (J.C.W.)
| | - Katarzyna J Macura
- From the Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Rickmansworth Rd, Northwood, Middlesex HA6 2RN, England (A.R.P.); Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands (J.B.); Department of Radiology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium (G.V.); Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY (A.B.R.); Weill Cornell Imaging, Cornell University, New York, NY (D.J.M.); Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.T.); Department of Radiology, Hôpital Cantonal de Fribourg HFR, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland (H.C.T.); Paris Descartes University, Department of Radiology, Hôpital Cochin, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France (F.C.); University of Toronto, Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (M.A.H.); Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (K.J.M.); Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Mass (C.M.T.); Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati, College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (S.V.); and Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn (J.C.W.)
| | - Clare M Tempany
- From the Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Rickmansworth Rd, Northwood, Middlesex HA6 2RN, England (A.R.P.); Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands (J.B.); Department of Radiology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium (G.V.); Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY (A.B.R.); Weill Cornell Imaging, Cornell University, New York, NY (D.J.M.); Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.T.); Department of Radiology, Hôpital Cantonal de Fribourg HFR, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland (H.C.T.); Paris Descartes University, Department of Radiology, Hôpital Cochin, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France (F.C.); University of Toronto, Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (M.A.H.); Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (K.J.M.); Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Mass (C.M.T.); Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati, College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (S.V.); and Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn (J.C.W.)
| | - Sadhna Verma
- From the Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Rickmansworth Rd, Northwood, Middlesex HA6 2RN, England (A.R.P.); Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands (J.B.); Department of Radiology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium (G.V.); Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY (A.B.R.); Weill Cornell Imaging, Cornell University, New York, NY (D.J.M.); Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.T.); Department of Radiology, Hôpital Cantonal de Fribourg HFR, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland (H.C.T.); Paris Descartes University, Department of Radiology, Hôpital Cochin, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France (F.C.); University of Toronto, Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (M.A.H.); Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (K.J.M.); Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Mass (C.M.T.); Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati, College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (S.V.); and Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn (J.C.W.)
| | - Jeffrey C Weinreb
- From the Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Rickmansworth Rd, Northwood, Middlesex HA6 2RN, England (A.R.P.); Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands (J.B.); Department of Radiology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium (G.V.); Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY (A.B.R.); Weill Cornell Imaging, Cornell University, New York, NY (D.J.M.); Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.T.); Department of Radiology, Hôpital Cantonal de Fribourg HFR, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland (H.C.T.); Paris Descartes University, Department of Radiology, Hôpital Cochin, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France (F.C.); University of Toronto, Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (M.A.H.); Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (K.J.M.); Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Mass (C.M.T.); Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati, College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (S.V.); and Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn (J.C.W.)
| |
Collapse
|
158
|
Greer MD, Shih JH, Lay N, Barrett T, Bittencourt L, Borofsky S, Kabakus I, Law YM, Marko J, Shebel H, Merino MJ, Wood BJ, Pinto PA, Summers RM, Choyke PL, Turkbey B. Interreader Variability of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 in Detecting and Assessing Prostate Cancer Lesions at Prostate MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2019; 212:1197-1205. [PMID: 30917023 PMCID: PMC8268760 DOI: 10.2214/ajr.18.20536] [Citation(s) in RCA: 63] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to evaluate agreement among radiologists in detecting and assessing prostate cancer at multiparametric MRI using Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADSv2). MATERIALS AND METHODS. Treatment-naïve patients underwent 3-T multipara-metric MRI between April 2012 and June 2015. Among the 163 patients evaluated, 110 underwent prostatectomy after MRI and 53 had normal MRI findings and transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy results. Nine radiologists participated (three each with high, intermediate, and low levels of experience). Readers interpreted images of 58 patients on average (range, 56-60) using PI-RADSv2. Prostatectomy specimens registered to MRI were ground truth. Interob-server agreement was evaluated with the index of specific agreement for lesion detection and kappa and proportion of agreement for PI-RADS category assignment. RESULTS. The radiologists detected 336 lesions. Sensitivity for index lesions was 80.9% (95% CI, 75.1-85.9%), comparable across reader experience (p = 0.392). Patient-level specificity was experience dependent; highly experienced readers had 84.0% specificity versus 55.2% for all others (p < 0.001). Interobserver agreement was excellent for detecting index lesions (index of specific agreement, 0.871; 95% CI, 0.798-0.923). Agreement on PI-RADSv2 category assignment of index lesions was moderate (κ = 0.419; 95% CI, 0.238-0.595). For individual category assignments, proportion of agreement was slight for PI-RADS category 3 (0.208; 95% CI, 0.086-0.284) but substantial for PI-RADS category 4 (0.674; 95% CI, 0.540-0.776). However, proportion of agreement for T2-weighted PI-RADS 4 in the transition zone was 0.250 (95% CI, 0.108-0.372). Proportion of agreement for category assignment of index lesions on dynamic contrast-enhanced MR images was 0.822 (95% CI, 0.728-0.903), on T2-weighted MR images was 0.515 (95% CI, 0.430-0623), and on DW images was 0.586 (95% CI, 0.495-0.682). Proportion of agreement for dominant lesion was excellent (0.828; 95% CI, 0.742-0.913). CONCLUSION. Radiologists across experience levels had excellent agreement for detecting index lesions and moderate agreement for category assignment of lesions using PI-RADS. Future iterations of PI-RADS should clarify PI-RADS 3 and PI-RADS 4 in the transition zone.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew D Greer
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, MSC 1182, Bethesda, MD 20892
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Haytham Shebel
- Department of Radiology, Urology Center, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt
| | - Maria J Merino
- Laboratory of Pathology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Bradford J Wood
- Center for Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, and Radiologic Imaging Sciences, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Peter A Pinto
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Ronald M Summers
- National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Imaging Biomarkers and Computer-Aided Diagnosis Laboratory, Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Bethesda, MD
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
159
|
Roh AT, Fan RE, Sonn GA, Vasanawala SS, Ghanouni P, Loening AM. How Often is the Dynamic Contrast Enhanced Score Needed in PI-RADS Version 2? Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 2019; 49:173-176. [PMID: 31126664 DOI: 10.1067/j.cpradiol.2019.05.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/11/2019] [Revised: 04/03/2019] [Accepted: 05/07/2019] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 (PI-RADS v2) relegates dynamic contrast enhanced (DCE) imaging to a minor role. We sought to determine how often DCE is used in PI-RADS v2 scoring. MATERIALS AND METHODS We retrospectively reviewed data from 388 patients who underwent prostate magnetic resonance imaging and subsequent biopsy from January 2016 through December 2017. In accordance with PI-RADS v2, DCE was deemed necessary if a peripheral-zone lesion had a diffusion-weighted imaging score of 3, or if a transition-zone lesion had a T2 score of 3 and diffusion-weighted imaging experienced technical failure. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis assessed the accuracy of prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) at different threshold values for differentiating lesions that would be equivocal with noncontrast technique. Accuracy of PSAD was compared to DCE using McNemar's test. RESULTS Sixty-nine lesions in 62 patients (16%) required DCE for PI-RADS scoring. Biopsy of 10 (14%) of these lesions showed clinically significant cancer (Gleason score ≥7). In the subgroup of patients with equivocal lesions, those with clinically significant cancer had significantly higher PSADs than those with clinically insignificant lesions (means of 0.18 and 0.13 ng/mL/mL, respectively; P= 0.038). In this subgroup, there was no statistical difference in accuracy in determining clinically significant cancer between a PSAD threshold value of 0.13 and DCE (P= 0.25). CONCLUSIONS Only 16% of our patients needed DCE to generate the PI-RADS version 2 score, raising the possibility of limiting the initial screening prostate MRI to a noncontrast exam. PSAD may also be used to further decrease the need for or to replace DCE altogether.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Albert T Roh
- Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA
| | - Richard E Fan
- Department of Urology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA
| | - Geoffrey A Sonn
- Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.; Department of Urology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
160
|
Utility of Restriction Spectrum Imaging Among Men Undergoing First-Time Biopsy for Suspected Prostate Cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2019; 213:365-370. [PMID: 31039011 DOI: 10.2214/ajr.18.20836] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article is to evaluate restriction spectrum imaging (RSI) in men undergoing MRI-ultrasound fusion biopsy for suspected prostate cancer (PCa) and to compare the performance of RSI with that of conventional DWI. MATERIALS AND METHODS. One hundred ninety-eight biopsy-naïve men enrolled in a concurrent prospective clinical trial evaluating MRI-targeted prostate biopsy underwent multiparametric MRI with RSI. Clinical and imaging features were compared between men with and without clinically significant (CS) PCa (MRI-ultrasound fusion biopsy Gleason score ≥ 3 + 4). RSI z score and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) were correlated, and their diagnostic performances were compared. RESULTS. CS PCa was detected in 109 of 198 men (55%). Using predefined thresholds of ADC less than or equal to 1000 μm2/s and RSI z score greater than or equal to 3, sensitivity and specificity for CS PCa were 86% and 38%, respectively, for ADC and 61% and 70%, respectively, for RSI. In the transition zone (n = 69), the sensitivity and specificity were 94% and 17%, respectively, for ADC and 59% and 69%, respectively, for RSI. Among lesions with CS PCa, RSI z score and ADC were significantly inversely correlated in the peripheral zone (ρ = -0.4852; p < 0.01) but not the transition zone (ρ = -0.2412; p = 0.17). Overall diagnostic accuracies of RSI and DWI were 0.70 and 0.68, respectively (p = 0.74). CONCLUSION. RSI and DWI achieved equivalent diagnostic performance for PCa detection in a large population of men undergoing first-time prostate biopsy for suspected PCa, but RSI had superior specificity for transition zone lesions.
Collapse
|
161
|
Pepe P, Garufi A, Priolo GD, Pennisi M, Fraggetta F. Early Second Round Targeted Biopsy of PI-RADS Score 3 or 4 in 256 Men With Persistent Suspicion of Prostate Cancer. In Vivo 2019; 33:897-901. [PMID: 31028214 PMCID: PMC6559925 DOI: 10.21873/invivo.11556] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/24/2019] [Revised: 03/19/2019] [Accepted: 03/20/2019] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIM The aim of the study was to determine the rate of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) cases in men submitted to early second round mpMRI/TRUS (multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound) fusion biopsy (TPBx). MATERIALS AND METHODS From January 2016 to December 2018, 256 men with a PI-RADS (Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System) score 3 (80 cases) or 4 (176 cases) and negative repeat transperineal saturation biopsy plus TPBx, underwent a new TPBx (four cores) for the persistent clinical suspicion of cancer. The accuracy of mpMRI ADC (apparent diffusion coefficient) values in the diagnosis of csPCa were evaluated. RESULTS Overall detection rate of csPCa was equal to 10.1% (26/256 cases): 2.5% (2/80) versus 13.6% (24/176) had a PI-RADS score equal to 3 versus 4, respectively. The presence of csPCa was significantly correlated with an ADC value of 0.747×10-3 mm2/sec. CONCLUSION A negative TBPx missed a csPCa in 13.6% of PI-RADS score 4 that was diagnosed by an early second round TBPx; the evaluation of ADC maps could select mpMRI lesions deserving a repeat TPBx.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pietro Pepe
- Urology Unit, Cannizzaro Hospital, Catania, Italy
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
162
|
Boesen L, Nørgaard N, Løgager V, Balslev I, Bisbjerg R, Thestrup KC, Jakobsen H, Thomsen HS. Prebiopsy Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Combined with Prostate-specific Antigen Density in Detecting and Ruling out Gleason 7–10 Prostate Cancer in Biopsy-naïve Men. Eur Urol Oncol 2019; 2:311-319. [DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2018.09.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 54] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/05/2018] [Revised: 08/17/2018] [Accepted: 09/05/2018] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
|
163
|
Drost FH, Osses DF, Nieboer D, Steyerberg EW, Bangma CH, Roobol MJ, Schoots IG. Prostate MRI, with or without MRI-targeted biopsy, and systematic biopsy for detecting prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019; 4:CD012663. [PMID: 31022301 PMCID: PMC6483565 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd012663.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 197] [Impact Index Per Article: 39.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), with or without MRI-targeted biopsy, is an alternative test to systematic transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy in men suspected of having prostate cancer. At present, evidence on which test to use is insufficient to inform detailed evidence-based decision-making. OBJECTIVES To determine the diagnostic accuracy of the index tests MRI only, MRI-targeted biopsy, the MRI pathway (MRI with or without MRI-targeted biopsy) and systematic biopsy as compared to template-guided biopsy as the reference standard in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer as the target condition, defined as International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade 2 or higher. Secondary target conditions were the detection of grade 1 and grade 3 or higher-grade prostate cancer, and a potential change in the number of biopsy procedures. SEARCH METHODS We performed a comprehensive systematic literature search up to 31 July 2018. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, eight other databases and one trials register. SELECTION CRITERIA We considered for inclusion any cross-sectional study if it investigated one or more index tests verified by the reference standard, or if it investigated the agreement between the MRI pathway and systematic biopsy, both performed in the same men. We included only studies on men who were biopsy naïve or who previously had a negative biopsy (or a mix of both). Studies involving MRI had to report on both MRI-positive and MRI-negative men. All studies had to report on the primary target condition. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias using the QUADAS-2 tool. To estimate test accuracy, we calculated sensitivity and specificity using the bivariate model. To estimate agreement between the MRI pathway and systematic biopsy, we synthesised detection ratios by performing random-effects meta-analyses. To estimate the proportions of participants with prostate cancer detected by only one of the index tests, we used random-effects multinomial or binary logistic regression models. For the main comparisions, we assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS The test accuracy analyses included 18 studies overall.MRI compared to template-guided biopsy: Based on a pooled sensitivity of 0.91 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.83 to 0.95; 12 studies; low certainty of evidence) and a pooled specificity of 0.37 (95% CI: 0.29 to 0.46; 12 studies; low certainty of evidence) using a baseline prevalence of 30%, MRI may result in 273 (95% CI: 249 to 285) true positives, 441 false positives (95% CI: 378 to 497), 259 true negatives (95% CI: 203 to 322) and 27 (95% CI: 15 to 51) false negatives per 1000 men. We downgraded the certainty of evidence for study limitations and inconsistency.MRI-targeted biopsy compared to template-guided biopsy: Based on a pooled sensitivity of 0.80 (95% CI: 0.69 to 0.87; 8 studies; low certainty of evidence) and a pooled specificity of 0.94 (95% CI: 0.90 to 0.97; 8 studies; low certainty of evidence) using a baseline prevalence of 30%, MRI-targeted biopsy may result in 240 (95% CI: 207 to 261) true positives, 42 (95% CI: 21 to 70) false positives, 658 (95% CI: 630 to 679) true negatives and 60 (95% CI: 39 to 93) false negatives per 1000 men. We downgraded the certainty of evidence for study limitations and inconsistency.The MRI pathway compared to template-guided biopsy: Based on a pooled sensitivity of 0.72 (95% CI: 0.60 to 0.82; 8 studies; low certainty of evidence) and a pooled specificity of 0.96 (95% CI: 0.94 to 0.98; 8 studies; low certainty of evidence) using a baseline prevalence of 30%, the MRI pathway may result in 216 (95% CI: 180 to 246) true positives, 28 (95% CI: 14 to 42) false positives, 672 (95% CI: 658 to 686) true negatives and 84 (95% CI: 54 to 120) false negatives per 1000 men. We downgraded the certainty of evidence for study limitations, inconsistency and imprecision.Systemic biopsy compared to template-guided biopsy: Based on a pooled sensitivity of 0.63 (95% CI: 0.19 to 0.93; 4 studies; low certainty of evidence) and a pooled specificity of 1.00 (95% CI: 0.91 to 1.00; 4 studies; low certainty of evidence) using a baseline prevalence of 30%, systematic biopsy may result in 189 (95% CI: 57 to 279) true positives, 0 (95% CI: 0 to 63) false positives, 700 (95% CI: 637 to 700) true negatives and 111 (95% CI: 21 to 243) false negatives per 1000 men. We downgraded the certainty of evidence for study limitations and inconsistency.Agreement analyses: In a mixed population of both biopsy-naïve and prior-negative biopsy men comparing the MRI pathway to systematic biopsy, we found a pooled detection ratio of 1.12 (95% CI: 1.02 to 1.23; 25 studies). We found pooled detection ratios of 1.44 (95% CI 1.19 to 1.75; 10 studies) in prior-negative biopsy men and 1.05 (95% CI: 0.95 to 1.16; 20 studies) in biopsy-naïve men. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Among the diagnostic strategies considered, the MRI pathway has the most favourable diagnostic accuracy in clinically significant prostate cancer detection. Compared to systematic biopsy, it increases the number of significant cancer detected while reducing the number of insignificant cancer diagnosed. The certainty in our findings was reduced by study limitations, specifically issues surrounding selection bias, as well as inconsistency. Based on these findings, further improvement of prostate cancer diagnostic pathways should be pursued.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Frank‐Jan H Drost
- Erasmus University Medical CenterDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine's‐Gravendijkwal 230Room NA‐1710, P.O. Box 2040RotterdamZuid‐HollandNetherlands3015 CE
- Erasmus University Medical CenterDepartment of UrologyRotterdamNetherlands
| | - Daniël F Osses
- Erasmus University Medical CenterDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine's‐Gravendijkwal 230Room NA‐1710, P.O. Box 2040RotterdamZuid‐HollandNetherlands3015 CE
- Erasmus University Medical CenterDepartment of UrologyRotterdamNetherlands
| | - Daan Nieboer
- Erasmus University Medical CenterDepartment of UrologyRotterdamNetherlands
| | - Ewout W Steyerberg
- Erasmus University Medical CenterDepartment of Public HealthPO Box 2040RotterdamNetherlands3000 CA
| | - Chris H Bangma
- Erasmus University Medical CenterDepartment of UrologyRotterdamNetherlands
| | - Monique J Roobol
- Erasmus University Medical CenterDepartment of UrologyRotterdamNetherlands
| | - Ivo G Schoots
- Erasmus University Medical CenterDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine's‐Gravendijkwal 230Room NA‐1710, P.O. Box 2040RotterdamZuid‐HollandNetherlands3015 CE
| | | |
Collapse
|
164
|
Chung DY, Kim MS, Lee JS, Goh HJ, Koh DH, Jang WS, Hong CH, Choi YD. Clinical Significance of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging as a Preoperative Predictor of Oncologic Outcome in Very Low-Risk Prostate Cancer. J Clin Med 2019; 8:jcm8040542. [PMID: 31010237 PMCID: PMC6518039 DOI: 10.3390/jcm8040542] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/22/2019] [Revised: 04/10/2019] [Accepted: 04/18/2019] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Currently, multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is not an indication for patients with very low-risk prostate cancer. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the usefulness of mpMRI as a diagnostic tool in these patients. We retrospectively analyzed the clinical and pathological data of individuals with very low-risk prostate cancer, according to the NCCN guidelines, who underwent mpMRI before radical prostatectomy at our institution between 2010 and 2016. Patients who did not undergo pre-evaluation with mpMRI were excluded. We analyzed the factors associated with biochemical recurrence (BCR) using Cox regression model, logistic regression analysis, and Kaplan–Meier curve. Of 253 very low-risk prostate cancer patients, we observed 26 (10.3%) with BCR during the follow-up period in this study. The median follow-up from radical prostatectomy was 53 months (IQR 33–74). The multivariate Cox regression analyses demonstrated that the only factor associated with BCR in very low-risk patients was increase in the pathologic Gleason score (GS) (HR: 2.185, p-value 0.048). In addition, multivariate logistic analyses identified prostate specific antigen (PSA) (OR: 1.353, p-value 0.010), PSA density (OR: 1.160, p-value 0.013), and suspicious lesion on mpMRI (OR: 1.995, p-value 0.019) as the independent preoperative predictors associated with the pathologic GS upgrade. In our study, the pathologic GS upgrade after radical prostatectomy in very low-risk prostate cancer patients demonstrated a negative impact on BCR and mpMRI is a good prognostic tool to predict the pathologic GS upgrade. We believe that the implementation of mpMRI would be beneficial to determine the treatment strategy for these patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Doo Yong Chung
- Department of Urology, Inha University School of Medicine, 366 Seohae-daero, Jung-gu, Incheon 22332, Korea.
- Department of Urology, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 03722, Korea.
| | - Min Seok Kim
- Department of Urology, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 03722, Korea.
| | - Jong Soo Lee
- Department of Urology, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 03722, Korea.
| | - Hyeok Jun Goh
- Department of Urology, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 03722, Korea.
| | - Dong Hoon Koh
- Department of Urology, Konyang University College of Medicine, 158 Gwanjeodong-ro, Daejeon 35365, Korea.
| | - Won Sik Jang
- Department of Urology, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 03722, Korea.
| | - Chang Hee Hong
- Department of Urology, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 03722, Korea.
| | - Young Deuk Choi
- Department of Urology, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 03722, Korea.
| |
Collapse
|
165
|
Zhou SR, Simopoulos DN, Jayadevan R, Felker ER, Delfin MK, Barsa DE, Kwan L, Marks LS. Use of MRI-Guided Biopsy for Selection and Follow-up of Men Undergoing Hemi-gland Cryoablation of Prostate Cancer. Urology 2019; 126:158-164. [PMID: 30659903 PMCID: PMC6698362 DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2018.11.052] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/24/2018] [Revised: 11/21/2018] [Accepted: 11/23/2018] [Indexed: 02/02/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To investigate safety, efficacy, and quality of life impact of hemi-gland cryotherapy for clinically-significant prostate cancer (CaP), when patient selection and follow-up includes MRI-guided biopsy. METHODS Twenty-nine men with unilateral CaP (all clinically significant with prostate volume <60 cc) were enrolled in a prospective observational trial of hemi-gland cryotherapy. Mean patient age was 68.7 years. Median prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was 6.6 ng/mL. MRI-guided biopsy (3T-MRI, Artemis US fusion) was used for diagnosis and repeated at 6-month follow-up in all men. Treatment was under general anesthesia using the BTG/Galil system. Validated questionnaires were used to determine effects of treatment on urinary and sexual function and quality of life. RESULTS Cryotherapy was completed satisfactorily in all 29 cases in <60 minutes with no intraoperative complications. Significant decreases in PSA (median decrease 5.6 ng/mL) and PSA density (median decrease 0.14 ng/mL/cc) were observed (P < .01). At 6 months, 23 patients (79%) demonstrated no residual cancer on follow-up MRI-guided biopsy of the treated side. Three patients (10%) revealed micro-residual disease. Three patients (10%) had residual cancer and underwent further treatment. Ipsilateral MRI lesions were present before treatment in 26 patients and after treatment in only 2, reflecting the gross ablative effect; however, MRI showed disappearance of lesions in 4 patients with residual tumor on biopsy. The single complication was 1 case of transient urinary retention; 85% of men who were sexually active continued without change after treatment. Voiding function was unchanged. CONCLUSION Hemi-gland cryoablation for clinically-significant CaP is well-tolerated, and when patients are selected and followed by MRI/US fusion biopsy, cancer control appears promising at 6 months.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Steve R Zhou
- David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Demetrios N Simopoulos
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Rajiv Jayadevan
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Ely R Felker
- Department of Radiology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Merdie K Delfin
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Danielle E Barsa
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Lorna Kwan
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Leonard S Marks
- Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA.
| |
Collapse
|
166
|
Liu W, Patil D, Howard DH, Moore RH, Wang H, Sanda MG, Filson CP. Impact of prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate on cancer detection and treatment patterns. Urol Oncol 2019; 37:181.e15-181.e21. [DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2018.11.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/17/2018] [Revised: 10/30/2018] [Accepted: 11/04/2018] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
|
167
|
Padhani AR, Weinreb J, Rosenkrantz AB, Villeirs G, Turkbey B, Barentsz J. Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System Steering Committee: PI-RADS v2 Status Update and Future Directions. Eur Urol 2019; 75:385-396. [PMID: 29908876 PMCID: PMC6292742 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.05.035] [Citation(s) in RCA: 183] [Impact Index Per Article: 36.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/12/2018] [Accepted: 05/29/2018] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
CONTEXT The Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) v2 analysis system for multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) detection of prostate cancer (PCa) is based on PI-RADS v1, accumulated scientific evidence, and expert consensus opinion. OBJECTIVE To summarize the accuracy, strengths and weaknesses of PI-RADS v2, discuss pathway implications of its use and outline opportunities for improvements and future developments. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION For this consensus expert opinion from the PI-RADS steering committee, clinical studies, systematic reviews, and professional guidelines for mpMRI PCa detection were evaluated. We focused on the performance characteristics of PI-RADS v2, comparing data to systems based on clinicoradiologic Likert scales and non-PI-RADS v2 imaging only. Evidence selections were based on high-quality, prospective, histologically verified data, with minimal patient selection and verifications biases. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS It has been shown that the test performance of PI-RADS v2 in research and clinical practice retains higher accuracy over systematic transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) biopsies for PCa diagnosis. PI-RADS v2 fails to detect all cancers but does detect the majority of tumors capable of causing patient harm, which should not be missed. Test performance depends on the definition and prevalence of clinically significant disease. Good performance can be attained in practice when the quality of the diagnostic process can be assured, together with joint working of robustly trained radiologists and urologists, conducting biopsy procedures within multidisciplinary teams. CONCLUSIONS It has been shown that the test performance of PI-RADS v2 in research and clinical practice is improved, retaining higher accuracy over systematic TRUS biopsies for PCa diagnosis. PATIENT SUMMARY Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and MRI-directed biopsies using the Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System improves the detection of prostate cancers likely to cause harm, and at the same time decreases the detection of disease that does not lead to harms if left untreated. The keys to success are high-quality imaging, reporting, and biopsies by radiologists and urologists working together in multidisciplinary teams.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anwar R Padhani
- Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, UK
| | - Jeffrey Weinreb
- Department of Radiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, USA
| | | | - Geert Villeirs
- Department of Radiology, Ghent University Hospital, Gent, Belgium
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
168
|
Bungart B, Cao Y, Yang-Tran T, Gorsky S, Lan L, Roblyer D, Koch MO, Cheng L, Masterson T, Cheng JX. Cylindrical illumination with angular coupling for whole-prostate photoacoustic tomography. BIOMEDICAL OPTICS EXPRESS 2019; 10:1405-1419. [PMID: 30891355 PMCID: PMC6420282 DOI: 10.1364/boe.10.001405] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2019] [Revised: 02/07/2019] [Accepted: 02/07/2019] [Indexed: 05/20/2023]
Abstract
Current diagnosis of prostate cancer relies on histological analysis of tissue samples acquired by biopsy, which could benefit from real-time identification of suspicious lesions. Photoacoustic tomography has the potential to provide real-time targets for prostate biopsy guidance with chemical selectivity, but light delivered from the rectal cavity has been unable to penetrate to the anterior prostate. To overcome this barrier, a urethral device with cylindrical illumination is developed for whole-prostate imaging, and its performance as a function of angular light coupling is evaluated with a prostate-mimicking phantom.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brittani Bungart
- Weldon School of Biomedical Engineering, Purdue University, 206 S. Martin Jischke Drive, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA
- Medical Scientist Training Program, Indiana University School of Medicine, 635 Barnhill Drive MS 2031, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA
- Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Boston University, 8 St. Mary’s Street, Boston, MA 02215, USA
| | - Yingchun Cao
- Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Boston University, 8 St. Mary’s Street, Boston, MA 02215, USA
| | - Tiffany Yang-Tran
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, 44 Cummington Mall, Boston, MA 02215, USA
| | - Sean Gorsky
- Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Boston University, 8 St. Mary’s Street, Boston, MA 02215, USA
| | - Lu Lan
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, 44 Cummington Mall, Boston, MA 02215, USA
| | - Darren Roblyer
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, 44 Cummington Mall, Boston, MA 02215, USA
| | - Michael O. Koch
- Department of Urology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | - Liang Cheng
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | - Timothy Masterson
- Department of Urology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | - Ji-Xin Cheng
- Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Boston University, 8 St. Mary’s Street, Boston, MA 02215, USA
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, 44 Cummington Mall, Boston, MA 02215, USA
| |
Collapse
|
169
|
Stolk TT, de Jong IJ, Kwee TC, Luiting HB, Mahesh SVK, Doornweerd BHJ, Willemse PPM, Yakar D. False positives in PIRADS (V2) 3, 4, and 5 lesions: relationship with reader experience and zonal location. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2019; 44:1044-1051. [PMID: 30737547 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-019-01919-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To investigate the effect of reader experience and zonal location on the occurrence of false positives (FPs) in PIRADS (V2) 3, 4, and 5 lesions on multiparametric (MP)-MRI of the prostate. MATERIALS AND METHODS This retrospective study included 139 patients who had consecutively undergone an MP-MRI of the prostate in combination with a transrectal ultrasound MRI fusion-guided biopsy between 2014 and 2017. MRI exams were prospectively read by a group of inexperienced radiologists (cohort 1; 54 patients) and an experienced radiologist (cohort 2; 85 patients). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the association of experience of the radiologist and zonal location with a FP reading. FP rates were compared between readings by inexperienced and experienced radiologists according to zonal location, using Chi-square (χ2) tests. RESULTS A total of 168 lesions in 139 patients were detected. Median patient age was 68 years (Interquartile range (IQR) 62.5-73), and median PSA was 10.9 ng/mL (IQR 7.6-15.9) for the entire patient cohort. According to multivariable logistic regression, inexperience of the radiologist was significantly (P = 0.044, odds ratio 1.927, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.017-3.651) and independently associated with a FP reading, while zonal location was not (P = 0.202, odds ratio 1.444, 95% CI 0.820-2.539). In the transition zone (TZ), the FP rate of the inexperienced radiologists 59% (17/29) was significantly higher (χ2P = 0.033) than that of the experienced radiologist 33% (13/40). CONCLUSION Inexperience of the radiologist is significantly and independently associated with a FP reading, while zonal location is not. Inexperienced radiologists have a significantly higher FP rate in the TZ.
Collapse
|
170
|
Gallagher KM, Christopher E, Cameron AJ, Little S, Innes A, Davis G, Keanie J, Bollina P, McNeill A. Four-year outcomes from a multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based active surveillance programme: PSA dynamics and serial MRI scans allow omission of protocol biopsies. BJU Int 2019; 123:429-438. [PMID: 30113755 PMCID: PMC7379595 DOI: 10.1111/bju.14513] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To report outcomes from a multiparametric (mp) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based active surveillance programme that did not include performing protocol biopsies after the first confirmatory biopsy. PATIENTS AND METHODS All patients diagnosed with Gleason 3 + 3 prostate cancer because of a raised PSA level who underwent mpMRI after diagnosis were included. Patients were recorded in a prospective clinical database and followed up with PSA monitoring and repeat MRI. In patients who remained on active surveillance after the first MRI (with or without confirmatory biopsy), we investigated PSA dynamics for association with subsequent progression. Comparison between first and second MRI scans was undertaken. Outcomes assessed were: progression to radical therapy at first MRI/confirmatory biopsy and progression to radical therapy in those who remained on active surveillance after first MRI. RESULTS A total of 211 patients were included, with a median of 4.2 years of follow-up. The rate of progression to radical therapy was significantly greater at all stages among patients with visible lesions than in those with initially negative MRI (47/125 (37.6%) vs 11/86 (12.8%); odds ratio 4.1 (95% CI 2.0-8.5), P < 0.001). Only 1/56 patients (1.8%) with negative initial MRI scans who underwent a confirmatory systematic biopsy had upgrading to Gleason 3 + 4 disease. PSA velocity was significantly associated with subsequent progression in patients with negative initial MRI (area under the curve 0.85 [95% CI 0.75-0.94]; P <0.001). Patients with high-risk visible lesions on first MRI who remained on active surveillance had a high risk of subsequent progression 19/76 (25.0%) vs 9/84 (10.7%) for patients with no visible lesions, despite reassuring targeted and systematic confirmatory biopsies and regardless of PSA dynamics. CONCLUSION Men with low-risk Gleason 3 + 3 prostate cancer on active surveillance can forgo protocol biopsies in favour of MRI and PSA monitoring with selective re-biopsy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Edward Christopher
- Department of UrologyWestern General HospitalEdinburghUK
- College of Medicine and Veterinary MedicineUniversity of EdinburghEdinburghUK
| | | | - Scott Little
- Department of UrologyWestern General HospitalEdinburghUK
| | - Alasdair Innes
- Department of UrologyWestern General HospitalEdinburghUK
| | - Gill Davis
- Department of UrologyWestern General HospitalEdinburghUK
| | - Julian Keanie
- Department of RadiologyWestern General HospitalEdinburghUK
| | - Prasad Bollina
- Department of UrologyWestern General HospitalEdinburghUK
| | - Alan McNeill
- Department of UrologyWestern General HospitalEdinburghUK
| |
Collapse
|
171
|
Bachawal SV, Park JM, Valluru KS, Loft MD, Felt SA, Vilches-Moure JG, Saenz YF, Daniel B, Iagaru A, Sonn G, Cheng Z, Spielman DM, Willmann JK. Multimodality Hyperpolarized C-13 MRS/PET/Multiparametric MR Imaging for Detection and Image-Guided Biopsy of Prostate Cancer: First Experience in a Canine Prostate Cancer Model. Mol Imaging Biol 2019; 21:861-870. [DOI: 10.1007/s11307-018-1235-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/17/2023]
|
172
|
Constructing and Pilot Testing a Novel Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy Phantom. Urology 2019; 124:33-37. [DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2018.10.029] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/19/2018] [Revised: 09/20/2018] [Accepted: 10/15/2018] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
|
173
|
Molecular Hallmarks of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Visibility in Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol 2019; 76:18-23. [PMID: 30685078 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.12.036] [Citation(s) in RCA: 49] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/31/2018] [Accepted: 12/20/2018] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has transformed the management of localized prostate cancer by improving identification of clinically significant disease at diagnosis. Approximately 20% of primary prostate tumors are invisible to mpMRI, and we hypothesize that this invisibility reflects fundamental molecular properties of the tumor. We therefore profiled the genomes and transcriptomes of 40 International Society of Urological Pathology grade 2 tumors: 20 mpMRI-invisible (Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System [PI-RADS] v2 <3) and 20 mpMRI-visible (PI-RADS v2 5) tumors. mpMRI-visible tumors were enriched in hallmarks of nimbosus, an aggressive pathological, molecular, and microenvironmental phenomenon in prostate cancer. These hallmarks included genomes with increased mutation density, a higher prevalence of intraductal carcinoma/cribriform architecture pathology, and altered abundance of 102 transcripts, including overexpression of noncoding RNAs such as SCHLAP1. Multiple small nucleolar RNAs (snoRNAs) were identified, and a snoRNA signature synergized with nimbosus hallmarks to discriminate visible from invisible tumors. These data suggest a confluence of aggressive molecular and microenvironmental phenomena underlie mpMRI visibility of localized prostate cancer. PATIENT SUMMARY: We examined the correlation between tumor biology and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) visibility in a group of patients with low- intermediate-risk prostate cancer. We observed that MRI findings are associated with biological features of aggressive prostate cancer.
Collapse
|
174
|
Mannaerts CK, Kajtazovic A, Lodeizen OAP, Gayet M, Engelbrecht MRW, Jager GJ, Wijkstra H, de Reijke TM, Beerlage HP. The added value of systematic biopsy in men with suspicion of prostate cancer undergoing multiparametric MRI-targeted biopsy. Urol Oncol 2019; 37:298.e1-298.e9. [PMID: 30660493 DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2019.01.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/14/2018] [Revised: 12/27/2018] [Accepted: 01/03/2019] [Indexed: 02/01/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Incorporation of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and targeted biopsy (TBx) in the diagnostic pathway for prostate cancer (CaP) is rapidly becoming common practice. In men with a prebiopsy positive mpMRI a TBx only approach, thereby omitting transrectal ultrasound-guided systematic biopsy (SBx), has been postulated. In this study we evaluated the additional clinical relevance of SBx in men with a positive prebiopsy mpMRI (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System [PI-RADS] ≥ 3) undergoing TBx for CaP detection, Gleason grading and CaP localization. MATERIAL AND METHODS Prospective data of 255 consecutive men with a prebiopsy positive mpMRI (PI-RADS ≥ 3) undergoing 12-core SBx and subsequent MRI-transrectal ultrasound fusion TBx in 2 institutions between 2015 and 2018 was obtained. The detection rate for significant CaP (Gleason score [GS] ≥ 3 + 4) for TBx and SBx were compared. The rate of potentially missed significant CaP by a TBx only approach was determined and GS concordance and CaP localization by TBx and SBx was evaluated. RESULTS TBx yielded significant CaP in 113 men (44%) while SBx yielded significant CaP in 110 men (43%) (P = 0.856). Insignificant CaP was found in 21 men (8%) by TBx, while SBx detected 34 men (13%) with insignificant CaP (P = 0.035). A TBx only approach, omitting SBx, would have missed significant CaP in 13 of the 126 men (10%) with significant CaP on biopsy. Ten of the 118 men (8%), both positive on TBx and SBx, were upgraded in GS by SBx while 11 men (9%) had higher maximum tumor core involvement on SBx. Nineteen of the 97 men (20%) with significant CaP in both TBx and SBx were diagnosed with unilateral significant CaP on mpMRI and TBx while SBx demonstrated bilateral significant CaP. CONCLUSIONS In men with a prebiopsy positive mpMRI, TBx detects high-GS CaP while reducing insignificant CaP detection as compared to SBx. SBx and TBx as stand-alone missed significant CaP in 13% and 10% of the men with significant CaP on biopsy, respectively. A combination of SBx and TBx remains necessary for the most accurate assessment of detection, grading, tumor core involvement, and localization of CaP.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christophe K Mannaerts
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Amir Kajtazovic
- Department of Urology, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands
| | - Olivia A P Lodeizen
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Maudy Gayet
- Department of Urology, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands
| | - Marc R W Engelbrecht
- Department of Radiology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Gerrit J Jager
- Department of Radiology, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands
| | - Hessel Wijkstra
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Electrical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Theo M de Reijke
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Harrie P Beerlage
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Urology, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands; Department of Electrical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
175
|
Campa R, Del Monte M, Barchetti G, Pecoraro M, Salvo V, Ceravolo I, Indino EL, Ciardi A, Catalano C, Panebianco V. Improvement of prostate cancer detection combining a computer-aided diagnostic system with TRUS-MRI targeted biopsy. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2019; 44:264-271. [PMID: 30054684 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-018-1712-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To validate a novel consensus method, called target-in-target, combining human analysis of mpMRI with automated CAD system analysis, with the aim to increasing the prostate cancer detection rate of targeted biopsies. METHODS A cohort of 420 patients was enrolled and 253 patients were rolled out, due to exclusion criteria. 167 patients, underwent diagnostic 3T MpMRI. Two expert radiologists evaluated the exams adopting PI-RADSv2 and CAD system. When a CAD target overlapped with a radiologic one, we performed the biopsy in the overlapping area which we defined as target-in-target. Targeted TRUS-MRI fusion biopsy was performed in 63 patients with a total of 212 targets. The MRI data of all targets were quantitatively analyzed, and diagnostic findings were compared to pathologist's biopsy reports. RESULTS CAD system diagnostic performance exhibited sensitivity and specificity scores of 55.2% and 74.1% [AUC = 0.63 (0.54 ÷ 0.71)] , respectively. Human readers achieved an AUC value, in ROC analysis, of 0.71 (0.63 ÷ 0.79). The target-in-target method provided a detection rate per targeted biopsy core of 81.8 % vs. a detection rate per targeted biopsy core of 68.6 % for pure PI-RADS based on target definitions. The higher per-core detection rate of the target-in-target approach was achieved irrespective of the presence of technical flaws and artifacts. CONCLUSIONS A novel consensus method combining human reader evaluation with automated CAD system analysis of mpMRI to define prostate biopsy targets was shown to improve the detection rate per biopsy core of TRUS-MRI fusion biopsies. Results suggest that the combination of CAD system analysis and human reader evaluation is a winning strategy to improve targeted biopsy efficiency.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Riccardo Campa
- Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University of Rome, V.le Regina Elena, 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Maurizio Del Monte
- Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University of Rome, V.le Regina Elena, 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Giovanni Barchetti
- Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University of Rome, V.le Regina Elena, 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Martina Pecoraro
- Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University of Rome, V.le Regina Elena, 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Vincenzo Salvo
- Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University of Rome, V.le Regina Elena, 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Isabella Ceravolo
- Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University of Rome, V.le Regina Elena, 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Elena Lucia Indino
- Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University of Rome, V.le Regina Elena, 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Antonio Ciardi
- Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University of Rome, V.le Regina Elena, 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Carlo Catalano
- Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University of Rome, V.le Regina Elena, 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Valeria Panebianco
- Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University of Rome, V.le Regina Elena, 324, 00161, Rome, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
176
|
Westhoff N, Ritter M. Prostate Cancer Biopsy: Strategies. Urol Oncol 2019. [DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-42623-5_70] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
|
177
|
Chung DY, Goh HJ, Koh DH, Kim MS, Lee JS, Jang WS, Choi YD. Clinical significance of multiparametric MRI and PSA density as predictors of residual tumor (pT0) following radical prostatectomy for T1a-T1b (incidental) prostate cancer. PLoS One 2018; 13:e0210037. [PMID: 30592769 PMCID: PMC6310270 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0210037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/19/2018] [Accepted: 12/14/2018] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose The aim of this study was to evaluate predictors of residual tumor and clinical prognosis in T1a-T1b (incidental) prostate cancer by analysis of specimens from men undergoing surgery for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Materials and methods We retrospectively reviewed medical records of incidental prostate cancer patients who had undergone radical prostatectomy. Patients whose tumor statuses were further confirmed by prostate biopsy, or who had used androgen deprivation therapy before radical prostatectomy, were excluded. Clinical and pathological parameters were analyzed to evaluate residual tumor and clinical prognosis. We used univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses, as well as receiver operator characteristics, to predict residual tumor (pT0). Results The final analysis included 95 patients. Among these patients, 67 (70.53%) exhibited residual tumor, whereas 28 (29.47%) did not (pT0). Pathology findings showed that 44 (65.67%), 16 (23.88%), and 7 patients (10.45%) exhibited Gleason scores of G6, G7, and ≥G8, respectively. Fifty-seven and 10 patients exhibited pathologic T stages T2 and T3, respectively. Mean follow-up duration was 70.26 (±34.67) months. Biochemical recurrence was observed in 11 patients; none were pT0 patients. Multivariate logistic regression showed that low prostate-specific antigen density after benign prostatic hyperplasia surgery and invisible lesion on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging were significantly associated with pT0. Additionally, a combination of these factors showed an increase in the diagnostic accuracy of pT0, compared with mpMRI alone (AUC 0.805, 0.767, respectively); this combination showed sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive values of 71.6%, 89.3%, and 94.1%, respectively. Conclusion Our results suggest that patients with incidental prostate cancer who have both prostate-specific antigen density ≤0.08 after benign prostatic hyperplasia surgery as well as invisible cancer lesion on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging should be considered for active surveillance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Doo Yong Chung
- Department of Urology, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Hyeok Jun Goh
- Department of Urology, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Dong Hoon Koh
- Department of Urology, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Min Seok Kim
- Department of Urology, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jong Soo Lee
- Department of Urology, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Won Sik Jang
- Department of Urology, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Young Deuk Choi
- Department of Urology, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
- * E-mail:
| |
Collapse
|
178
|
Westhoff N, Haumann H, Kriegmair MC, von Hardenberg J, Budjan J, Porubsky S, Michel MS, Honeck P, Ritter M. Association of training level and outcome of software-based image fusion-guided targeted prostate biopsies. World J Urol 2018; 37:2119-2127. [PMID: 30560300 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-018-2605-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/20/2018] [Accepted: 12/11/2018] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The aim of this study was to assess the impact of experience on the outcome of image fusion-guided prostate biopsies performed by urologists working at a high-volume medical center. METHODS The first 210 consecutive fusion biopsies were analyzed following installation of the software-based biopsy platform Artemis™ (Eigen, USA). The impact of training was measured in terms of changes in prostate cancer detection rates and biopsy duration over time. We sought to identify a threshold of experience for urologists, which predicts higher detection rates of targeted biopsies. The influence of various factors on prostate cancer detection rates was evaluated using bi- and multivariate analysis. RESULTS Twenty-two urologists (n = 9 senior urologists, n = 13 urological residents) performed targeted biopsies followed by systematic 12-core biopsies. Overall, targeted biopsies yielded a positive result in 39.6% of 260 suspicious MRI lesions. A subgroup analysis of the six urologists who performed more than ten biopsies was then conducted, and their level of experience (i.e., performance of more than eight biopsies) was found to be associated with higher detection rates than those with less experience (49.0% and 23.0%, respectively; p < 0.001) in the targeted biopsies. Experience was likewise a significant and independent predictor of a cancer-positive targeted biopsy (p = 0.002). Experienced senior physicians did not outperform residents in their targeted biopsy results. Further, biopsy duration correlated negatively (r = - 0.5931, p < 0.001) with the total number of biopsies performed for all subgroups during the period of assessment. CONCLUSIONS Experience is an important predictor of the rate of detection in targeted biopsies using software-based biopsy platforms with semi-robotic assistance. Moreover, the performance of just a few procedures appears sufficient to increase biopsy effectiveness significantly. Lastly, supervision by experts is recommended during the training phase.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Niklas Westhoff
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, Mannheim, 68165, Germany.
| | - Henning Haumann
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, Mannheim, 68165, Germany
| | - Maximilian Christian Kriegmair
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, Mannheim, 68165, Germany
| | - Jost von Hardenberg
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, Mannheim, 68165, Germany
| | - Johannes Budjan
- Institute of Clinical Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, Mannheim, 68165, Germany
| | - Stefan Porubsky
- Institute of Pathology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, Mannheim, 68165, Germany
| | - Maurice Stephan Michel
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, Mannheim, 68165, Germany
| | - Patrick Honeck
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, Mannheim, 68165, Germany
| | - Manuel Ritter
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, Mannheim, 68165, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
179
|
Rouviere O, Moldovan PC. The current role of prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. Asian J Urol 2018; 6:137-145. [PMID: 31061799 PMCID: PMC6488694 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajur.2018.12.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/24/2018] [Revised: 10/26/2018] [Accepted: 10/26/2018] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Prostate multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has shown excellent sensitivity for Gleason ≥7 cancers, especially when their volume is ≥0.5 mL. As a result, performing an mpMRI before prostate biopsy could improve the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) by adding targeted biopsies to systematic biopsies. Currently, there is a consensus that targeted biopsies improve the detection of csPCa in the repeat biopsy setting and at confirmatory biopsy in patients considering active surveillance. Several prospective multicentric controlled trials recently showed that targeted biopsy also improved csPCa detection in biopsy-naïve patients. The role of mpMRI and targeted biopsy during the follow-up of active surveillance remains unclear. Whether systematic biopsy could be omitted in case of negative mpMRI is also a matter of controversy. mpMRI did show excellent negative predictive values (NPV) in the literature, however, since NPV depends on the prevalence of the disease, negative mpMRI findings should be interpreted in the light of a priori risk for csPCa of the patient. Nomograms combining mpMRI findings and classical risk predictors (age, prostate-specific antigen density, digital rectal examination, etc.) will probably be developed in the future to decide whether a prostate biopsy should be obtained. mpMRI has a good specificity for detecting T3 stage cancers, but its sensitivity is low. It should therefore not be used routinely for staging purposes in low-risk patients. Nomograms combining mpMRI findings and other clinical and biochemical data will also probably be used in the future to better assess the risk of T3 stage disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Olivier Rouviere
- Hospices Civils de Lyon, Department of Urinary and Vascular Imaging, Hôpital Edouard Herriot, Lyon, France.,Université de Lyon, Lyon, France.,Université Lyon 1, faculté de médecine Lyon Est, Lyon, France
| | - Paul Cezar Moldovan
- Hospices Civils de Lyon, Department of Urinary and Vascular Imaging, Hôpital Edouard Herriot, Lyon, France.,Université de Lyon, Lyon, France.,Université Lyon 1, faculté de médecine Lyon Est, Lyon, France
| |
Collapse
|
180
|
Detection of Individual Prostate Cancer Foci via Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Eur Urol 2018; 75:712-720. [PMID: 30509763 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.11.031] [Citation(s) in RCA: 182] [Impact Index Per Article: 30.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/29/2018] [Accepted: 11/10/2018] [Indexed: 01/24/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) undoubtedly affects the diagnosis and treatment of localized prostate cancer (CaP). However, clinicians need a better understanding of its accuracy and limitations in detecting individual CaP foci to optimize management. OBJECTIVE To determine the per-lesion detection rate for CaP foci by mpMRI and identify predictors of tumor detection. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS We carried out a retrospective analysis of a prospectively managed database correlating lesion-specific results from mpMRI co-registered with whole-mount pathology (WMP) prostatectomy specimens from June 2010 to February 2018. Participants include 588 consecutive patients with biopsy-proven CaP undergoing 3-T mpMRI before radical prostatectomy at a single tertiary institution. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS We measured mpMRI sensitivity in detecting individual CaP and clinically significant (any Gleason score ≥7) CaP foci and predictors of tumor detection using multivariate analysis. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS The final analysis included 1213 pathologically confirmed tumor foci in 588 patients with primarily intermediate- (75%) or high-risk (12%) CaP. mpMRI detected 45% of all lesions (95% confidence interval [CI] 42-47%), including 65% of clinically significant lesions (95% CI 61-69%) and nearly 80% of high-grade tumors. Some 74% and 31% of missed solitary and multifocal tumors, respectively, were clinically significant. The majority of missed lesions were small (61.1% ≤1cm); 28.3% were between 1 and 2cm, and 10.4% were >2cm. mpMRI missed at least one clinically significant focus in 34% of patients overall, and in 45% of men with multifocal lesions. On multivariate analysis, smaller, low-grade, multifocal, nonindex tumors with lower prostate-specific antigen density were more likely to be missed. Limitations include selection bias in a prostatectomy cohort, lack of specificity data, an imperfect co-registration process, and uncertain clinical significance for undetected lesions. CONCLUSIONS mpMRI detects less than half of all and less than two-thirds of clinically significant CaP foci. The moderate per-lesion sensitivity and significant proportion of men with undetected tumor foci demonstrate the current limitations of mpMRI. PATIENT SUMMARY Magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate before surgical removal for prostate cancer finds less than half of all individual prostate cancer tumors. Large, solitary, aggressive tumors are more likely to be visualized on imaging.
Collapse
|
181
|
Sathianathen NJ, Warlick CA, Weight CJ, Ordonez MA, Spilseth B, Metzger GJ, Murugan P, Konety BR. A clinical prediction tool to determine the need for concurrent systematic sampling at the time of magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsy. BJU Int 2018; 123:612-617. [DOI: 10.1111/bju.14617] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Maria A. Ordonez
- Department of Urology; University of Minnesota; Minneapolis MN USA
| | - Benjamin Spilseth
- Department of Radiology; University of Minnesota; Minneapolis MN, USA
| | | | - Paari Murugan
- Department of Pathology; University of Minnesota; Minneapolis MN USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
182
|
Jayadevan R, Marks LS. Exclusive MRI-targeted biopsy: not so fast. Lancet Oncol 2018; 20:9-10. [PMID: 30470503 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(18)30607-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/07/2018] [Accepted: 08/09/2018] [Indexed: 10/27/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Rajiv Jayadevan
- Department of Urology, Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA
| | - Leonard S Marks
- Department of Urology, Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
183
|
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. Lancet Oncol 2018; 20:100-109. [PMID: 30470502 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(18)30569-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 677] [Impact Index Per Article: 112.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/14/2018] [Revised: 07/20/2018] [Accepted: 07/23/2018] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
184
|
Press B, Rosenkrantz AB, Huang R, Taneja SS. The ultrasound characteristics of regions identified as suspicious by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) predict the likelihood of clinically significant cancer on MRI-ultrasound fusion-targeted biopsy. BJU Int 2018; 123:439-446. [PMID: 30415476 DOI: 10.1111/bju.14615] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To determine whether the presence of an ultrasound hypoechoic region at the site of a region of interest (ROI) on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) results in improved prostate cancer (PCa) detection and predicts clinically significant PCa on MRI-ultrasonography fusion-targeted prostate biopsy (MRF-TB). MATERIALS AND METHODS Between July 2011 and June 2017, 1058 men who underwent MRF-TB, with or without systematic biopsy, by a single surgeon were prospectively entered into an institutional review board-approved database. Each MRI ROI was identified and scored for suspicion by a single radiologist, and was prospectively evaluated for presence of a hypoechoic region at the site by the surgeon and graded as 0, 1 or 2, representing none, a poorly demarcated ROI-HyR, or a well demarcated ROI-HyR, respectively. The interaction of MRI suspicion score (mSS) and ultrasonography grade (USG), and the prediction of cancer detection rate by USG, were evaluated through univariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS For 672 men, the overall and Gleason score (GS) ≥7 cancer detection rates were 61.2% and 39.6%, respectively. The cancer detection rates for USGs 0, 1 and 2 were 46.2%, 58.6% and 76.0% (P < 0.001) for any cancer, and 18.7%, 35.2% and 61.1% (P < 0.001) for GS ≥7 cancer, respectively. For MRF-TB only, the GS ≥7 cancer detection rates for USG 0, 1 and 2 were 12.8%, 25.7% and 52.0%, respectively (P < 0.001). On univariate analysis, in men with mSS 2-4, USG was predictive of GS ≥7 cancer detection rate. Multivariable regression analysis showed that USG, prostate-specific antigen density and mSS were predictive of GS ≥7 PCa on MRF-TB. CONCLUSIONS Ultrasonography findings at the site of an MRI ROI independently predict the likelihood of GS ≥7 PCa, as men with a well-demarcated ROI-HyR at the time of MRF-TB have a higher risk than men without.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Richard Huang
- Department of Urology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA
| | - Samir S Taneja
- Department of Urology and Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
185
|
Clinical significance and predictors of oncologic outcome after radical prostatectomy for invisible prostate cancer on multiparametric MRI. BMC Cancer 2018; 18:1057. [PMID: 30382916 PMCID: PMC6211592 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-018-4955-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/19/2018] [Accepted: 10/15/2018] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The objective of our study was to evaluate the clinical significance of invisible prostate cancer (iPCa) on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) by analyzing clinical parameters and oncologic outcomes. Methods We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) from 2010 to 2015 at our institution. Before RP, all patients were confirmed to have prostate cancer based on prostate biopsy. We excluded patients who underwent neoadjuvant therapy. Additionally, we excluded patients who had incomplete mpMRI based on PI-RADS (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System). iPCa was defined as having no grade 3 or higher region of interests using a scoring system established by PI-RADS without limitations on interpretation from mpMRI by radiologists. We selected patients with iPCa using this protocol. We analyzed data using univariate and multivariate cox regression analysis, logistic analysis, Kaplan-Meier curves, and receiver operator characteristic curves to predict biochemical recurrence (BCR). Results A total of 213 patients with iPCa were selected according to the patient selection protocol. Among them, pathological findings showed that Gleason score (GS) G6, G7 and ≥ G8 were present in 115 cases (54.0%), 78 cases (36.6%), and 20 cases (9.4%), respectively. Further, extracapsular extension (ECE), positive surgical margins (PSM), and lymphovascular invasion (LVI) were present in 28 (13.1%), 18 (8.5%), and 3 cases (1.4%), respectively. Seminal vesicle invasion (SVI) was observed in one case (0.5%). During a median follow-up time of 51 months, BCR was observed 29 cases. Adverse pathology (AP) was defined as GS ≥8, ECE, SVI and LVI. AP and prostate specific antigen (PSA) were significantly associated with BCR. Moreover, PSA > 6.2 ng/ml was suggested as a cut-off value for predicting BCR. Conclusions In our results, cases of iPCa had clinically significant PCa, and AP and poor prognosis were also observed in some. Additionally, we found that PSA is the most clinically reliable predictor of oncologic outcome. We suggest that active treatment and diagnosis should be considered for patients with iPCa with PSA > 6.2 ng/ml.
Collapse
|
186
|
Bass EJ, Freeman A, Jameson C, Punwani S, Moore CM, Arya M, Emberton M, Ahmed HU. Prostate cancer diagnostic pathway: Is a one-stop cognitive MRI targeted biopsy service a realistic goal in everyday practice? A pilot cohort in a tertiary referral centre in the UK. BMJ Open 2018; 8:e024941. [PMID: 30361408 PMCID: PMC6224764 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024941] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/04/2018] [Revised: 08/24/2018] [Accepted: 09/20/2018] [Indexed: 11/05/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To evaluate the feasibility of a novel multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) and cognitive fusion transperineal targeted biopsy (MRTB) led prostate cancer (PCa) diagnostic service with regard to cancer detection and reducing time to diagnosis and treatment. DESIGN Consecutive men being investigated for possible PCa under the UK 2-week wait guidelines. SETTING Tertiary referral centre for PCa in the UK. PARTICIPANTS Men referred with a raised prostate-specific antigen (PSA) or abnormal digital rectal examination between February 2015 and March 2016 under the UK 2-week rule guideline. INTERVENTIONS An mpMRI was performed prior to patients attending clinic, on the same day. If required, MRTB was offered. Results were available within 48 hours and discussed at a specialist multidisciplinary team meeting. Patients returned for counselling within 7 days PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcome measures in this regard included the time to diagnosis and treatment of patients referred with a suspicion of PCa. Quality control outcome measures included clinically significant and total cancer detection rates. RESULTS 112 men were referred to the service. 111 (99.1%) underwent mpMRI. Median PSA was 9.4 ng/mL (IQR 5.6-21.0). 87 patients had a target on mpMRI with 25 scoring Likert 3/5 for likelihood of disease, 26 4/5 and 36 5/5.57 (51%) patients received a local anaesthetic, Magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy (MRTB). Cancer was detected in 45 (79%). 43 (96%) had University College London definition 2 disease or greater. The times to diagnosis and treatment were a median of 8 and 20 days, respectively. CONCLUSIONS This approach greatly reduces the time to diagnosis and treatment. Detection rates of significant cancer are high. Similar services may be valuable to patients with a potential diagnosis of PCa.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Edward James Bass
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK
- Department of Urology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Alex Freeman
- Department of Histopathology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Charles Jameson
- Department of Histopathology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Shonit Punwani
- Department of Radiology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
- Division of Medicine, Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK
| | - Caroline M Moore
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK
- Department of Urology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Manit Arya
- Department of Urology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Mark Emberton
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK
- Department of Urology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Hashim Uddin Ahmed
- Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK
- Imperial Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
187
|
Is it Time to Perform Only Magnetic Resonance Imaging Targeted Cores? Our Experience with 1,032 Men Who Underwent Prostate Biopsy. J Urol 2018; 200:774-778. [DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2018.04.061] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 04/13/2018] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
|
188
|
Shah PH, Patel VR, Moreira DM, George AK, Alom M, Kozel Z, Joshi V, Ben-Levi E, Villani R, Yaskiv O, Kavoussi LR, Vira M, Olsson CO, Rastinehad AR. Implementation of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging technology for evaluation of patients with suspicion for prostate cancer in the clinical practice setting. BJU Int 2018; 123:239-245. [PMID: 30113138 DOI: 10.1111/bju.14515] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To investigate the impact of implementing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasonography fusion technology on biopsy and prostate cancer (PCa) detection rates in men presenting with clinical suspicion for PCa in the clinical practice setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS We performed a review of 1 808 consecutive men referred for elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level between 2011 and 2014. The study population was divided into two groups based on whether MRI was used as a risk stratification tool. Univariable and multivariable analyses of biopsy rates and overall and clinically significant PCa detection rates between groups were performed. RESULTS The MRI and PSA-only groups consisted of 1 020 and 788 patients, respectively. A total of 465 patients (45.6%) in the MRI group and 442 (56.1%) in the PSA-only group underwent biopsy, corresponding to an 18.7% decrease in the proportion of patients receiving biopsy in the MRI group (P < 0.001). Overall PCa (56.8% vs 40.7%; P < 0.001) and clinically significant PCa detection (47.3% vs 31.0%; P < 0.001) was significantly higher in the MRI vs the PSA-only group. In logistic regression analyses, the odds of overall PCa detection (odds ratio [OR] 1.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.29-2.35; P < 0.001) and clinically significant PCa detection (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.48-2.80; P < 0.001) were higher in the MRI than in the PSA-only group after adjusting for clinically relevant PCa variables. CONCLUSION Among men presenting with clinical suspicion for PCa, addition of MRI increases detection of clinically significant cancers while reducing prostate biopsy rates when implemented in a clinical practice setting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paras H Shah
- Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Vinay R Patel
- Department of Urology, Icahn Smith Institute for Urology, Northwell Health, New York, NY, USA
| | - Daniel M Moreira
- Department of Urology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Arvin K George
- Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Manaf Alom
- Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Zachary Kozel
- Department of Urology, Smith Institute for Urology, Northwell Health, New Hyde Park, NY, USA
| | - Vidhu Joshi
- Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Eran Ben-Levi
- Department of Radiology, Hofstra Northwell School of Medicine, New Hyde Park, NY, USA
| | - Robert Villani
- Department of Radiology, Hofstra Northwell School of Medicine, New Hyde Park, NY, USA
| | - Oksana Yaskiv
- Department of Pathology, Hofstra Northwell School of Medicine, New Hyde Park, NY, USA
| | - Louis R Kavoussi
- Department of Urology, Smith Institute for Urology, Northwell Health, New Hyde Park, NY, USA
| | - Manish Vira
- Department of Urology, Smith Institute for Urology, Northwell Health, New Hyde Park, NY, USA
| | | | - Ardeshir R Rastinehad
- Department of Urology, Icahn Smith Institute for Urology, Northwell Health, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
189
|
|
190
|
Lovegrove CE, Matanhelia M, Randeva J, Eldred-Evans D, Tam H, Miah S, Winkler M, Ahmed HU, Shah TT. Prostate imaging features that indicate benign or malignant pathology on biopsy. Transl Androl Urol 2018; 7:S420-S435. [PMID: 30363462 PMCID: PMC6178322 DOI: 10.21037/tau.2018.07.06] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Accurate diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer is essential in identifying patients who should be offered treatment with curative intent. Modifications to the Gleason grading system in recent years show that accurate grading and reporting at needle biopsy can improve identification of clinically significant prostate cancers. Extracapsular extension of prostate cancer has been demonstrated to be an adverse prognostic factor with greater risk of metastatic spread than organ-confined disease. Tumor volume may be an independent prognostic factor and should be considered in conjunction with other factors. Multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (MP-MRI) has become an increasingly important tool in the diagnosis and characterization of prostate cancer. MP-MRI allows T2-weighted (T2W) anatomical imaging to be combined with functional and physiological assessment. Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) has shown greater sensitivity, specificity and negative predictive value compared to prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing and T2W imaging alone and has a more positive correlation with Gleason score and tumour volume. Dynamic gadolinium contrast-enhanced (DCE) imaging can exhibit difficulties in distinguishing prostatitis from malignancy in the peripheral zone, and between benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and malignancies in the transition zone (TZ). Computer aided diagnosis utilizes software to aid radiologists in detecting and diagnosing abnormalities from diagnostic imaging. New techniques of quantitative MRI, such as VERDICT MRI use tissue-specific factors to delineate different cellular and microstructural phenotypes, characterizing tissue properties with greater detail. Proton MR spectroscopic imaging (MRSI) is a more technically challenging imaging modality than DCE and DWI MRI. Over the last decade, choline and prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) have developed as better tools for staging than conventional imaging. While hyperpolarized MRI shows promise in improving the imaging and differentiation of benign and malignant lesions there is further work required. Accurate reading and interpretation of diagnostic investigations is key to accurate identification of abnormal areas requiring biopsy, sparing those in whom benign or indolent disease can be managed by non-invasive means. Embracing and advancing existing technologies is essential in furthering this process.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Catherine Elizabeth Lovegrove
- Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.,Imperial Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Mudit Matanhelia
- Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.,Imperial Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Jagpal Randeva
- Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.,Imperial Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - David Eldred-Evans
- Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.,Imperial Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Henry Tam
- Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.,Imperial Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Saiful Miah
- Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.,Imperial Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Mathias Winkler
- Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.,Imperial Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Hashim U Ahmed
- Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.,Imperial Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Taimur T Shah
- Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.,Imperial Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
191
|
Patel N, Cricco-Lizza E, Kasabwala K, Xu C, Robinson BD, Khani F, Wang Y, Margolis D, Hu JC. The Role of Systematic and Targeted Biopsies in Light of Overlap on Magnetic Resonance Imaging Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy. Eur Urol Oncol 2018; 1:263-267. [DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2018.03.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/19/2018] [Revised: 02/26/2018] [Accepted: 03/20/2018] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
|
192
|
Sathianathen NJ, Warlick CA. The Use of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Prostate Cancer Primary Diagnostic Pathway: Is It Ready for Primetime? World J Mens Health 2018; 36:223-229. [PMID: 30168298 DOI: 10.5534/wjmh.2018.180025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/09/2018] [Revised: 05/27/2018] [Accepted: 05/31/2018] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has been increasingly utilized in the prostate cancer diagnostic landscape over the last five years. The majority of the literature has focused on its use in men with a previous negative biopsy. However, over time, clinicians have begun using mpMRI in the work-up of men being considered for primary biopsy and subsequently data characterizing its diagnostic performance in this setting is emerging. This review comprehensively assesses the utility of mpMRI in the primary biopsy setting.
Collapse
|
193
|
ADC Metrics From Multiparametric MRI: Histologic Downgrading of Gleason Score 9 or 10 Prostate Cancers Diagnosed at Nontargeted Transrectal Ultrasound–Guided Biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2018; 211:W158-W165. [DOI: 10.2214/ajr.17.18958] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/21/2023]
|
194
|
Sathianathen NJ, Warlick CA. The Use of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Prostate Cancer Primary Diagnostic Pathway: Is It Ready for Primetime? World J Mens Health 2018. [PMID: 30168298 PMCID: PMC6119840 DOI: 10.5534/wjmh.180025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has been increasingly utilized in the prostate cancer diagnostic landscape over the last five years. The majority of the literature has focused on its use in men with a previous negative biopsy. However, over time, clinicians have begun using mpMRI in the work-up of men being considered for primary biopsy and subsequently data characterizing its diagnostic performance in this setting is emerging. This review comprehensively assesses the utility of mpMRI in the primary biopsy setting.
Collapse
|
195
|
A 17-Gene Genomic Prostate Score Assay Provides Independent Information on Adverse Pathology in the Setting of Combined Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Fusion Targeted and Systematic Prostate Biopsy. J Urol 2018. [DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2018.03.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/08/2023]
|
196
|
Bungart BL, Lan L, Wang P, Li R, Koch MO, Cheng L, Masterson TA, Dundar M, Cheng JX. Photoacoustic tomography of intact human prostates and vascular texture analysis identify prostate cancer biopsy targets. PHOTOACOUSTICS 2018; 11:46-55. [PMID: 30109195 PMCID: PMC6088561 DOI: 10.1016/j.pacs.2018.07.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/06/2018] [Revised: 06/24/2018] [Accepted: 07/26/2018] [Indexed: 05/05/2023]
Abstract
Prostate cancer is poorly visualized on ultrasonography (US) so that current biopsy requires either a templated technique or guidance after fusion of US with magnetic resonance imaging. Here we determined the ability for photoacoustic tomography (PAT) and US followed by texture-based image processing to identify prostate biopsy targets. K-means clustering feature learning and testing was performed on separate datasets comprised of 1064 and 1197 nm PAT and US images of intact, ex vivo human prostates. 1197 nm PAT was found to not contribute to the feature learning, and thus, only 1064 nm PAT and US images were used for final feature testing. Biopsy targets, determined by the tumor-assigned pixels' center of mass, located 100% of the primary lesions and 67% of the secondary lesions. In conclusion, 1064 nm PAT and US texture-based feature analysis provided successful prostate biopsy targets.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brittani L. Bungart
- Weldon School of Biomedical Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA
- Medical Scientist Training Program, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | - Lu Lan
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Pu Wang
- Vibronix Inc., West Lafayette, IN, USA
| | - Rui Li
- Weldon School of Biomedical Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA
- Vibronix Inc., West Lafayette, IN, USA
| | - Michael O. Koch
- Department of Urology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | - Liang Cheng
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | - Timothy A. Masterson
- Department of Urology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | - Murat Dundar
- Computer and Information Science Department, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | - Ji-Xin Cheng
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA
- Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA
- Corresponding author at: Boston University Photonics Center, Boston University, 8 St. Mary’s Street, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
197
|
Prediction of unilateral prostate cancer by the combination of transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsy and multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging: A real-life experience. PLoS One 2018; 13:e0202872. [PMID: 30157232 PMCID: PMC6114785 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0202872] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/25/2017] [Accepted: 08/11/2018] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Hemi-ablation of prostate cancer (PCa) requires an accurate prediction of laterality. Recently, multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has recently been increasingly used to enhance clinical staging and characterization of tumor foci. Thus, we tried to investigate the real-life accuracy of combinatory approach of using both transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostatic biopsy and mpMRI in predicting the laterality of PCa. We reviewed the records of 335 men who were suspected of having unilateral PCa on multi (≥ 12)-core TRUS-guided biopsy and preoperative mpMRI and subsequently had undergone radical prostatectomy (RP) at our institution. Based on the analysis of pathologic outcomes from RP, the performance of the combinatory approach in predicting the pathological laterality of PCa was evaluated. Pathology was classified to be unfavorable when showing a Gleason pattern of 4/5 or pT3/N1 features. Significant cancer was defined as non-organ-confined disease, having a Gleason pattern of 4/5, or showing a cancer volume of ≥ 0.5 mL. Among the 335 unilateral lobes not suspected to harbor tumor from either the TRUS biopsy or mpMRI, the actual absence rate of malignancy was only 13.7% from a pathologic analysis of RP specimens. Even among the 115 D'Amico low-risk group, the absence rate of malignancy was only 26.1% in unilateral lobes not suspected to harbor tumor. Among the 335 lobes, unfavorable pathology and significant cancer were not observed in 36.1% and 30.7%, respectively. The absence rates of unfavorable pathology and significant cancer among the D'Amico low risk group were 56.5% and 47.8%, respectively. Meanwhile, the absence rate of dominant Gleason pattern 4 or 5 was 74.9% among the 335 total subjects. Our real-life clinical experience showed that the combination of multi-core TRUS-guided biopsy and mpMRI did not provide reliable accuracy in the prediction of true unilaterality of PCa.
Collapse
|
198
|
Accuracy of the magnetic resonance imaging pathway in the detection of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2018; 22:39-48. [PMID: 30108376 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-018-0075-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/07/2018] [Revised: 05/07/2018] [Accepted: 05/25/2018] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although magnetic resonance imaging and subsequent targeted biopsy ('MRI pathway') have been widely adopted in routine clinical practice, it is still a common practice to perform systematic biopsy concurrently, because the accuracy of the MRI pathway is yet to be fully defined. This systematic review of the literature assessed the sensitivity of the MRI pathway for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer. METHODS Multiple databases were searched up to May 2017 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement for studies assessing the accuracy of MR-guided biopsy (MRGB) compared to a reference standard which consisted of both MRGB and systematic biopsy with at least 20-cores. The primary outcome was the sensitivity of detecting clinically significant prostate cancer defined as Gleason ≥7 disease. RESULTS A total of 15 studies met the predefined inclusion criteria. Overall, studies were assessed to be of low quality with inadequate blinding of personnel, which could introduce performance and detection bias. The calculated summary sensitivity of the MRI pathway was 78.3% [95%CI 75.0-81.4%]. There was moderate heterogeneity between the included studies (I2 = 36%). Subgroup analysis was performed based on clinical setting, the strength of MRI magnet and mode of image fusion as factors but no interaction was identified between any of the subgroups. No publication bias was identified. CONCLUSION The MRI pathway cannot yet be solely relied upon to diagnose clinically significant disease and hence additional systematic sampling should still be performed during the biopsy procedure.
Collapse
|
199
|
MRI in prostate cancer diagnosis: do we need to add standard sampling? A review of the last 5 years. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2018; 21:473-487. [DOI: 10.1038/s41391-018-0071-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/29/2018] [Revised: 05/03/2018] [Accepted: 05/25/2018] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
|
200
|
von Hardenberg J, Westhoff N, Baumunk D, Hausmann D, Martini T, Marx A, Porubsky S, Schostak M, Michel MS, Ritter M. Prostate cancer treatment by the latest focal HIFU device with MRI/TRUS-fusion control biopsies: A prospective evaluation. Urol Oncol 2018; 36:401.e1-401.e9. [PMID: 30093211 DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2018.05.022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/30/2017] [Revised: 04/14/2018] [Accepted: 05/18/2018] [Indexed: 10/28/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound (MRI/TRUS) fusion-guided focal high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) therapy of the prostate has recently been developed as a selective HIFU-therapy technique to enable targeted ablation of prostate cancer. Here we report a series of patients treated with focal HIFU therapy, discuss its potential pitfalls, and address controversies concerning the indications. MATERIALS AND METHODS This single-center prospective study reports outcomes of patients treated from September 2014 to March 2016. Follow-up was a minimum of 12 months. MRI/TRUS-fusion-guided HIFU was performed under general anesthesia using the Focal One® device (EDAP, France). A control biopsy at 12 months was taken using the MRI/TRUS-fusion biopsy platform Artemis™ (Eigen, California) combining targeted and systematic cores. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) changes from baseline, patient-reported outcome measures, and complications using the Clavien-Dindo classification system are also reported. RESULTS Twenty-four patients (PSA < 10 ng/ml, n = 17 Gleason 3+3, n = 7 Gleason 3+4) with either unifocal or bifocal prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) 3-5 lesions (n = 19) or without a PI-RADS lesion (n = 5) were treated. Nineteen patients underwent focal HIFU, five patients zonal HIFU. Of the 20 patients that had biopsies at 12 months, 8 patients had a positive biopsy within the ablation zone (overall cancer free rate: 60%). Using different definitions of clinically significant cancer, the cancer-free rate for the ablation zone varies between 75% and 95%. Four of the eight patients (all persistent Gleason 3+4 or upgrading to 4+3) underwent a radical whole gland salvage therapy. Patient-reported outcome measures showed no significant decrease in urinary continence (expanded prostate cancer index composite -26 urinary incontinence: P = 0.080), but there was a reduction in potency (International index of erectile function in preoperatively potent patients: median decrease of 2 points to a median of 19 points at 12 months; 95% confidence interval: 15.79-22.21; P = 0.044). Only one complication > grade II occurred. CONCLUSIONS Targeted MRI/TRUS fusion-guided focal HIFU allows local tumor ablation, but is not free from limitations. The procedure has good functional outcomes and a quick recovery. Multicenter trials with more patients are required to determine the procedure´s role in the prostate cancer therapy algorithm.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jost von Hardenberg
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167 Mannheim, Germany.
| | - Niklas Westhoff
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167 Mannheim, Germany
| | - Daniel Baumunk
- Department of Urology and Pediatric Urology, University Hospital Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120 Magdeburg Germany
| | - Daniel Hausmann
- Institute of Clinical Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167 Mannheim, Germany
| | - Thomas Martini
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Ulm, Prittwitzstraße 43, 89075 Ulm, Germany
| | - Alexander Marx
- Institute of Pathology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Stefan Porubsky
- Institute of Pathology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Martin Schostak
- Department of Urology and Pediatric Urology, University Hospital Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120 Magdeburg Germany
| | - Maurice Stephan Michel
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167 Mannheim, Germany
| | - Manuel Ritter
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167 Mannheim, Germany
| |
Collapse
|