Image-guided prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance imaging-derived targets: a systematic review

68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT: the rising star of nuclear medicine in prostate cancer imaging?

Ever since the introduction of ⁶⁸Ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen 11 positron-emission tomography/computed tomography (⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT) a few years ago, it has rapidly achieved great success in the field of prostate cancer imaging. A large number of studies have been published to date, indicating a high potential of ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT in the work-up of prostate cancer patients, including primary diagnosis, staging and biochemical recurrence. The aim of this review is to present the most important data on this novel, highly promising imaging technique, and to formulate recommendations for possible applications of ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT in clinical routine.

A critical comparison of techniques for MRI-targeted biopsy of the prostate

MRI-targeted biopsy is a promising technique that offers an improved detection of clinically significant prostate cancer over standard non-targeted biopsy. It is established that prostate MRI is of use in both the primary and repeat biopsy setting for the detection of significant prostate cancer. There are three approaches to targeting biopsies to areas of interest seen on prostate MRI. They each rely on the acquisition and reporting of a diagnostic quality multi-parametric MRI scan used to identify areas of interest, and the subsequent use of those diagnostic quality images in combination with real-time images of the prostate during the biopsy procedure. The three techniques are: visual registration of the MRI images with a real-time ultrasound image; software-assisted fusion of the MRI images and the real-time ultrasound images, and in-bore biopsy, which requires registration of a diagnostic quality MRI scan with a real time interventional MRI image. In this paper we compare the three techniques and evaluate those studies where there is a direct comparison of more than one MRI-targeting technique. PubMed was searched from inception to November 2016 using the search terms (cognitive registration OR visual registration OR fusion biopsy OR in-bore biopsy OR targeted biopsy) AND (prostate cancer OR prostate adenocarcinoma OR prostate carcinoma OR prostatic carcinoma OR prostatic adenocarcinoma) AND (MRI OR NMR OR magnetic resonance imaging OR mpMRI OR multiparametric MRI). The initial search included 731 abstracts. Eleven full text papers directly compared two or more techniques of MRI-targeting, and were selected for inclusion. The detection of clinically significant prostate cancer varied from 0% to 93.3% for visual registration, 23.2% to 100% for software-assisted registration and 29% to 80% for in-bore biopsy. Detection rates for clinically significant cancer are dependent on the prevalence of cancer within the population biopsied, which in turn is determined by the selection criteria [biopsy naïve, previous negative biopsy, prostate specific antigen (PSA) selection criteria, presence of a lesion on MRI]. Cancer detection rates varied more between study populations than between biopsy approaches. Currently there is no consensus on which type of MRI-targeted biopsy performs better in a given setting. Although there have been studies supporting each of the three techniques, substantial differences in methodology and reporting the findings make it difficult to reliably compare their outcomes.

Cost consideration in utilization of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer

The screening, evaluation and management of prostate cancer changed significantly in the last decade. The recommendations regarding prostate cancer screening continue to evolve with new revelations about existing data sets and longer followup of landmark trials. Robotics has gained the vast majority of the marketplace for surgically managed prostate cancer in rapid fashion. The need for intervention in low risk prostate cancer has been closely examined and more men are being expectantly managed than ever before. Amidst all these changes, prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has emerged as a disruptive technology. Through the use of dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion weighted series, prostate tumors that were previously not visible have become identifiable and quantifiable. The ability of MRI to improve staging and identification of clinically significant disease has resulted in increased utilization for different aspects of prostate cancer care. The best studied use is in men with a prior negative transrectal ultrasound guided (TRUS) prostate biopsy and the performance characteristics in this role match well with the clinical question raised. The role for MRI in initial biopsy, in pre-surgical planning before prostatectomy and in men on active surveillance is less well defined. A primary concern in the use of MRI is that of cost. MRI units are expensive, both in initial outlay and ongoing use. The availability of MRI varies widely between countries and even within regions of the same country. Different healthcare models have different approaches for allocating the use of expensive resources, including MRI, in times when they are scarce. Prostate MRI can be used at multiple points in the management algorithm of prostate cancer and each implies different cost concerns. In this review we present an overview of current research in cost and cost efficacy for the use of MRI in the management of prostate cancer. By examining what is known and highlighting areas of ongoing research we hope to provide the reader with a solid foundation for understanding these complex, ever-changing issues.

Pre-biopsy MRI as an adjunct for cancer detection in men with elevated PSA and no previous biopsy

The role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) prior to biopsy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer in biopsy-naïve patients has been strengthened by recent developments such as the PIRADS V2 criteria, which cover acquisition, interpretation, and reporting for clinical practice and data collection for research. Important questions on the role of prostate MRI remain: can MRI be used as a triage test before first biopsy series? Can it be used to avoid the use of systematic biopsies (SB) and instead use only targeted biopsies (TB) to MRI-suspicious lesions? Studies to evaluate image guided TB compared to SB have started to accumulate. Objectives of these studies should be to reduce the detection of clinically insignificant disease, to maximize the detection of clinically significant cancer (CSC), to better assess disease size, grade and location. Accurate diagnosis will allow the choice of the most appropriate treatments options, minimising side effects and reducing overtreatment. Study results on MRI-TB detection rates are promising however some limitations should be considered. The majority of published and ongoing studies have been performed at expert centres, in order to demonstrate the optimal performance of MRI. Then, the validation of this strategy in less specialised institutions will be necessary before incorporating recommendations in international guidelines. It necessitates training for radiologists and urologists to perform and read MRI and MRI-targeted biopsy through education programs and standardization tools. All these advances will be consolidated with expected genetic screening tools to improve the detection of aggressive cancer.

[Role of prostate MRI, TRUS fusion biopsies and new markers in the diagnostic strategy of prostate cancer]

Multiparametric MRI prostate (mp-MRI) is a powerful tool to locate lesions>0.5cm³ (below this threshold tumor volume, prostate cancers are classified as "insignificant"). The detection rate of the mp-MRI for significant cancers of small volume (0.5-1cm³) with a Gleason score≥7 is>85 %. The prostate mp-MRI optimizes the management of cancers classified as low risk of progression by providing aggressive criteria for misclassified lesions, which require an active treatment and enhance the clinicopathological criteria of indolence for subclinical lesions, which can justify of surveillance. MRI-mp coupled to the 3D ultrasound image fusion, optimizes the predictive value of biopsies and improves tumor staging, particularly when benign prostatic hyperplasia (>40cm³) is associated with clinical course. New tissue markers feasible on biopsies allow to define better the risk of progression of the small volume of cancer in order to reinforce the indications of surveillance or delayed curative treatment.

[Multiparametric MRI and MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy in patients with prior negative prostate biopsy]

BACKGROUND

Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) plays an increasingly important role in prostate cancer (PCa) diagnostics and is recommended in men with previously negative TRUS biopsy. The optimal biopsy method after mpMRI is under discussion.

OBJECTIVE

Prospective, PIRADS- and START-conform analysis of the relevance of mpMRI and MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy in patients with prior negative TRUS biopsy and comparison of the detection rates of fusion-targeted biopsies (tB) and systematic transperineal saturation biopsies (sB).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between 10/2012 and 09/2015, 287 patients with prior negative TRUS biopsy underwent mpMRI and software-assisted, rigid MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy. In addition to and strictly separated from sB (median cores n = 24), tB (median cores per patient n = 4, per lesion n = 3) were performed in case of suspicious MRI lesions (PIRADS ≥ 2). Both biopsy methods were compared by using McNemar's test.

RESULTS

Of the 287 patients, 148 (52 %) had positive biopsies. Of these, 108/287 (38 %) had significant PCa (Gleason Score [GS] = 3 + 3 and PSA ≥ 10 ng/ml or GS ≥ 3 + 4) and again 43/287 (15 %) had a GS ≥ 4 + 3 PCa. sB failed to diagnose 8/148 PCa (5.4 %) and 6/108 significant PCa (5.5 %), whereas tB failed to diagnose 48 (32.4 %) PCa (p < 0.0001) and 22 (20.4 %) significant PCa (p = 0.0046). Of the PCa missed by tB, 11  had a GS ≥ 3 + 4 and 5 of these a GS = 4 + 3. On a per patient basis, MRI failed to detect 5 significant PCa, whereby 17 of the significant PCa were missed by fusion-targeted cores alone.

CONCLUSIONS

In men with unsuspicious MRI (PIRADS < 3), there is a 11 % risk of significant PCa. In case of suspicious MRI lesions, the combination of both biopsy approaches offers maximum tumor detection.

Improving the evaluation and diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer in 2017

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an overview of the current state of the evidence and highlight recent advances in the evaluation and diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer, focusing on biomarkers, risk calculators and multiparametric MRI (mpMRI).

RECENT FINDINGS

In 2017 there are numerous options to improve early detection as compared to a purely prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based approach. All have strengths and drawbacks. In addition to repeating the PSA and performing clinical work-up (digital rectal examination and estimation of prostate volume), additional tests investigated in the initial biopsy setting are: %free PSA, Prostate Health Index, 4-kallikrein score, SelectMDx, and Michigan Prostate Score and in the repeat setting: %free PSA, Prostate Health Index, 4-kallikrein score, Prostate Cancer Antigen 3, and ConfirmMDx. Risk calculators are available for both biopsy settings and incorporate clinical data with, or without, biomarkers. mpMRI is an important diagnostic adjunct.

SUMMARY

There are numerous tests available that can help increase the specificity of PSA, in the initial and repeat biopsy setting. All coincide with a small decrease in sensitivity of detecting high-grade cancer. Cost effectiveness is crucial. The way forward is a multivariable risk assessment on the basis of readily available clinical data, potentially with the addition of PSA subforms, preferably at low cost. MRI in the prediagnostic setting is promising, but is not ready for 'prime time'.

Multiparametric MRI/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy decreases detection of indolent cancer in African-American men

BACKGROUND

Analysis of systematic 12-core biopsies (SBx) has shown that African-American (AA) men tend to harbor higher risk prostate cancer (PCa) at presentation relative to other races. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and MRI-ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy (FBx) have been shown to diagnose more intermediate- and high-risk PCa in the general population; however, the efficacy in AA remains largely uncharacterized. We aim to evaluate the utility of FBx in an AA patient cohort.

METHODS

Men suspected of PCa underwent an mpMRI and FBx with concurrent SBx from 2007 to 2015 in this institutional review board-approved prospective cohort study. Patient demographics, imaging and fusion biopsy variables were collected. χ², Mann-Whitney U-test and McNemar's tests were performed to compare proportions, means and paired variables, respectively. Clinically significant PCa (CSPCa) was defined as Gleason score ⩾3+4.

RESULTS

Fusion biopsy demonstrated exact agreement with SBx risk categories in 64% of AA men. There was no statistically significant difference in the detection of CSPCa between FBx vs SBx (68 vs 62 cases, P=0.36). However, FBx detected 41% fewer cases of clinically insignificant PCa (CIPCa) compared with SBx (FBx 30 vs SBx 51 cases, P=0.0004). The combined FBx/SBx biopsy approach detected significantly more cases of CSPCa (FBx/SBx 80 vs SBx 62 cases, P=0.004) while detecting comparable number of cases of CIPCa (FBx/SBx 45 vs SBx 51 cases, P=0.37) compared with SBx alone. FBx/SBx also detected more CSPCa in patients with a history of prior negative SBx (FBx/SBx 28 vs 19 cases, P=0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

FBx when used in combination with SBx detected more cases of CSPCa while not significantly increasing the diagnosis of CIPCa in AA men. Future multicenter studies will be needed to validate ultimately the clinical implications of FBx in AA patients.

TRUS-guided transperineal prostate 12+X core biopsy with template for the diagnosis of prostate cancer

The objective of the present study was to explore the clinical value and safety of trans-rectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided transperineal prostate 12+X core biopsy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Patients who received a TRUS-guided transperineal prostate biopsy for suspected prostate cancer at the General Hospital of The People's Liberation Army between September 2009 and May 2014 were retrospectively analyzed, this consisted of 1,300 patients. These patients were randomly divided into the 12+X core group or the standard 12-core group. The mean age of all the patients was 70.5 years old. Levels of prostate-specific antigen, digital rectal examination, transrectal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were checked and used as reference prior and subsequent to the biopsy procedure. The 12+X core group consisted of 937 patients and the 12-core group consisted of 363 patients. The mean number of core samples taken from both groups was 14.5 (ranging from 12 to 24) and the mean operative time of the whole group was 20.4 min (ranging from 15 to 40 min). The puncture positive detection rate of abnormal rectal examination, trans-rectal ultrasound, and MRI was 24.0, 30.1, and 59.2%, respectively, whereas the puncture positive rate was 47.2% in 12+X core group and 34.5% in 12-core group. Improved prostate needle biopsy with 12+X cores was found to have significantly higher detection rate than that with 12 cores as well as fewer post-operative complications, therefore making the method ideal for diagnosing prostate cancer.

Development and Phantom Validation of a 3-D-Ultrasound-Guided System for Targeting MRI-Visible Lesions During Transrectal Prostate Biopsy

OBJECTIVE

Three- and four-dimensional transrectal ultrasound transducers are now available from most major ultrasound equipment manufacturers, but currently are incorporated into only one commercial prostate biopsy guidance system. Such transducers offer the benefits of rapid volumetric imaging, but can cause substantial measurement distortion in electromagnetic tracking sensors, which are commonly used to enable 3-D navigation. In this paper, we describe the design, development, and validation of a 3-D-ultrasound-guided transrectal prostate biopsy system that employs high-accuracy optical tracking to localize the ultrasound probe and prostate targets in 3-D physical space.

METHODS

The accuracy of the system was validated by evaluating the targeted needle placement error after inserting a biopsy needle to sample planned targets in a phantom using standard 2-D ultrasound guidance versus real-time 3-D guidance provided by the new system.

RESULTS

The overall mean needle-segment-to-target distance error was 3.6 ± 4.0 mm and mean needle-to-target distance was 3.2 ± 2.4 mm.

CONCLUSION

A significant increase in needle placement accuracy was observed when using the 3-D guidance system compared with visual targeting of invisible (virtual) lesions using a standard B-mode ultrasound-guided biopsy technique.

Cost-Effectiveness Comparison of Imaging-Guided Prostate Biopsy Techniques: Systematic Transrectal Ultrasound, Direct In-Bore MRI, and Image Fusion

OBJECTIVE

Three commonly used prostate biopsy approaches are systematic transrectal ultrasound guided, direct in-bore MRI guided, and image fusion guided. The aim of this study was to calculate which strategy is most cost-effective.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A decision tree and Markov model were developed to compare cost-effectiveness. Literature review and expert opinion were used as input. A strategy was deemed cost-effective if the costs of gaining one quality-adjusted life year (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio) did not exceed the willingness-to-pay threshold of €80,000 (≈$85,000 in January 2017). A base case analysis was performed to compare systematic transrectal ultrasound- and image fusion-guided biopsies. Because of a lack of appropriate literature regarding the accuracy of direct in-bore MRI-guided biopsy, a threshold analysis was performed.

RESULTS

The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for fusion-guided biopsy compared with systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy was €1386 ($1470) per quality-adjusted life year gained, which was below the willingness-to-pay threshold and thus assumed cost-effective. If MRI findings are normal in a patient with clinically significant prostate cancer, the sensitivity of direct in-bore MRI-guided biopsy has to be at least 88.8%. If that is the case, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio is €80,000 per quality-adjusted life year gained and thus cost-effective.

CONCLUSION

Fusion-guided biopsy seems to be cost-effective compared with systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy. Future research is needed to determine whether direct in-bore MRI-guided biopsy is the best pathway; in this study a threshold was calculated at which it would be cost-effective.

Accuracy of real-time magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound fusion image-guided transperineal target biopsy with needle tracking with a mechanical position-encoded stepper in detecting significant prostate cancer in biopsy-naïve men

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the accuracy of real-time elastic fusion image-guided transperineal prostate biopsy with needle tracking involving a mechanical position-encoded stepper in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer for biopsy-naïve men.

METHODS

We prospectively recruited patients with serum prostate-specific antigen levels of 4.0-20 ng/mL and suspicious of prostate cancer on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. They underwent targeted biopsies for cancer-suspicious lesions and 12-core systematic biopsies. Pathological findings from biopsy cores and whole-mount specimens (for those who underwent radical prostatectomy) were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 250 patients were included, in whom targeted and systematic biopsies detected significant cancers in 55% and 25%, respectively (P < 0.001). The targeted biopsy cores (n = 527) showed significantly greater biopsy-proven significant cancer detection rates (P < 0.001), cancer core length (P < 0.0001), cancer core percentage (P < 0.001) and Gleason scores (P < 0.001) than did the systematic biopsies. The significant cancer detection rate for targeted lesions (those with Prostate Imaging and Reporting and Data System classification scores of 5) was 80%. Biopsy-proven significant cancer detection rates for targeted lesions ≤10 mm and >10 mm were similar for Prostate Imaging and Reporting and Data System scores of 4 (P = 0.707) and 5 (P = 0.386). In whole-mount specimens (n = 30), locations for 95% of significant cancers were diagnosed preoperatively. Targeted biopsies alone diagnosed 79% of significant cancers.

CONCLUSIONS

Although targeted biopsies are superior to systematic biopsies in detecting significant cancers, systematic biopsies maintain an important role in the diagnosis of prostate cancer in biopsy-naïve men.

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

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

Prebiopsy mp-MRI Can Help to Improve the Predictive Performance in Prostate Cancer: A Prospective Study in 1,478 Consecutive Patients

Purpose: To investigate whether prebiopsy multi-parametric (mp) MRI can help to improve predictive performance in prostate cancer.Experimental Design: Based on a support vector machine (SVM) analysis, we prospectively modeled clinical data (age, PSA, digital rectal examination, transrectal ultrasound, PSA density, and prostate volume) and mp-MRI findings [Prostate Imaging and Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score and tumor-node-metastasis stage] in 985 men to predict the risk of prostate cancer. The new nomogram was validated in 493 patients treated at the same institution. Multivariable Cox regression analyses assessed the association between input variables and risk of prostate cancer, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (Az) analyzed the predictive ability.Results: At 5-year follow-up period, 34.3% of patients had systemic progression of prostate cancer. Nomogram (SVM-MRI) predicting 5-year prostate cancer rate trained with clinical and mp-MRI data was accurate and discriminating with an externally validated Az of 0.938, positive predictive value (PPV) of 77.4%, and negative predictive value of 91.5%. The improvement was significant (P < 0.001) compared with the nomogram trained with clinical data. When stratified by PSA, SVM-MRI nomogram had high PPV (93.6%) in patients with PSA > 20 ng/mL, with intermediate to low PPV in PSA 10 to 20 ng/mL (64%), PSA 4 to 10 ng/mL (55.8%), and PSA 0 to 4 ng/mL (29%). PI-RADS score (Cox HR, 2.112; P < 0.001), PSA level (HR, 1.435; P < 0.001), and age (HR, 1.012; P = 0.043) were independent predictors of prostate cancer.Conclusions: Featured with low false positive rate, mp-MRI could be the first investigation of a man with a raised PSA before prostate biopsy. Clin Cancer Res; 23(14); 3692-9. ©2017 AACR.

Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance/Ultrasound Fusion Prostate Biopsy: Number and Spatial Distribution of Cores for Better Index Tumor Detection and Characterization

PURPOSE

We evaluated the minimum core number for better index tumor detection to determine the best core site as well as biopsy Gleason score heterogeneity in the same index lesion. The aim was to optimize the highest Gleason score detection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 327 patients with negative digital rectal examination underwent magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy for elevated/rising prostate specific antigen and/or 1 or more detectable lesions on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging after a previous negative standard biopsy. Depending on the diameter of each index lesion (8 or less, or greater than 8 mm) 4 or 6 cores, respectively, were taken according to a well determined sequence.

RESULTS

Of the patients 166 (50.7%) had prostate cancer, including 79 (47.6%) with an 8 mm or less index lesion and 87 (52.4%) with a greater than 8 mm index lesion. Of patients with an index tumor 8 mm or less 7 (8.9%) had 1, 31 (39.2%) had 2, 27 (34.2%) had 3 and 14 (17.7%) had 4 positive cores. Similarly, of patients with a lesion greater than 8 mm 8 (9.2%) had 1, 30 (34.5%) had 2, 13 (14.9%) had 3, 14 (16.1%) had 4, 12 (13.8%) had 5 and 10 (11.5%) had 6 positive cores. The major prevalence of positive cores was observed in the center of the target. Gleason score heterogeneity was found in 12.6% of those with an 8 mm or less target vs 26.4% with a target greater than 8 mm. In the center of the target there was a slight prevalence of Gleason pattern 4 or greater, or a lesser pattern.

CONCLUSIONS

Approaching magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy with a single core might be inadequate. Rather, taking 2 cores in the center of the index lesion may provide more accurate cancer detection and optimize the chances of finding the highest Gleason pattern.

Risk of prostate cancer diagnosis and mortality in men with a benign initial transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy set: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

The risk of missing prostate cancer in the transrectal ultrasound-guided systematic biopsies of the prostate in men with suspected prostate cancer is a key problem in urological oncology. Repeat biopsy or MRI-guided biopsies have been suggested to increase sensitivity for diagnosis of prostate cancer, but the risk of disease-specific mortality in men who present with raised prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentration and a benign initial biopsy result remains unknown. We investigated the risk of overall and prostate cancer-specific mortality in men with a benign initial biopsy set.

METHODS

Data were extracted from the Danish Prostate Cancer Registry-a population-based registry including all men undergoing histopathological assessment of prostate tissue. All men who were referred for transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy for assessment of suspected prostate cancer between Jan 1, 1995, and Dec 31, 2011, in Denmark were eligible for inclusion. Follow-up data were obtained on April 28, 2015. The primary endpoint was the cumulative incidence of prostate cancer-specific mortality, analysed in a competing risk setting, with death from other causes as the competing event.

FINDINGS

Between Jan 1, 1995, and Dec 31, 2011, 64 430 men were referred for transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy, of whom 63 454 were eligible for inclusion. Median follow-up was 5·9 years (IQR 3·8-8·5) and the total follow-up time, from the enrolment of the first patient on Jan 1, 1995, until the extraction of causes of death on April 28, 2015, was 20 years. 10 407 (30%) of 35 159 men with malignant initial biopsy sets died from prostate cancer, compared with 541 (2%) of 27 181 men with benign initial biopsy sets. Estimated overall 20-year mortality was 76·1% (95% CI 73·0-79·2). In all men referred for transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy, the cumulative incidence of prostate cancer-specific mortality after 20 years was 25·6% (24·7-26·5) versus 50·5% (47·5-53·5) for mortality from other causes. In men with benign initial biopsy sets, the cumulative incidence of prostate cancer-specific mortality was 5·2% (3·9-6·5) versus 59·9% (55·2-64·6) for mortality from other causes. In men with PSA concentrations 10 μg/L or lower and benign initial biopsy sets (2779 men), the cumulative incidence of prostate cancer-specific mortality was 0·7% (0·2-1·3). Cumulative incidence of prostate cancer specific mortality in men with benign initial biopsy sets was 3·6% (95% CI 0·1-7·2) for men with a PSA higher than 10 ng/mL but 20 ng/mL or less (855 men) and 17·6% (12·7-22·4) and for men with a PSA higher than 20 ng/mL (454 men).

INTERPRETATION

The first systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy set holds important prognostic information. The 20-year risk of prostate cancer-specific mortality in men with benign initial results is low. Our findings question whether men with low PSA concentration and a benign initial biopsy set should undergo further diagnostic assessment in view of the high risk of mortality from other causes.

FUNDING

Capital Region of Denmark's Fund for Health Research, Danish Cancer Society, Danish Association for Cancer Research, and Krista and Viggo Petersen's Foundation.

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

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

Comparison of free-hand transperineal mpMRI/TRUS fusion-guided biopsy with transperineal 12-core systematic biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer: a single-center prospective study in China

OBJECTIVES

To prospectively compare biopsy outcomes between free-hand transperineal mpMRI/TRUS fusion targeted biopsy (TB) and transperineal systematic biopsy (SB) in patients with first prostate biopsy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In all, 224 consecutive patients with the suspicion of PCa were investigated. All patients were evaluated by 3.0-T mpMRI applying the ESUR criteria. All patients underwent free-hand transperineal mpMRI/TRUS fusion TB and additionally a transperineal SB. Pathological findings of TB, SB, and step-sectioned RP specimens were analyzed.

RESULTS

The median age of the patients was 69 (40-85) years, median PSA level was 10.05 (3.61-78.39) ng/mL, and median prostate volume was 45.5 (22-77) mL. Overall, the PCa detection rate was 50.45% (113/224). TB detected significantly more cancer [44.2% (99/224) vs. 34.8% (78/224); P = 0.001] and clinically significant PCa [75.75% (75/99) vs. 62.82% (49/78); P = 0.005] than SB. For the upgrading of Gleason score, 39.74% (31/78), more clinically significant PCa was detected by using additional TB than by SB alone. Conversely, 5.05% (5/99) more clinically significant PCa was found by SB in addition to that by TB. The location of 96.67% (58/60) and Gleason score of 60% (36/60) of TB-proven ITs were correctly identified, as corroborated by RP specimens. The median IT volume was 1.125 (0.21-19.87) ml on MRI and 1.41 (0.13-9.56) ml in RP specimens.

CONCLUSIONS

Free-hand transperineal mpMRI/TRUS fusion biopsy was associated with a higher detection rate of clinically significant PCa while taking fewer cores. Moreover, this technique can reliably predict the location, and relatively reliably predict cancer volume and Gleason score of ITs.

Novel concepts for risk stratification in prostate cancer

Since Partin introduced the analysis of prostate-specific antigen, clinical T-stage and Gleason scores to estimate the risk of progression in men with localised prostate cancer, our understanding of factors that modify this risk has changed drastically. There are now multiple risk stratification tools available, including look-up tables, risk stratification/classification analyses, regression-tree analyses, nomograms and artificial neural networks. Concurrently, descriptions of novel biopsy strategies, imaging modalities and biomarkers are frequently published with the aim of improving risk stratification. With an abundance of new information available, incorporating advances into clinical practice can be confusing. This article aims to outline the major novel concepts in prostate cancer risk stratification for men with biopsy confirmed prostate cancer. We will detail which of these novel techniques and tools are likely to be adopted to aid treatment decisions and enable more accurate post-diagnosis, pretreatment risk stratification.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Robot-Guided, Software Based Transperineal MRI/TRUS Fusion Biopsy of the Prostate in a High Risk Population of Previously Biopsy Negative Men

Objective. In this study, we compared prostate cancer detection rates between MRI-TRUS fusion targeted and systematic biopsies using a robot-guided, software based transperineal approach. Methods and Patients. 52 patients received a MRIT/TRUS fusion followed by a systematic volume adapted biopsy using the same robot-guided transperineal approach. The primary outcome was the detection rate of clinically significant disease (Gleason grade ≥ 4). Secondary outcomes were detection rate of all cancers, sampling efficiency and utility, and serious adverse event rate. Patients received no antibiotic prophylaxis. Results. From 52 patients, 519 targeted biopsies from 135 lesions and 1561 random biopsies were generated (total n = 2080). Overall detection rate of clinically significant PCa was 44.2% (23/52) and 50.0% (26/52) for target and random biopsy, respectively. Sampling efficiency as the median number of cores needed to detect clinically significant prostate cancer was 9 for target (IQR: 6–14.0) and 32 (IQR: 24–32) for random biopsy. The utility as the number of additionally detected clinically significant PCa cases by either strategy was 0% (0/52) for target and 3.9% (2/52) for random biopsy. Conclusions. MRI/TRUS fusion based target biopsy did not show an advantage in the overall detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer.

In-Bore 3-T MR-guided Transrectal Targeted Prostate Biopsy: Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2-based Diagnostic Performance for Detection of Prostate Cancer

Purpose To determine the diagnostic yield of in-bore 3-T magnetic resonance (MR) imaging-guided prostate biopsy and stratify performance according to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) versions 1 and 2. Materials and Methods This study was HIPAA compliant and institution review board approved. In-bore 3-T MR-guided prostate biopsy was performed in 134 targets in 106 men who (a) had not previously undergone prostate biopsy, (b) had prior negative biopsy findings with increased prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, or (c) had a prior history of prostate cancer with increasing PSA level. Clinical, diagnostic 3-T MR imaging was performed with in-bore guided prostate biopsy, and pathology data were collected. The diagnostic yields of MR-guided biopsy per patient and target were analyzed, and differences between biopsy targets with negative and positive findings were determined. Results of logistic regression and areas under the curve were compared between PI-RADS versions 1 and 2. Results Prostate cancer was detected in 63 of 106 patients (59.4%) and in 72 of 134 targets (53.7%) with 3-T MR imaging. Forty-nine of 72 targets (68.0%) had clinically significant cancer (Gleason score ≥ 7). One complication occurred (urosepsis, 0.9%). Patients who had positive target findings had lower apparent diffusion coefficient values (875 × 10^-6 mm²/sec vs 1111 × 10^-6 mm²/sec, respectively; P < .01), smaller prostate volume (47.2 cm³ vs 75.4 cm³, respectively; P < .01), higher PSA density (0.16 vs 0.10, respectively; P < .01), and higher proportion of PI-RADS version 2 category 3-5 scores when compared with patients with negative target findings. MR targets with PI-RADS version 2 category 2, 3, 4, and 5 scores had a positive diagnostic yield of three of 23 (13.0%), six of 31 (19.4%), 39 of 50 (78.0%), and 24 of 29 (82.8%) targets, respectively. No differences were detected in areas under the curve for PI-RADS version 2 versus 1. Conclusion In-bore 3-T MR-guided biopsy is safe and effective for prostate cancer diagnosis when stratified according to PI-RADS versions 1 and 2. ^©RSNA, 2016.

Review of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2

Prostate MRI has been a hot topic in recent years in large part due to the high incidence of prostate cancer worldwide. Advances in technology have allowed multiparametric MRI to improve lesion detection and characterization in prostate imaging. Additionally, prostate MRI has shown great promise in the detection of clinically significant cancer. In 2012, the European Society of Urogenital Radiology established clinical guidelines for multiparametric MRI of the prostate to facilitate a greater level of standardization and consistency, which became known as the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS). Subsequently, the American College of Radiology, European Society of Urogenital Radiology and the AdMeTech Foundation jointly created PI-RADS version 2. This article focuses on summarizing the key points of PI-RADS version 2.

Focal Therapy for Prostate Cancer: Pending Questions

Focal therapy (FT) represents a potential shift in clinical practice by featuring a tissue-sparing approach for prostate cancer (PCa) treatment. It stands midway between active surveillance (AS) and more aggressive options like radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiotherapy. The field has enormously evolved in the last few years but there are still pending questions to answer in the future. The manuscript overlooks FT in terms of indications, available energies, situation of tumor microenvironment, follow-up, re-interventions, and the future of this approach for PCa.

Is magnetic resonance/ultrasound fusion prostate biopsy better than systematic prostate biopsy? An updated meta- and trial sequential analysis

We systematically reviewed the literature to determine whether Magnetic Resonance/Ultrasound (MR/US) fusion prostate biopsy is better than systematic biopsy for making a definitive diagnosis of prostate cancer. The two strategies were also compared for their ability to detect lesions with different degrees of suspicion on MRI and clinically significant prostate cancer, and the number of cores needed for diagnosis. The Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Knowledge, and Medline were searched from inception until May 1, 2015. Meta-analysis was conducted via RevMan 5.2 software. Data was expressed as risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval. Trial sequential analysis was used to assess risk of random errors. Fourteen trials were included, encompassing a total of 3105 participants. We found that MR/US fusion biopsy detected more prostate cancers than systematic biopsy (46.9% vs. 44.2%, p=0.03). In men with moderate/high MRI suspicion, MR/US fusion biopsy did better than systematic biopsy (RR = 1.46; p < 0.05) for making a diagnosis. Moreover, MR/US fusion biopsy detected more clinically significant cancers than systematic biopsy (RR = 1.19; p < 0.05). We recommend that MR/US fusion prostate biopsy be used to better detect prostate cancer, particularly in patients with moderate/high suspicion lesions on MRI.

Prostate-specific antigen vs. magnetic resonance imaging parameters for assessing oncological outcomes after high intensity-focused ultrasound focal therapy for localized prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION

Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer has the potential for oncological control without the side effects of radical therapies. However, there is currently no validated method for monitoring treatment success. We assessed the diagnostic performance of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) parameters and MRI compared to histological outcomes following focal therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients from 3 Ethics Review Board approved prospective studies of focal high intensity-focused ultrasound (HIFU) (Sonablate 500) for localized prostate cancer (T1c-T3a, Gleason grade≤4+3, and PSA≤20). Post-HIFU PSA nadir, 6-month PSA, PSA density, and early (<3wk) and late (6mo) MRI (T2-weighted, dynamic contrast-enhanced±diffusion-weighted) was assessed for predictive accuracy of cancer on postoperative biopsy, using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive estimates. ROC areas for MRI and PSA were compared. Calculations for statistical significance (P≤0.05) were obtained in a subset of patients comparing area under ROC for 6-month MRI and PSA criteria, across 4 different histological definitions of disease significance.

RESULTS

Of 118 men, 111 underwent at least 1 postoperative biopsy (median 6 cores), with an overall positive biopsy rate of 37% (41/118), over a mean follow-up period of 716 days post-HIFU. Areas under ROC for early and late MRI were (depending on definition of significant disease) 0.65 to 0.76 and 0.77 to 0.85, respectively, with sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive values of 68% to 91%, 52% to 55%, and 85% to 98% (early MRI), and 63% to 80%, 67% to 73%, and 86% to 97% (late MRI). The area under the ROC curve was statistically significantly higher for late MRI than 6 months and nadir PSA for residual disease >3mm or any Gleason 4 tumor.

CONCLUSIONS

Early and late MRI performed better than PSA measurements in the detection of residual tumor after focal therapy.

Optimizing safety and accuracy of prostate biopsy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The objective of this article is to examine the safety of prostate biopsy and discuss the emerging role of MRI-ultrasound fusion technology in improving diagnostic accuracy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Men undergoing prostate biopsy frequently experience minor complications, including hematospermia, hematuria, and infection. Quinolone-resistant bacteria are a growing concern; thus, transperineal access or modification of antibiotic prophylaxis based on local antibiograms is now used to avoid infectious complications.Multiparametric MRI allows visualization of many prostate cancers, and by fusing MRI with real-time ultrasound, a biopsy needle can be directed by a urologist into suspicious regions of interest. Using this new method, detection of clinically significant prostate cancer has increased and the incidence of falsely negative biopsies has decreased.

SUMMARY

Prostate biopsy is generally a safe procedure, and with attention to local patterns of antibiotic resistance, infectious complications can be minimized. MRI-ultrasound fusion has significantly improved the accuracy of prostate biopsy, allowing tracking and targeting not previously possible.

MRI-Guided Prostate Biopsy of Native and Recurrent Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed noncutaneous cancer and second-leading cause of death in men. Many patients with clinically organ-confined prostate cancer undergo definitive, curative treatment of the whole gland with either radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy. However, many men are reluctant to take the definitive step due to potential morbidity associated with either therapy. A growing interest in active surveillance or focal therapy has emerged as realistic alternatives for many patients. With each of these management strategies, it is critical to accurately quantify and stage the cancer with improved biopsy targeting and more precise imaging with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Furthermore, having dependable prostate imaging allows for targeted biopsies to improve the yield of clinically significant prostate cancer and decrease detection of indolent prostate cancer. MRI-guided targeted biopsy techniques include cognitive MRI/transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy, in-bore transrectal targeted biopsy using a calibrated guidance device, and in-bore direct MR-guided transperineal biopsy with a software-based transperineal grid template. Herein we present a contemporary review of MRI-guided targeted biopsy techniques for new and recurrent cancerous foci of the prostate.

EAU-ESTRO-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Part 1: Screening, Diagnosis, and Local Treatment with Curative Intent

OBJECTIVE

To present a summary of the 2016 version of the European Association of Urology (EAU) - European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) - International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) Guidelines on screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent of clinically localised prostate cancer (PCa).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The working panel performed a literature review of the new data (2013-2015). The guidelines were updated and the levels of evidence and/or grades of recommendation were added based on a systematic review of the evidence.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

BRCA2 mutations have been added as risk factors for early and aggressive disease. In addition to the Gleason score, the five-tier 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology grading system should now be provided. Systematic screening is still not recommended. Instead, an individual risk-adapted strategy following a detailed discussion and taking into account the patient's wishes and life expectancy must be considered. An early prostate-specific antigen test, the use of a risk calculator, or one of the promising biomarker tools are being investigated and might be able to limit the overdetection of insignificant PCa. Breaking the link between diagnosis and treatment may lower the overtreatment risk. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging using standardised reporting cannot replace systematic biopsy, but robustly nested within the diagnostic work-up, it has a key role in local staging. Active surveillance always needs to be discussed with very low-risk patients. The place of surgery in high-risk disease and the role of lymph node dissection have been clarified, as well as the management of node-positive patients. Radiation therapy using dose-escalated intensity-modulated technology is a key treatment modality with recent improvement in the outcome based on increased doses as well as combination with hormonal treatment. Moderate hypofractionation is safe and effective, but longer-term data are still lacking. Brachytherapy represents an effective way to increase the delivered dose. Focal therapy remains experimental while cryosurgery and HIFU are still lacking long-term convincing results.

CONCLUSIONS

The knowledge in the field of diagnosis, staging, and treatment of localised PCa is evolving rapidly. The 2016 EAU-ESTRO-SIOG Guidelines on PCa summarise the most recent findings and advice for the use in clinical practice. These are the first PCa guidelines endorsed by the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology and the International Society of Geriatric Oncology and reflect the multidisciplinary nature of PCa management. A full version is available from the EAU office and online (http://uroweb.org/guideline/prostate-cancer/).

PATIENT SUMMARY

The 2016 EAU-STRO-IOG Prostate Cancer (PCa) Guidelines present updated information on the diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised prostate cancer. In Northern and Western Europe, the number of men diagnosed with PCa has been on the rise. This may be due to an increase in opportunistic screening, but other factors may also be involved (eg, diet, sexual behaviour, low exposure to ultraviolet radiation). We propose that men who are potential candidates for screening should be engaged in a discussion with their clinician (also involving their families and caregivers) so that an informed decision may be made as part of an individualised risk-adapted approach.

Comparing Three Different Techniques for Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsies: A Systematic Review of In-bore versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging-transrectal Ultrasound fusion versus Cognitive Registration. Is There a Preferred Technique?

CONTEXT

The introduction of magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsies (MRI-GB) has changed the paradigm concerning prostate biopsies. Three techniques of MRI-GB are available: (1) in-bore MRI target biopsy (MRI-TB), (2) MRI-transrectal ultrasound fusion (FUS-TB), and (3) cognitive registration (COG-TB).

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether MRI-GB has increased detection rates of (clinically significant) prostate cancer (PCa) compared with transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS-GB) in patients at risk for PCa, and which technique of MRI-GB has the highest detection rate of (clinically significant) PCa.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We performed a literature search in PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL databases. Studies were evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 checklist and START recommendations. The initial search identified 2562 studies and 43 were included in the meta-analysis.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Among the included studies 11 used MRI-TB, 17 used FUS-TB, 11 used COG-TB, and four used a combination of techniques. In 34 studies concurrent TRUS-GB was performed. There was no significant difference between MRI-GB (all techniques combined) and TRUS-GB for overall PCa detection (relative risk [RR] 0.97 [0.90-1.07]). MRI-GB had higher detection rates of clinically significant PCa (csPCa) compared with TRUS-GB (RR 1.16 [1.02-1.32]), and a lower yield of insignificant PCa (RR 0.47 [0.35-0.63]). There was a significant advantage (p = 0.02) of MRI-TB compared with COG-TB for overall PCa detection. For overall PCa detection there was no significant advantage of MRI-TB compared with FUS-TB (p=0.13), and neither for FUS-TB compared with COG-TB (p=0.11). For csPCa detection there was no significant advantage of any one technique of MRI-GB. The impact of lesion characteristics such as size and localisation could not be assessed.

CONCLUSIONS

MRI-GB had similar overall PCa detection rates compared with TRUS-GB, increased rates of csPCa, and decreased rates of insignificant PCa. MRI-TB has a superior overall PCa detection compared with COG-TB. FUS-TB and MRI-TB appear to have similar detection rates. Head-to-head comparisons of MRI-GB techniques are limited and are needed to confirm our findings.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Our review shows that magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsy detects more clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa) and less insignificant PCa compared with systematic biopsy in men at risk for PCa.

Performance of PI-RADS version 1 versus version 2 regarding the relation with histopathological results

PURPOSE

Aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic performance of PI-RADS version 1 (v1) and version 2 (v2) in the detection of prostate cancer (PCa).

METHODS

Multiparametric MRIs (mpMRI) of 50 consecutive patients with biopsy proven PCa, which had originally been evaluated according to PIRADS v1, were now retrospectively re-evaluated, comparing PI-RADS v1 and v2. MpMRI data were evaluated in comparison with histopathological whole-mount step-section slides. MRI examinations included T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted, and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI.

RESULTS

Overall PI-RADS v1 showed a significantly larger discriminative ability of tumor detection: PI-RADS v1 AUC 0.96 (95 % CI 0.94-0.98) and v2 AUC 0.90 (95 % CI 0.86-0.94). For peripheral zone lesions, PI-RADS v1 showed a significantly larger ability of PCa discrimination: v1 AUC 0.97 (95 % CI 0.95-0.99) and v2 AUC 0.92 (95 % CI 0.88-0.96). For transition zone lesions, PI-RADS v1 showed more discrimination: v1 AUC 0.96 (95 % CI 0.92-1.00) and v2 0.90 (95 % CI 0.83-0.97), but the difference was not significant. PI-RADS v2 resulted in significantly more false negative results (3 % in v1, 14 % in v2) and a comparable number of true positive results (82 % in v1, 80 % in v2).

CONCLUSION

PI-RADS v2 uses a simplified approach, but shows a lower diagnostic accuracy. This could lead to a higher rate of false negative results with the risk of missing tumors within low PI-RADS score levels. Therefore, its use cannot be recommended unconditionally, and further improvement should be considered.

Computer-aided Detection of Prostate Cancer with MRI: Technology and Applications

One in six men will develop prostate cancer in his lifetime. Early detection and accurate diagnosis of the disease can improve cancer survival and reduce treatment costs. Recently, imaging of prostate cancer has greatly advanced since the introduction of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI). Mp-MRI consists of T2-weighted sequences combined with functional sequences including dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI, diffusion-weighted MRI, and magnetic resonance spectroscopy imaging. Because of the big data and variations in imaging sequences, detection can be affected by multiple factors such as observer variability and visibility and complexity of the lesions. To improve quantitative assessment of the disease, various computer-aided detection systems have been designed to help radiologists in their clinical practice. This review paper presents an overview of literatures on computer-aided detection of prostate cancer with mp-MRI, which include the technology and its applications. The aim of the survey is threefold: an introduction for those new to the field, an overview for those working in the field, and a reference for those searching for literature on a specific application.

Magnetic Resonance and Ultrasound Image Fusion Supported Transperineal Prostate Biopsy Using the Ginsburg Protocol: Technique, Learning Points, and Biopsy Results

BACKGROUND

Prostate biopsy supported by transperineal image fusion has recently been developed as a new method to the improve accuracy of prostate cancer detection.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the Ginsburg protocol for transperineal prostate biopsy supported by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) image fusion, provide learning points for its application, and report biopsy results. The article is supplemented by a Surgery in Motion video.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This single-centre retrospective outcome study included 534 patients from March 2012 to October 2015. A total of 107 had no previous prostate biopsy, 295 had benign TRUS-guided biopsies, and 159 were on active surveillance for low-risk cancer.

SURGICAL PROCEDURE

A Likert scale reported mpMRI for suspicion of cancer from 1 (no suspicion) to 5 (cancer highly likely). Transperineal biopsies were obtained under general anaesthesia using BiopSee fusion software (Medcom, Darmstadt, Germany). All patients had systematic biopsies, two cores from each of 12 anatomic sectors. Likert 3-5 lesions were targeted with a further two cores per lesion.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Any cancer and Gleason score 7-10 cancer on biopsy were noted. Descriptive statistics and positive predictive values (PPVs) and negative predictive values (NPVs) were calculated.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The detection rate of Gleason score 7-10 cancer was similar across clinical groups. Likert scale 3-5 MRI lesions were reported in 378 (71%) of the patients. Cancer was detected in 249 (66%) and Gleason score 7-10 cancer was noted in 157 (42%) of these patients. PPV for detecting 7-10 cancer was 0.15 for Likert score 3, 0.43 for score 4, and 0.63 for score 5. NPV of Likert 1-2 findings was 0.87 for Gleason score 7-10 and 0.97 for Gleason score ≥4+3=7 cancer. Limitations include lack of data on complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Transperineal prostate biopsy supported by MRI/TRUS image fusion using the Ginsburg protocol yielded high detection rates of Gleason score 7-10 cancer. Because the NPV for excluding Gleason score 7-10 cancer was very high, prostate biopsies may not be needed for all men with elevated prostate-specific antigen values and nonsuspicious mpMRI.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We present our technique to sample (biopsy) the prostate by the transperineal route (the area between the scrotum and the anus) to detect prostate cancer using a fusion of magnetic resonance and ultrasound images to guide the sampling.

Elastic Versus Rigid Image Registration in Magnetic Resonance Imaging-transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Prostate Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

CONTEXT

The main difference between the available magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound (MRI-TRUS) fusion platforms for prostate biopsy is the method of image registration being either rigid or elastic. As elastic registration compensates for possible deformation caused by the introduction of an ultrasound probe for example, it is expected that it would perform better than rigid registration.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare rigid with elastic registration by calculating the detection odds ratio (OR) for both subgroups. The detection OR is defined as the ratio of the odds of detecting clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) by MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy compared with systematic TRUS biopsy. Secondary objectives were the OR for any PCa and the OR after pooling both registration techniques.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The electronic databases PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane were systematically searched for relevant studies according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Statement. Studies comparing MRI-TRUS fusion and systematic TRUS-guided biopsies in the same patient were included. The quality assessment of included studies was performed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies version 2.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Eleven papers describing elastic and 10 describing rigid registration were included. Meta-analysis showed an OR of csPCa for elastic and rigid registration of 1.45 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.21-1.73, p<0.0001) and 1.40 (95% CI: 1.13-1.75, p=0.002), respectively. No significant difference was seen between the subgroups (p=0.83). Pooling subgroups resulted in an OR of 1.43 (95% CI: 1.25-1.63, p<0.00001).

CONCLUSIONS

No significant difference was identified between rigid and elastic registration for MRI-TRUS fusion-guided biopsy in the detection of csPCa; however, both techniques detected more csPCa than TRUS-guided biopsy alone.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We did not identify any significant differences in prostate cancer detection between two distinct magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound fusion systems which vary in their method of compensating for prostate deformation.

Could Magnetic Resonance Imaging Help to Identify the Presence of Prostate Cancer Before Initial Biopsy? The Development of Nomogram Predicting the Outcomes of Prostate Biopsy in the Chinese Population

PURPOSE

This study was designed to investigate the effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in diagnosing prostate cancer (PCa) and high-grade prostate cancer (HGPCa) before transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided biopsy.

METHODS

The clinical data of 894 patients who received TRUS-guided biopsy and prior MRI test from a large Chinese center was reviewed. Based on Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) scoring, all MRIs were re-reviewed and assigned as Grade 0-2 (PI-RADS 1-2; PI-RADS 3; PI-RADS 4-5). We constructed two models both in predicting PCa and HGPCa (Gleason score ≥ 4 + 3): Model 1 with MRI and Model 2 without MRI. Other clinical factors include age, digital rectal examination, PSA, free-PSA, volume, and TRUS.

RESULTS

PCa and HGPCa were present in 434 (48.5 %) and 218 (24.4 %) patients. An MRI Grade 0, 1, and 2 were assigned in 324 (36.2 %), 193 (21.6 %) and 377 (42.2 %) patients, which was associated with the presence of PCa (p < 0.001) and HGPCa (p < 0.001). Particularly in patients aged ≤55 years, the assignment of MRI Grade 0 was correlated with extremely low rate of PCa (1/27) and no HGPCa. The c-statistic of Model 1 and Model 2 for predicting PCa was 0.875 and 0.841 (Z = 4.2302, p < 0.001), whereas for predicting HGPCa was 0.872 and 0.850 (Z = 3.265, p = 0.001). Model 1 exhibited higher sensitivity and specificity at same cutoffs, and decision-curve analysis also suggested the favorable clinical utility of Model 1.

CONCLUSIONS

Prostate MRI before biopsy could predict the presence of PCa and HGPCa, especially in younger patients. The incorporation of MRI in nomograms could increase predictive accuracy.

Magnetic resonance imaging - ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy outperforms standard approaches in detecting prostate cancer: A meta-analysis

The aim of the present study was to determine whether magnetic resonance imaging - ultrasound (MRI-US) fusion prostate biopsy is superior to systematic biopsy for making a definitive diagnosis of prostate cancer. The two strategies were also compared regarding their ability to detect clinically significant and insignificant prostate cancer. A literature search was conducted through the PubMed, EMBASE and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases using appropriate search terms. A total of 3,415 cases from 21 studies were included in the present meta-analysis. Data were expressed as relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval. The results revealed that MRI-US fusion biopsy achieved a higher rate of overall prostate cancer detection compared with systematic biopsy (RR=1.09; P=0.047). Moreover, MRI-US fusion biopsy detected more clinically significant cancers compared with systematic biopsy (RR=1.22; P<0.01). It is therefore recommended that multi-parametric MRI-US is performed in men suspected of having prostate cancer to optimize the detection of clinically significant disease, while reducing the burden of biopsies.

Current practice and access to prostate MR imaging in France

PURPOSE

To obtain an overview of the degree of discrepancy between current clinical practice of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in France and recommendations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A brief survey was sent to 1229 members of the French society of urology in order to identify their indications of prostate MRI and its impact on patient management. The urologists were asked to answer several questions regarding age, practice modality, prostate MRI examinations (technique, indication before first biopsy, second biopsy, cancer staging, active surveillance, recurrence, focal therapy) and quality of reports.

RESULTS

A total of 445 responses were received (participation rate of 36%). The mean delay for obtaining an appointment for prostate MRI ranged between 15-30 days in 54%. Fifty-four percent of MRI reports contained a PIRADS score and 23% a Likert score. The indications of multiparametric-MRI were tumor detection/location prior to repeat biopsy (90%), cancer staging (85%), management of patients under active surveillance (85%), selection of candidates to focal therapy (63%), tumor detection/location in biopsy naïve patients (53%), detection of local recurrence after radical (51%). Only 119 urologists (28.6%) had access to image fusion (MRI and transrectal ultrasound) and 351 (85.4%) used cognitive fusion. Mostly, targeted biopsies are done by urologists alone (nearly 80%), a very few are done by radiologists (8%) or by the two of them in collaboration (12%).

CONCLUSION

The majority of urologists consider that prostate MRI is essential for the management of patients with prostate cancer. Practices are ahead of recommendations particularly before the first biopsy and in active surveillance.