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

Repeat prostate biopsy strategies after initial negative biopsy: meta-regression comparing cancer detection of transperineal, transrectal saturation and MRI guided biopsy

Introduction

There is no consensus on how to investigate men with negative transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy (TRUS-B) but ongoing suspicion of cancer. Three strategies used are transperineal (TP-B), transrectal saturation (TS-B) and MRI-guided biopsy (MRI-B). We compared cancer yields of these strategies.

Methods

Papers were identified by search of Pubmed, Embase and Ovid Medline. Included studies investigated biopsy diagnostic yield in men with at least one negative TRUS-B and ongoing suspicion of prostate cancer. Data including age, PSA, number of previous biopsy episodes, number of cores at re-biopsy, cancer yield, and Gleason score of detected cancers were extracted. Meta-regression analyses were used to analyse the data.

Results

Forty-six studies were included; 12 of TS-B, 14 of TP-B, and 20 of MRI-B, representing 4,657 patients. Mean patient age, PSA and number of previous biopsy episodes were similar between the strategies. The mean number of biopsy cores obtained by TP-B and TS-B were greater than MRI-B. Cancer detection rates were 30·0%, 36·8%, and 37·6% for TS-B, TP-B, and MRI-B respectively. Meta-regression analysis showed that MRI-B had significantly higher cancer detection than TS-B. There were no significant differences however between MRI-B and TP-B, or TP-B and TS-B. In a sensitivity analysis incorporating number of previous biopsy episodes (36 studies) the difference between MRI-B and TP-B was not maintained resulting in no significant difference in cancer detection between the groups. There were no significant differences in median Gleason scores detected comparing the three strategies.

Conclusions

In the re-biopsy setting, it is unclear which strategy offers the highest cancer detection rate. MRI-B may potentially detect more prostate cancers than other modalities and can achieve this with fewer biopsy cores. However, well–designed prospective studies with standardised outcome measures are needed to accurately compare modalities and define an optimum re-biopsy approach.

Prostate cancer risk inflation as a consequence of image-targeted biopsy of the prostate: a computer simulation study

Background

Prostate biopsy parameters are commonly used to attribute cancer risk. A targeted approach to lesions found on imaging may have an impact on the risk attribution given to a man.

Objective

To evaluate whether, based on computer simulation, targeting of lesions during biopsy results in reclassification of cancer risk when compared with transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided biopsy.

Design, setting, and participants

A total of 107 reconstructed three-dimensional models of whole-mount radical prostatectomy specimens were used for computer simulations. Systematic 12-core TRUS biopsy was compared with transperineal targeted biopsies using between one and five cores. All biopsy strategies incorporated operator and needle deflection error. A target was defined as any lesion ≥0.2 ml. A false-positive magnetic resonance imaging identification rate of 34% was applied.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

Sensitivity was calculated for the detection of all cancer and clinically significant disease. Cases were designated as high risk based on achieving ≥6 mm cancer length and/or ≥50% positive cores. Statistical significance (p values) was calculated using both a paired Kolmogorov-Smirnov test and the t test.

Results and limitations

When applying a widely used biopsy criteria to designate risk, 12-core TRUS biopsy classified only 24% (20 of 85) of clinically significant cases as high risk, compared with 74% (63 of 85) of cases using 4 targeted cores. The targeted strategy reported a significantly higher proportion of positive cores (44% vs 11%; p < 0.0001) and a significantly greater mean maximum cancer core length (7.8 mm vs 4.3 mm; p < 0.0001) when compared with 12-core TRUS biopsy. Computer simulations may not reflect the sources of errors encountered in clinical practice. To mitigate this we incorporated all known major sources of error to maximise clinical relevance.

Conclusions

Image-targeted biopsy results in an increase in risk attribution if traditional criteria, based on cancer core length and the proportion of positive cores, are applied. Targeted biopsy strategies will require new risk stratification models that account for the increased likelihood of sampling the tumour.

Risk stratification in prostate cancer screening

Screening for prostate cancer is a controversial topic within the field of urology. The US Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial did not demonstrate any difference in prostate-cancer-related mortality rates between men screened annually rather than on an 'opportunistic' basis. However, in the world's largest trial to date--the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer--screening every 2-4 years was associated with a 21% reduction in prostate-cancer-related mortality rate after 11 years. Citing the uncertain ratio between potential harm and potential benefit, the US Preventive Services Task Force recently recommended against serum PSA screening. Although this ratio has yet to be elucidated, PSA testing--and early tumour detection--is undoubtedly beneficial for some individuals. Instead of adopting a 'one size fits all' approach, physicians are likely to perform personalized risk assessment to minimize the risk of negative consequences, such as anxiety, unnecessary testing and biopsies, overdiagnosis, and overtreatment. The PSA test needs to be combined with other predictive factors or be used in a more thoughtful way to identify men at risk of symptomatic or life-threatening cancer, without overdiagnosing indolent disease. A risk-adapted approach is needed, whereby PSA testing is tailored to individual risk.

Using the epigenetic field defect to detect prostate cancer in biopsy negative patients

PURPOSE

We determined whether a novel combination of field defect DNA methylation markers could predict the presence of prostate cancer using histologically normal transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy cores.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Methylation was assessed using quantitative Pyrosequencing® in a training set consisting of 65 nontumor and tumor associated prostate tissues from University of Wisconsin. A multiplex model was generated using multivariate logistic regression and externally validated in blinded fashion in a set of 47 nontumor and tumor associated biopsy specimens from University of Washington.

RESULTS

We observed robust methylation differences in all genes at all CpGs assayed (p <0.0001). Regression models incorporating individual genes (EVX1, CAV1 and FGF1) and a gene combination (EVX1 and FGF1) discriminated nontumor from tumor associated tissues in the original training set (AUC 0.796-0.898, p <0.001). On external validation uniplex models incorporating EVX1, CAV1 or FGF1 discriminated tumor from nontumor associated biopsy negative specimens (AUC 0.702, 0.696 and 0.658, respectively, p <0.05). A multiplex model (EVX1 and FGF1) identified patients with prostate cancer (AUC 0.774, p = 0.001) and had a negative predictive value of 0.909. Comparison between 2 separate cores in patients in this validation set revealed similar methylation defects, indicating detection of a widespread field defect.

CONCLUSIONS

A widespread epigenetic field defect can be used to detect prostate cancer in patients with histologically negative biopsies. To our knowledge this assay is unique, in that it detects alterations in nontumor cells. With further validation this marker combination (EVX1 and FGF1) has the potential to decrease the need for repeat prostate biopsies, a procedure associated with cost and complications.

Transperineal magnetic resonance image targeted prostate biopsy versus transperineal template prostate biopsy in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer

PURPOSE

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging can be used to guide prostate biopsy by targeting biopsies to areas in the prostate at high risk for cancer. We compared the detection of clinically significant and insignificant cancer by transperineal magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy and transperineal template guided prostate biopsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 182 men with a lesion suspicious for cancer on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging underwent transperineal magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy using a cognitive registration technique, followed by systematic transperineal template guided prostate biopsy. The primary outcome was the detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer. Clinical significance was defined using maximum cancer core length 4 mm or greater and/or Gleason grade 3 + 4 or greater (University College London definition 2). We secondarily evaluated other commonly used thresholds of clinically significant disease, including maximum cancer core length 6 mm or greater and/or Gleason grade 4 + 3 or greater, maximum cancer core length 3 mm or greater and/or Gleason grade 3 + 4 or greater, and maximum cancer core length 2 or greater mm and/or Gleason grade 3 + 4 or greater. Strategies were statistically compared with the McNemar test.

RESULTS

Mean ± SD patient age was 63.3 ± 7.2 years. Median prostate specific antigen was 6.7 ng/ml (IQR 4.7-10.0). Clinically significant cancer was detected by magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy and template guided prostate biopsy in 103 (57%) and 113 of the 182 men (62%) (p = 0.174), and clinically insignificant cancer was detected in 17 (9.3%) and 31 (17.0%), respectively (p = 0.024).

CONCLUSIONS

Prostate biopsy targeted to suspicious lesions on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging has encouraging rates of detection of clinically significant cancer while also decreasing the detection rate of clinically insignificant cancer. This is achieved with fewer biopsy cores than for systematic template guided biopsy. Further prospective, multicenter, comparative trials of the performance of targeting strategies are needed to consider magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy an alternative to conventional systematic biopsy.