Novel biparametric MRI and targeted biopsy improves risk stratification in men with a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer (IMPROD Trial): Biparametric MRI in Men With Suspicion of PCa

Diagnosis of prostate cancer with magnetic resonance imaging in men treated with 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors

PURPOSE

The primary aim of this study was to evaluate if exposure to 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors (5-ARIs) modifies the effect of MRI for the diagnosis of clinically significant Prostate Cancer (csPCa) (ISUP Gleason grade ≥ 2).

METHODS

This study is a multicenter cohort study including patients undergoing prostate biopsy and MRI at 24 institutions between 2013 and 2022. Multivariable analysis predicting csPCa with an interaction term between 5-ARIs and PIRADS score was performed. Sensitivity, specificity, and negative (NPV) and positive (PPV) predictive values of MRI were compared in treated and untreated patients.

RESULTS

705 patients (9%) were treated with 5-ARIs [median age 69 years, Interquartile range (IQR): 65, 73; median PSA 6.3 ng/ml, IQR 4.0, 9.0; median prostate volume 53 ml, IQR 40, 72] and 6913 were 5-ARIs naïve (age 66 years, IQR 60, 71; PSA 6.5 ng/ml, IQR 4.8, 9.0; prostate volume 50 ml, IQR 37, 65). MRI showed PIRADS 1-2, 3, 4, and 5 lesions in 141 (20%), 158 (22%), 258 (37%), and 148 (21%) patients treated with 5-ARIs, and 878 (13%), 1764 (25%), 2948 (43%), and 1323 (19%) of untreated patients (p < 0.0001). No difference was found in csPCa detection rates, but diagnosis of high-grade PCa (ISUP GG ≥ 3) was higher in treated patients (23% vs 19%, p = 0.013). We did not find any evidence of interaction between PIRADS score and 5-ARIs exposure in predicting csPCa. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of PIRADS ≥ 3 were 94%, 29%, 46%, and 88% in treated patients and 96%, 18%, 43%, and 88% in untreated patients, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Exposure to 5-ARIs does not affect the association of PIRADS score with csPCa. Higher rates of high-grade PCa were detected in treated patients, but most were clearly visible on MRI as PIRADS 4 and 5 lesions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The present study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT05078359.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Pretreatment Detection, Surveillance, and Staging of Prostate Cancer: 2022 Update

Prostate cancer is second leading cause of death from malignancy after lung cancer in American men. The primary goal during pretreatment evaluation of prostate cancer is disease detection, localization, establishing disease extent (both local and distant), and evaluating aggressiveness, which are the driving factors of patient outcomes such as recurrence and survival. Prostate cancer is typically diagnosed after the recognizing elevated serum prostate-specific antigen level or abnormal digital rectal examination. Tissue diagnosis is obtained by transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy or MRI-targeted biopsy, commonly with multiparametric MRI without or with intravenous contrast, which has recently been established as standard of care for detecting, localizing, and assessing local extent of prostate cancer. Although bone scintigraphy and CT are still typically used to detect bone and nodal metastases in patients with intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer, novel advanced imaging modalities including prostatespecific membrane antigen PET/CT and whole-body MRI are being more frequently utilized for this purpose with improved detection rates. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

bpMRI and mpMRI for detecting prostate cancer: A retrospective cohort study

Background

We aimed to compare the detection rates of prostate cancer (PCa) and clinically significant prostate cancer(csPCa) by biparametric (bp-) and multiparameter magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI).

Materials and Methods

A total of 699 patients who underwent transperineal prostate biopsy in the Department of Urology, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University from January 2018 to December 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Multivariate analysis was used to explore the influencing factors associated with the detection rates of PCa and csPCa. According to MRI examination before biopsy, the patients were divided into bpMRI group and mpMRI group. The detection rates of PCa and csPCa by bpMRI and mpMRI were compared. Furthermore, stratified analysis was performed for patients in these two groups to compare the detection rates of PCa and csPCa at different tPSA intervals, different prostate volume (PV) intervals and different PI-RADS V2 scores.

Results

A total of 571 patients were finally analyzed in this study after exclusion, and the overall detection rate of PCa was 54.5%. Multivariate analysis showed that patient age, tPSA level, prostate volume and PI-RADS V2 score were independent risk factors affecting the detection rates of PCa and csPCa. The detection rates of PCa and csPCa by bpMRI and mpMRI were comparable (51.3% vs. 57.9%, 44.0% vs. 48.0%, both P > 0.05), with no statistical significance. In the tPSA 10-20 ng/ml interval, the detection rates of PCa (59.72% vs. 40.35%, P = 0.011) and csPCa (51.39% vs. 28.82%, P = 0.005) by mpMRI were significantly higher than those by bpMRI, while in other tPSA interval (tPSA < 4 ng/ml, 4-10 ng/ml, 20-100 ng/ml), different PVs (≤30 ml, 30-60 ml, >60 ml) and different PI-RADS V2 scores (3, 4, and 5), the detection rates of PCa and csPCa were comparable between the two groups.

Conclusion

For detecting PCa and csPCa, bpMRI and mpMRI had similar diagnostic efficacies, whereas mpMRI detected more PCa and csPCa in the tPSA interval of 10-20 ng/ml.

Comparison between biparametric and multiparametric MRI diagnosis strategy for prostate cancer in the peripheral zone using PI-RADS version 2.1

PURPOSE

To compare and analyse the diagnostic value of PI-RADS v2.1 when used with biparametric MRI (bpMRI) versus multiparametric MRI (mpMRI), DWI versus T2WI to detect peripheral-zone prostate cancer (pzPCa) and clinically significant peripheral-zone prostate cancer (cs-pzPCa).

METHODS

The diagnostic efficiencies of mpMRI and bpMRI as well as DWI and T2WI in pzPCa and cs-pzPCa were compared using a PI-RADS score of ≥ 4 as the positive threshold and prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy as the reference standards.

RESULTS

A total of 307 prostate cases were included in the study, including 142 in the non-pzPCa group, 165 in the pzPCa group, and 130 in the cs-pzPCa group. The AUCs of mpMRI and bpMRI were 0.717 and 0.733 (P = 0.317), respectively, for the diagnosis of pzPCa (sensitivities: 89.1% and 81.8%; specificities: 54.2% and 64.8%, both P < 0.001) and 0.594 and 0.602 (P = 0.756), respectively, for the diagnosis of cs-pzPCa (sensitivities: 93.1% and 86.2%, P = 0.004; specificities: 25.7% and 34.3%, P = 0.250). The AUCs of DWI and T2WI were 0.733 and 0.749 (P = 0.308), respectively, for the diagnosis of pzPCa (sensitivities: 81.8% and 84.2%; specificities: 64.8% and 66.2%, both P > 0.05) and 0.602 and 0.581 (P = 0.371), respectively, for the diagnosis of cs-pzPCa (sensitivities: 86.2% and 87.7%; specificities: 34.3% and 28.6%, both P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

mpMRI and bpMRI as well as DWI and T2WI using PI-RADS v2.1 exhibited similar diagnostic efficiency in pzPCa and cs-pzPCa.

Combination of biparametric magnetic resonance imaging with prostate-specific antigen density to stratify the risk of significant prostate cancer: Initial biopsy and long-term follow-up results

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether the combination of biparametric magnetic resonance imaging with prostate-specific antigen density can properly stratify the risk of significant prostate cancer in patients undergoing prostate biopsies and how this approach affects the detection of prostate cancer during follow-up in patients who do not undergo prostate biopsy.

METHODS

In total, 411 biopsy-naïve patients who had elevated prostate-specific antigen levels and then underwent biparametric magnetic resonance imaging for suspicious prostate cancer were analyzed: 203 patients underwent prostate biopsies, whereas 208 patients did not. Significant prostate cancer detection rates stratified by the combination of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System score and prostate-specific antigen density were assessed in patients who underwent prostate biopsies. The cumulative incidence of prostate cancer detection during the follow-up was assessed in patients who omitted biopsy.

RESULTS

The negative predictive value for significant prostate cancer was 89% for Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System scores 1-3, which increased to 97% when prostate-specific antigen density <0.15 ng/ml/cm³ was combined. Among patients who did not undergo biopsy, patients with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System scores 1-3 plus prostate-specific antigen density <0.15 ng/ml/cm³ included significantly less cases in which significant prostate cancer was detected during the follow-up, compared with the others (3.2% versus 17% at 36 months).

CONCLUSIONS

Restriction of prostate biopsies to patients with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System scores 4-5 or prostate-specific antigen density ≥0.15 ng/ml/cm³ proved to be the good biopsy strategy, effectively balancing risks and benefits.

Prostate Surface Distension and Tumor Texture Descriptors From Pre-Treatment MRI Are Associated With Biochemical Recurrence Following Radical Prostatectomy: Preliminary Findings

Objective

To derive and evaluate the association of prostate shape distension descriptors from T2-weighted MRI (T2WI) with prostate cancer (PCa) biochemical recurrence (BCR) post-radical prostatectomy (RP) independently and in conjunction with texture radiomics of PCa.

Methods

This retrospective study comprised 133 PCa patients from two institutions who underwent 3T-MRI prior to RP and were followed up with PSA measurements for ≥3 years. A 3D shape atlas-based approach was adopted to derive prostate shape distension descriptors from T2WI, and these descriptors were used to train a random forest classifier (C_S) to predict BCR. Texture radiomics was derived within PCa regions of interest from T2WI and ADC maps, and another machine learning classifier (C_R) was trained for BCR. An integrated classifier C_S+R was then trained using predictions from C_S and C_R. These models were trained on D₁ (N = 71, 27 BCR+) and evaluated on independent hold-out set D₂ (N = 62, 12 BCR+). C_S+R was compared against pre-RP, post-RP clinical variables, and extant nomograms for BCR-free survival (bFS) at 3 years.

Results

C_S+R resulted in a higher AUC (0.75) compared to C_R (0.70, p = 0.04) and C_S (0.69, p = 0.01) on D₂ in predicting BCR. On univariable analysis, C_S+R achieved a higher hazard ratio (2.89, 95% CI 0.35–12.81, p < 0.01) compared to other pre-RP clinical variables for bFS. C_S+R, pathologic Gleason grade, extraprostatic extension, and positive surgical margins were associated with bFS (p < 0.05). C_S+R resulted in a higher C-index (0.76 ± 0.06) compared to CAPRA (0.69 ± 0.09, p < 0.01) and Decipher risk (0.59 ± 0.06, p < 0.01); however, it was comparable to post-RP CAPRA-S (0.75 ± 0.02, p = 0.07).

Conclusions

Radiomic shape descriptors quantifying prostate surface distension complement texture radiomics of prostate cancer on MRI and result in an improved association with biochemical recurrence post-radical prostatectomy.

Individualised non-contrast MRI-based risk estimation and shared decision-making in men with a suspicion of prostate cancer: protocol for multicentre randomised controlled trial (multi-IMPROD V.2.0)

INTRODUCTION

European Association of Urology and UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines recommend that all men with suspicions of prostate cancer should undergo prebiopsy contrast enhanced, that is, multiparametric prostate MRI. Subsequent prostate biopsies should also be performed if MRI is positive, that is, Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) scores 3-5. However, several retrospective post hoc analyses have shown that this approach still leads to many unnecessary biopsy procedures. For example, 88%-96% of men with PI-RADS, three findings are still diagnosed with clinically non-significant prostate cancer or no cancer at all.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a prospective, randomised, controlled, multicentre trial, being conducted in Finland, to demonstrate non-inferiority in clinically significant cancer detection rates among men undergoing prostate biopsies post-MRI and men undergoing prostate biopsies post-MRI only after a shared decision based on individualised risk estimation. Men without previous diagnosis of prostate cancer and with abnormal digital rectal examination findings and/or prostate-specific antigen between 2.5 ug/L and 20.0 ug/L are included. We aim to recruit 830 men who are randomised at a 1:1 ratio into control (all undergo biopsies after MRI) and intervention arms (the decision to perform biopsies is based on risk estimation and shared decision-making). The primary outcome of the study is the proportion of men with clinically significant prostate cancer (Gleason 4+3 prostate cancer or higher). We will also compare the overall biopsy rate, benign biopsy rate and the detection of non-significant prostate cancer between the two study groups.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study (protocol V.2.0, 4 January 2021) was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Hospital District of Southwest Finland (IORG number: 0001744, IBR number: 00002216; trial number: 99/1801/2019). Participants are required to provide written informed consent. Full reports of this study will be submitted to peer-reviewed journals, mainly urology and radiology.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04287088; the study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov.

MRI as a screening tool for prostate cancer: current evidence and future challenges

Purpose

Prostate cancer (PCa) screening, which relies on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing, is a contentious topic that received negative attention due to the low sensitivity and specificity of PSA to detect clinically significant PCa. In this context, due to the higher sensitivity and specificity of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), several trials investigate the feasibility of “MRI-only” screening approaches, and question if PSA testing may be replaced within prostate cancer screening programs.

Methods

This narrative review discusses the current literature and the outlook on the potential of MRI-based PCa screening.

Results

Several prospective randomized population-based trials are ongoing. Preliminary study results appear to favor the “MRI-only” approach. However, MRI-based PCa screening programs face a variety of obstacles that have yet to be fully addressed. These include the increased cost of MRI, lack of broad availability, differences in MRI acquisition and interpretation protocols, and lack of long-term impact on cancer-specific mortality. Partly, these issues are being addressed by shorter and simpler MRI approaches (5–20 min bi-parametric MRI), novel quality indicators (PI-QUAL) and the implementation of radiomics (deep learning, machine learning).

Conclusion

Although promising preliminary results were reported, MRI-based PCa screening still lack long-term data on crucial endpoints such as the impact of MRI screening on mortality. Furthermore, the issues of availability, cost-effectiveness, and differences in MRI acquisition and interpretation still need to be addressed.

One-Day Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Digital Pathology by Fluorescence Confocal Microscopy

In this prospective observational study, we tested the feasibility and efficacy of a novel one-day PCa diagnosis path based on biparametric magnetic resonance (bpMRI) and digital pathology by fluorescence confocal microscopy (FCM). Patients aged 55–70 years scheduled for PBx due to increased PSA levels (3–10 ng/mL) and/or abnormal digitorectal examination were enrolled. All patients underwent bpMRI and PBx with immediate FCM evaluation of biopsy cores. Patients were asked to fill out a dedicated Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire. Patients’ satisfaction rates and concordance between digital pathology and standard HE evaluation were the outcomes of interest. Twelve patients completed our one-day PCa diagnosis path. BpMRI showed suspicious lesions in 7 patients. Digital pathology by FCM identified PCa in 5 (41.7%) of the 12 patients. Standard pathology confirmed the diagnosis made through digital pathology in all the cases. At a per patient level, high concordance between the methods was achieved in Gleason Grading (4 out of 5 patients). The level of agreement in the number of positive cores was lower but did not affect the choice of treatment in any of the 5 PCa cases. At a per core level, the agreement was very high for the diagnosis of anyPCa (96.2%) and csPCa (97.3%), with a k coefficient of 0.90 and 0.92, respectively (near perfect agreement). In conclusion, one-day PCa diagnosis by FCM represents a feasible, reliable, and fast diagnostic method that provides significant advantages in optimizing time and resources, leading to patients having a higher quality standard of care perception.

Predicting the Performance of Concurrent Systematic Random Biopsies during Image Fusion Targeted Sampling of Multi-Parametric MRI Detected Prostate Cancer. A Prospective Study (PRESET Study)

Simple Summary

The study provides a predictive model by using clinical factors in selecting men who may benefit from the addition of systematic biopsies with an image fusion targeted approach. The approach is likely to improve the detection of csPCa and avoid unnecessary detection of indolent prostate cancers.

Abstract

The study was aimed to develop a predictive model to identify patients who may benefit from performing systematic random biopsies (SB) in addition to targeted biopsies (TB) in men suspected of having prostate cancer. A total of 198 patients with positive pre-biopsy MRI findings and who had undergone both TB and SB were prospectively recruited into this study. The primary outcome was detection rates of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in SB and TB approaches. The secondary outcome was net clinical benefits of SB in addition to TB. A logistic regression model and nomogram construction were used to perform a multivariate analysis. The detection rate of csPCa using SB was 51.0% (101/198) compared to a rate of 56.1% (111/198) for TB, using a patient-based biopsy approach. The detection rate of csPCa was higher using a combined biopsy (64.6%; 128/198) in comparison to TB (56.1%; 111/198) alone. This was statistically significant (p < 0.001). Age, PSA density and PIRADS score significantly predicted the detection of csPCa by SB in addition to TB. A nomogram based on the model showed good discriminative ability (C-index; 78%). The decision analysis curve confirmed a higher net clinical benefit at an acceptable threshold.

Acute and subacute prostate MRI findings after MRI-guided transurethral ultrasound ablation of prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided transurethral ultrasound ablation (TULSA) is an emerging method for treatment of localized prostate cancer (PCa). TULSA-related subacute MRI findings have not been previously characterized.

PURPOSE

To evaluate acute and subacute MRI findings after TULSA treatment in a treat-and-resect setting.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Six men with newly diagnosed MRI-visible and biopsy-concordant clinically significant PCa were enrolled and completed the study. Eight lesions classified as PI-RADS 3-5 were focally ablated using TULSA. One- and three-week follow-up MRI scans were performed between TULSA and robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy.

RESULTS

TULSA-related hemorrhage was detected as a subtle T1 hyperintensity and more apparent T2 hypointensity in the MRI. Both prostate volume and non-perfused volume (NPV) markedly increased after TULSA at one week and three weeks after treatment, respectively. Lesion apparent diffusion coefficient values increased one week after treatment and decreased nearing the baseline values at the three-week MRI follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The optimal timing of MRI follow-up seems to be at the earliest at three weeks after treatment, when the post-procedural edema has decreased and the NPV has matured. Diffusion-weighted imaging has little or no added diagnostic value in the subacute setting.

How to read biparametric MRI in men with a clinical suspicious of prostate cancer: Pictorial review for beginners with public access to imaging, clinical and histopathological database

Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is increasingly being used in men with a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa). Performing prostate MRI without the use of an intravenous contrast (IV) agent in men with a clinical suspicion of PCa can lead to reduced MRI scan time. Enabling a large array of different medical providers (from mid-level to specialized radiologists) to evaluate and potentially report prostate MRI in men with a clinical suspicion of PCa with a high accuracy could be one way to enable wide adoption of prostate MRI in men with a clinical suspicion of PCa. The aim of this pictorial review is to provide an insight into acquisition, quality control and reporting of prostate MRI performed without IV contrast agent in men with a clinical suspicion of PCa, aimed specifically at radiologists starting reporting prostate MRI, urologists, urology/radiology residents and mid-level medical providers without experience in reporting prostate MRI. Free public access (http://petiv.utu.fi/improd/and http://petiv.utu.fi/multiimprod/) to complete datasets of 161 and 338 men is provided. The imaging datasets are accompanied by clinical, laboratory and histopathological findings. Several topics are simplified in order to provide a solid base for the development of skills needed for an unsupervised review and potential reporting of prostate MRI in men with a clinical suspicion of PCa. The current review represents the first step towards enabling a large array of different medical providers to review and report accurately prostate MRI performed without IV contrast agent in men with a clinical suspicion of PCa.

Modified Predictive Model and Nomogram by Incorporating Prebiopsy Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging With Clinical Indicators for Prostate Biopsy Decision Making

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to explore the value of combining bpMRI and clinical indicators in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa), and developing a prediction model and Nomogram to guide clinical decision-making.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 530 patients who underwent prostate biopsy due to elevated serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels and/or suspicious digital rectal examination (DRE). Enrolled patients were randomly assigned to the training group (n = 371, 70%) and validation group (n = 159, 30%). All patients underwent prostate bpMRI examination, and T2-weighted imaging (T2WI) and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) sequences were collected before biopsy and were scored, which were respectively named T2WI score and DWI score according to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADS v.2) scoring protocol, and then PI-RADS scoring was performed. We defined a new bpMRI-based parameter named Total score (Total score = T2WI score + DWI score). PI-RADS score and Total score were separately included in the multivariate analysis of the training group to determine independent predictors for csPCa and establish prediction models. Then, prediction models and clinical indicators were compared by analyzing the area under the curve (AUC) and decision curves. A Nomogram for predicting csPCa was established using data from the training group.

Results

In the training group, 160 (43.1%) patients had prostate cancer (PCa), including 128 (34.5%) with csPCa. Multivariate regression analysis showed that the PI-RADS score, Total score, f/tPSA, and PSA density (PSAD) were independent predictors of csPCa. The prediction model that was defined by Total score, f/tPSA, and PSAD had the highest discriminatory power of csPCa (AUC = 0.931), and the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity were 85.1% and 87.5%, respectively. Decision curve analysis (DCA) showed that the prediction model achieved an optimal overall net benefit in both the training group and the validation group. In addition, the Nomogram predicted csPCa revealed good estimation when compared with clinical indicators.

Conclusion

The prediction model and Nomogram based on bpMRI and clinical indicators exhibit a satisfactory predictive value and improved risk stratification for csPCa, which could be used for clinical biopsy decision-making.

Emerging role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in identifying clinically relevant localized prostate cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To explore the recent advances and utility of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in the diagnosis and risk-stratification of prostate cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

Low-risk, clinically insignificant prostate cancer has a decreased risk of morbidity or mortality. Meanwhile, patients with intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer may significantly benefit from interventions like radiation or surgery. To appropriately risk stratify these patients, MRI has emerged as the imaging modality in the last decade to assist in defining prostate cancer significance, location, and biologic aggressiveness. Traditional 12-core transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy is associated with over-detection, and ultimately over-treatment of clinically insignificant disease, and the under-detection of clinically significant disease. Biopsy accuracy is improved with MRI-guided targeted biopsy and with the use of standardized risk stratification imaging score systems. Cancer detection accuracy is further improved with combined biopsy techniques that include both systematic and MRI-targeted biopsy that aid in detection of MRI-invisible lesions.

SUMMARY

mpMRI is an area of expanding innovation that continues to refine the diagnostic accuracy of prostate biopsies. As mpMRI-targeted biopsy in prostate cancer becomes more commonplace, advances like artificial intelligence and less invasive dynamic metabolic imaging will continue to improve the utility of MRI.

Detection of Prostate Cancer Using Biparametric Prostate MRI, Radiomics, and Kallikreins: A Retrospective Multicenter Study of Men With a Clinical Suspicion of Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

Accurate detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa), Gleason Grade Group ≥ 2, remains a challenge. Prostate MRI radiomics and blood kallikreins have been proposed as tools to improve the performance of biparametric MRI (bpMRI).

PURPOSE

To develop and validate radiomics and kallikrein models for the detection of csPCa.

STUDY TYPE

Retrospective.

POPULATION

A total of 543 men with a clinical suspicion of csPCa, 411 (76%, 411/543) had kallikreins available and 360 (88%, 360/411) did not take 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors. Two data splits into training, validation (split 1: single center, n = 72; split 2: random 50% of pooled datasets from all four centers), and testing (split 1: 4 centers, n = 288; split 2: remaining 50%) were evaluated.

FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE

A 3 T/1.5 T, TSE T2-weighted imaging, 3x SE DWI.

ASSESSMENT

In total, 20,363 radiomic features calculated from manually delineated whole gland (WG) and bpMRI suspicion lesion masks were evaluated in addition to clinical parameters, prostate-specific antigen, four kallikreins, MRI-based qualitative (PI-RADSv2.1/IMPROD bpMRI Likert) scores.

STATISTICAL TESTS

For the detection of csPCa, area under receiver operating curve (AUC) was calculated using the DeLong's method. A multivariate analysis was conducted to determine the predictive power of combining variables. The values of P-value < 0.05 were considered significant.

RESULTS

The highest prediction performance was achieved by IMPROD bpMRI Likert and PI-RADSv2.1 score with AUC = 0.85 and 0.85 in split 1, 0.85 and 0.83 in split 2, respectively. bpMRI WG and/or kallikreins demonstrated AUCs ranging from 0.62 to 0.73 in split 1 and from 0.68 to 0.76 in split 2. AUC of bpMRI lesion-derived radiomics model was not statistically different to IMPROD bpMRI Likert score (split 1: AUC = 0.83, P-value = 0.306; split 2: AUC = 0.83, P-value = 0.488).

DATA CONCLUSION

The use of radiomics and kallikreins failed to outperform PI-RADSv2.1/IMPROD bpMRI Likert and their combination did not lead to further performance gains.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.

The future direction of imaging in prostate cancer: MRI with or without contrast injection

BACKGROUND

Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) is the "state of the art" management tool for patients with suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa). The role of non-contrast MRI is investigated to move toward a more personalized, less invasive, and highly cost-effective PCa diagnostic workup.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a non-systematic review of the existing literature to highlight strength and flaws of performing non-contrast MRI, and to provide a critical overview of the international scientific production on the topic.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Online databases (Medline, PubMed, and Web of Science) were searched for original articles, systematic review and meta-analysis, and expert opinion papers.

RESULTS

Several investigations have shown comparable diagnostic accuracy of biparametric (bpMRI) and mpMRI for the detection of PCa. The advantage of abandoning contrast-enhanced sequences improves operational logistics, lowering costs, acquisition time, and side effects. The main limitations of bpMRI are that most studies comparing non-contrast with contrast MRI come from centers with high expertise that might not be reproducible in the general community setting; besides, reduced protocols might be insufficient for estimation of the intra- and extra-prostatic extension and regional disease. The mentioned observations suggest that low-quality mpMRI for the general population might represent the main shortage to overcome.

DISCUSSION

Non-contrast MRI future trends are likely represented by PCa screening and the application of artificial intelligence (AI) tools. PCa screening is still a controversial topic; bpMRI has become one of the most promising diagnostic applications, as it is a more sensitive test for PCa early detection, compared to serum PSA level test. Also, AI applications and radiomic have been the object of several studies investigating PCa detection using bpMRI, showing encouraging results.

CONCLUSION

Today, the accessibility to MRI for early detection of PCa is a priority. Results from prospective, multicenter, multireader, and paired validation studies are needed to provide evidence supporting its role in the clinical practice.

A Predictive Model Based on Bi-parametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Clinical Parameters for Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in the Korean Population

PURPOSE

This study aimed to develop and validate a predictive model for the assessment of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in men, prior to prostate biopsies, based on bi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) and clinical parameters.

Materials and Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 300 men with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer (prostate-specific antigen [PSA] ≥ 4.0 ng/mL and/or abnormal findings in a digital rectal examination), who underwent bpMRI-ultrasound fusion transperineal targeted and systematic biopsies in the same session, at a Korean university hospital. Predictive models, based on Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data Systems scores of bpMRI and clinical parameters, were developed to detect csPCa (intermediate/high grade [Gleason score ≥ 3+4]) and compared by analyzing the areas under the curves and decision curves.

RESULTS

A predictive model defined by the combination of bpMRI and clinical parameters (age, PSA density) showed high discriminatory power (area under the curve, 0.861) and resulted in a significant net benefit on decision curve analysis. Applying a probability threshold of 7.5%, 21.6% of men could avoid unnecessary prostate biopsy, while only 1.0% of significant prostate cancers were missed.

CONCLUSION

This predictive model provided a reliable and measurable means of risk stratification of csPCa, with high discriminatory power and great net benefit. It could be a useful tool for clinical decision-making prior to prostate biopsies.

PI-RADS 2.1 - Image Interpretation: The Most Important Updates and Their Clinical Implications

BACKGROUND

 Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the prostate plays a central role in the diagnosis of patients with suspected prostate cancer. The increasing distribution and application of the guideline for the standardization of image acquisition, evaluation, and reporting (Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System, PI-RADS), which was updated in 2019 to version 2.1, contributes to the success of the technique.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 The most important updates of PI-RADS version 2.1 presented in 2019 compared to the previous version PI-RADS 2.0 are highlighted and interpreted with regard to their clinical implications.

RESULTS

 PI-RADS version 2.1 aims to simplify the application of the scoring scheme without changing the basic concept of dominant sequences (DWI in the peripheral zone, T2 in the transition zone). Of particular importance are the increasing role of diffusion-weighted imaging in the transition zone, the now mandatory high b-value of at least 1400 s/mm², and new information on the assessment of the central zone and the anterior fibromuscular stroma.

CONCLUSION

 PI-RADS version 2.1 published in 2019 addresses a number of changes to the previous version, including both the examination technique and image interpretation. Prospective clinical studies have yet to prove the extent to which the goals of reducing interreader variability and increasing the detection rate in the transition zone will be achieved.

KEY POINTS

  · The new PI-RADS version 2.1. includes changes regarding image interpretation and examination technique. · The role of diffusion-weighted imaging is strengthened in the transition zone. · An ultra-high b-value of at least 1400 s/mm2 is mandatory according to PI-RADS 2.1. · Biparametric MRI is not recommended for general application.

CITATION FORMAT

· Beyer T, Schlemmer H, Weber M et al. PI-RADS 2.1 - Image Interpretation: The Most Important Updates and Their Clinical Implications. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2021; 193: 787 - 795.

Visibility of significant prostate cancer on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-do we still need contrast media?

Objectives

To assess the visibility of clinically significant prostate cancer (PCA) lesions on the sequences multiparametric MRI of the prostate (mpMRI) and to evaluate whether the addition of dynamic contrast–enhanced imaging (DCE) improves the overall visibility.

Methods

We retrospectively evaluated multiparametric MRI images of 119 lesions in 111 patients with biopsy-proven clinically significant PCA. Three readers assigned visual grading scores for visibility on each sequence, and a visual grading characteristic analysis was performed. Linear regression was used to explore which factors contributed to visibility in individual sequences.

Results

The visibility of lesions was significantly better with mpMRI when compared to biparametric MRI in visual grading characteristic (VGC) analysis, with an AUC_VGC of 0.62 (95% CI 0.55–0.69; p < 0.001). This benefit was seen across all readers. Multivariable linear regression revealed that a location in the peripheral zone was associated with better visibility on T2-weighted imaging (T2w). A higher Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score was associated with better visibility on both diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and DCE. Increased lesion size was associated with better visibility on all sequences.

Conclusions

Visibility of clinically significant PCA is improved by using mpMRI. DCE and DWI images independently improve lesion visibility compared to T2w images alone. Further research into the potential of DCE to impact on clinical decision-making is suggested.

Key Points

• DCE and DWI images independently improve clinically significant prostate cancer lesion visibility compared to T2w images alone.

• Multiparametric MRI (DCE, DWI, T2w) achieved significantly higher visibility scores than biparametric MRI (DWI, T2w).

• Location in the transition zone is associated with poor visibility on T2w, while it did not affect visibility on DWI or DCE.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00330-020-07494-1.

Prostate cancer local staging using biparametric MRI: assessment and comparison with multiparametric MRI

PURPOSE

The value of adding dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) imaging to T2-weighted (T2W) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) to improve the detection and staging of prostate cancer (PCa) is unclear. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the diagnostic performance of non-contrast biparametric MRI (bpMRI) with multiparametric MRI (mpMRI), for local staging of PCa.

METHODS

Ninety-two patients who underwent prostate MRI on a 3-Tesla MRI system before radical prostatectomy for PCa were included retrospectively. Four readers independently assigned a Likert score (ranging from 1 to 5) for predicting extra-prostatic extension (EPE) on T2W + DWI (bpMRI) and then on T2W + DWI + DCE imaging (mpMRI). MRI-based staging results were compared with radical prostatectomy histology. A prediction of EPE generalized linear mixed model was used to assess the added-value of DCE and discriminative power of staging accuracy by area under the receiver-operating curve (AUC ROC).

RESULTS

AUC was not significantly improved by DCE (mpMRI, AUC = 0.73 [95%CI: 0.655‒0.827] vs. bpMRI, AUC = 0.76 [95%CI: 0.681‒0.846]). After applying a selection procedure, only MRI criteria were retained in a multivariate model. The following criteria were significantly associated with local extension: localization in the peripheral zone (p < 0.001), maximal diameter of the lesion (<0.0001), curvilinear capsular contact on T2W (p < 0.0001), capsular irregularity on T2W (p < 0.0001), bulging on T2W (p < 0.001) and seminal vesicle hypo-signal (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Use of bpMRI did not result in a decrease in local staging accuracy.

Combined Use of Prostate-specific Antigen Density and Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Biopsy Decision Planning: A Retrospective Multi-institutional Study Using the Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging Outcome Database (PROMOD)

BACKGROUND

Previous studies suggested that prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density (PSAd) combined with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may help avoid unnecessary prostate biopsy (PB) with a limited risk of missing clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa; Gleason grade group [GGG] >1).

OBJECTIVE

To define optimal diagnostic strategies based on the combined use of PSAd and MRI in patients at risk of prostate cancer (PCa).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A retrospective analysis of the international multicenter Prostate MRI Outcome Database (PROMOD), including 2512 men having undergone PSAd and prostate MRI before PB between 2013 and 2019, was performed.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Rates of avoided PB, missed GGG 1, and csPCa according to 10 strategies based on PSAd values and MRI reporting scores (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System [PI-RADS]/Likert/IMPROD biparametric prostate MRI Likert). Decision curve analysis (DCA) was used to statistically compare the net benefit of each strategy. Combined systematic and targeted biopsies were used for reference.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

According to DCA, the best strategy in biopsy-naive patients was #7 (PI-RADS/Likert 4-5 or PI-RADS/Likert 3 if PSAd >0.2), which avoided 41.2% PBs while missed 44% of GGG 1 and 10.9% of csPCa cases. From a clinical standpoint, however, strategies with a lower risk of missing csPCa included #10 (PI-RADS/Likert 4-5 or PI-RADS 3 if PSAd >0.10 or PSAd >0.2), which avoided 27% PBs while missing 24.4% GGG 1 and 4% csPCa cases, or #5 (PI-RADS/Likert 3-5 or PSAd>0.15), which avoided 14.7% PBs while missing 9.3% GGG 1 and 1.7% csPCa cases. Similar results were found in patients with a previous negative biopsy. This study is limited by its retrospective nature, and no central review of MRI and histopathological findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined PSAd and MRI findings allows individualization of the decision to perform PB on the basis of the risk of missing PCa that both patients and clinicians are ready to accept to avoid this procedure.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We compared several biopsy strategies based on a combination of prostate magnetic resonance imaging findings and prostate-specific antigen density, providing a readily available tool for each center and practicing urologist to counsel patients about their individual risk of significant prostate cancer.

Negative Predictive Value of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Era: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

CONTEXT

Prebiopsy multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is increasingly used in prostate cancer diagnosis. The reported negative predictive value (NPV) of mpMRI is used by some clinicians to aid in decision making about whether or not to proceed to biopsy.

OBJECTIVE

We aim to perform a contemporary systematic review that reflects the latest literature on optimal mpMRI techniques and scoring systems to update the NPV of mpMRI for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We conducted a systematic literature search and included studies from 2016 to September 4, 2019, which assessed the NPV of mpMRI for csPCa, using biopsy or clinical follow-up as the reference standard. To ensure that studies included in this analysis reflect contemporary practice, we only included studies in which mpMRI findings were interpreted according to the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) or similar Likert grading system. We define negative mpMRI as either (1) PIRADS/Likert 1-2 or (2) PIRADS/Likert 1-3; csPCa was defined as either (1) Gleason grade group ≥2 or (2) Gleason grade group ≥3. We calculated NPV separately for each combination of negative mpMRI and csPCa.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 42 studies with 7321 patients met our inclusion criteria and were included for analysis. Using definition (1) for negative mpMRI and csPCa, the pooled NPV for biopsy-naïve men was 90.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 88.1-93.1%). When defining csPCa using definition (2), the NPV for csPCa was 97.1% (95% CI 94.9-98.7%). Calculation of the pooled NPV using definition (2) for negative mpMRI and definition (1) for csPCa yielded the following: 86.8% (95% CI 80.1-92.4%). Using definition (2) for both negative mpMRI and csPCa, the pooled NPV from two studies was 96.1% (95% CI 93.4-98.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Multiparametric MRI of the prostate is generally an accurate test for ruling out csPCa. However, we observed heterogeneity in the NPV estimates, and local institutional data should form the basis of decision making if available.

PATIENT SUMMARY

The negative predictive values should assist in decision making for clinicians considering not proceeding to biopsy in men with elevated age-specific prostate-specific antigen and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging reported as negative (or equivocal) on Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System/Likert scoring. Some 7-10% of men, depending on the setting, will miss a diagnosis of clinically significant cancer if they do not proceed to biopsy. Given the institutional variation in results, it is of upmost importance to base decision making on local data if available.

Added value of systematic biopsy in men with a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer undergoing biparametric MRI-targeted biopsy: multi-institutional external validation study

Purpose

We aimed to develop and externally validate a nomogram based on MRI volumetric parameters and clinical information for deciding when SBx should be performed in addition to TBx in man with suspicious prostate MRI.

Materials and methods

Retrospective analyses of single (IMPROD, NCT01864135) and multi-institution (MULTI-IMPROD, NCT02241122) clinical trials. All men underwent a unique rapid biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (IMPROD bpMRI) consisting of T2-weighted imaging and three separate DWI acquisitions. Men with IMPROD bpMRI Likert scores of 3–5 were included. Logistic regression models were developed using IMPROD trial (n = 122) and validated using MULTI-IMPROD trial (n = 262) data. The model’s performance was evaluated in the terms of PCa detection with Gleason Grade Group 1 (clinically insignificant prostate cancer, iPCa) and > 1 (clinically significant prostate cancer, csPCa). Net benefits and decision curve analyses (DCA) were compared. Combined biopsies were used for reference.

Results

The developed nomogram included age, PSA, prostate volume, MRI suspicion score (IMPROD bpMRI Likert or PIRADsv2.1 score), MRI-suspicion lesion volume percentage, and lesion location. All these variables were significant predictors of csPCa in SBx in multivariable analysis. In the validation cohort (n = 262) using different nomogram cutoffs, 19–43% of men would have avoided SBx while missing 1–4% of csPCa and avoiding detection of 9–20% of iPCa. Similar performance was found for nomograms using IMPROD bpMRI Likert score or v2.1.

Conclusions

The developed nomogram demonstrated potential to select men with a clinical suspicion of PCa who would benefit from performing SBx in addition to TBx. Public access to the nomogram is provided at:https://petiv.utu.fi/multiimprod/.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00345-020-03393-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Prediction of prostate cancer aggressiveness using 18F-Fluciclovine (FACBC) PET and multisequence multiparametric MRI

The aim of this prospective single-institution clinical trial (NCT02002455) was to evaluate the potential of advanced post-processing methods for ¹⁸F-Fluciclovine PET and multisequence multiparametric MRI in the prediction of prostate cancer (PCa) aggressiveness, defined by Gleason Grade Group (GGG). 21 patients with PCa underwent PET/CT, PET/MRI and MRI before prostatectomy. DWI was post-processed using kurtosis (ADC_k, K), mono- (ADC_m), and biexponential functions (f, D_p, D_f) while Logan plots were used to calculate volume of distribution (V_T). In total, 16 unique PET (V_T, SUV) and MRI derived quantitative parameters were evaluated. Univariate and multivariate analysis were carried out to estimate the potential of the quantitative parameters and their combinations to predict GGG 1 vs >1, using logistic regression with a nested leave-pair out cross validation (LPOCV) scheme and recursive feature elimination technique applied for feature selection. The second order rotating frame imaging (RAFF), monoexponential and kurtosis derived parameters had LPOCV AUC in the range of 0.72 to 0.92 while the corresponding value for V_T was 0.85. _The best performance for GGG prediction was achieved by K parameter of kurtosis function followed by quantitative parameters based on DWI, RAFF and ¹⁸F-FACBC PET. No major improvement was achieved using parameter combinations with or without feature selection. Addition of ¹⁸F-FACBC PET derived parameters (V_T, SUV) to DWI and RAFF derived parameters did not improve LPOCV AUC.

Negative Predictive Value of Biparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Excluding Significant Prostate Cancer: A Pooled Data Analysis Based on Clinical Data from Four Prospective, Registered Studies

BACKGROUND

Multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) can be considered the gold standard in prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Biparametric prostate MRI (bpMRI) is faster and could be a feasible alternative to mpMRI.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the negative predictive value (NPV) of Improved Prostate Cancer Diagnosis (IMPROD) bpMRI as a whole and in clinical subgroups in primary diagnostics of clinically significant prostate cancer (CSPCa).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This is a pooled data analysis of four prospective, registered clinical trials investigating prebiopsy IMPROD bpMRI. Men with a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa) were included.

INTERVENTION

Prebiopsy IMPROD bpMRI was performed, and an IMPROD bpMRI Likert scoring system was used. If suspicious lesions (IMPROD bpMRI Likert score 3-5) were visible, targeted biopsies in addition to systematic biopsies were taken.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Performance measures of IMPROD bpMRI in CSPCa diagnostics were evaluated. NPV was also evaluated in clinical subgroups. Gleason grade ≥3 + 4 in any biopsy core taken was defined as CSPCa.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

A total of 639 men were included in the analysis. The mean age was 64 yr, mean prostate-specific antigen level was 8.9 ng/ml, and CSPCa prevalence was 48%. NPVs of IMPROD bpMRI Likert scores 3-5 and 4-5 for CSPCa were 0.932 and 0.909, respectively, and the corresponding positive predictive values were 0.589 and 0.720. Only nine of 132 (7%) men with IMPROD bpMRI Likert score 1-2 had CSPCa and none with Gleason score >7. Thus, 132 of 639 (21%) study patients could have avoided biopsies without missing a single Gleason >7 cancer in the study biopsies. In the subgroup analysis, no clear outlier was present. The limitation is uncertainty of the true CSPCa prevalence.

CONCLUSIONS

IMPROD bpMRI demonstrated a high NPV to rule out CSPCa. IMPROD bpMRI Likert score 1-2 excludes Gleason >7 PCa in the study biopsies.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We investigated the feasibility of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with the Improved Prostate Cancer Diagnosis (IMPROD) biparametric MRI (bpMRI) protocol in excluding significant prostate cancer. In this study, highly aggressive prostate cancer was excluded using the publicly available IMPROD bpMRI protocol (http://petiv.utu.fi/multiimprod/).

MRI in the Management of Prostate Cancer

Multiparametric MRI has a changing role in prostate cancer diagnosis. Internationally recognized consensus documents such as prostate imaging reporting and data system version have been developed and adapted to standardize the acquisition and reporting of prostate MRI. The improvement in scanning techniques and development of highly sensitive functional sequences have improved the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer as well as treatment planning and follow up. This has led to a recent NICE recommendation to use prostate MRI as the initial investigation in men with clinically suspected localized disease. The results of several recent international MRI prostate trials are influencing the way imaging is used to stratify which patients require a prostate biopsy as well as how MRI guidance is used to target biopsies.

Diagnostic accuracy of biparametric versus multiparametric prostate MRI: assessment of contrast benefit in clinical practice

PURPOSE

To assess the added value of dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) in prostate MR in clinical practice.

METHODS

Two hundred sixty-four patients underwent prostate MRI, with T2 and DWI sequences initially interpreted, prior to full multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) interpretation using a Likert 1-5 scale. A prospective opinion was given on likely benefit of contrast prior to review of the DCE sequence, and retrospectively following full mpMRI review. The final histology result following targeted and/or systematic biopsy of the prostate was used for outcome purposes.

RESULTS

Biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) and mpMRI were assigned the same score in 86% of cases; when dichotomising to a negative or positive MRI (Likert score ≥ 3), concordance increased to 92.8%. At Likert score ≥ 3 bpMRI detected 89.9% of all cancers and 93.5% clinically significant prostate cancers (csPCa) and mpMRI 90.7% and 94.6%, respectively. mpMRI had fewer false positives than bpMRI (11.4% vs 18.9%) and a lower Likert 3 rate (8.3% vs 17%), conferring higher specificity (74% vs 67%), but similar sensitivity (95% versus 94%) and ROC-AUC (90% vs 89%). At a positive MRI threshold of Likert ≥ 4, mpMRI had a higher sensitivity than bpMRI (89% versus 80%) and detected more csPCa (89.2% versus 79.6%). DCE was prospectively considered of potential benefit in 27.3%, but readers would only recall 11% of patients for DCE sequences, mainly to assess score 3 peripheral zone lesions. Following full mpMRI review, DCE was considered helpful in 28.4% of cases; in 23/75 (30.6%) of these cases this only became apparent after reviewing the sequence, reasons included increased confidence, presence of "safety-net" lesions or inflammatory lesions.

CONCLUSION

BpMRI has equivalent cancer detection rates to mpMRI; however, mpMRI had fewer Likert 3 call rates and increased specificity and was subjectively considered of benefit by readers in 28.4% of cases.

KEY POINTS

• bpMRI has similar cancer detection rates to the full mpMRI protocol at a positive MRI threshold of Likert 3. • mpMRI had fewer intermediate category 3 calls (8.3%) than bpMRI (17%) and fewer false positives than bpMRI (11.4% vs 18.9%), conferring higher specificity (74% vs 67%). • Readers considered DCE beneficial in 28.4% of cases, but in a relatively high number (30.6%) this only became apparent after reviewing the sequence.

Biparametric versus multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate: detection of clinically significant cancer in a perfect match group

Background

Biparametric (bp) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) could be an alternative MRI for the detection of the clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa).

Purpose

To compare the accuracies of prostate cancer detection and localization between prebiopsy bpMRI and postbiopsy multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) taken on different days, using radical prostatectomy specimens as the reference standards.

Material and methods

Data of 41 total consecutive patients who underwent the following examinations and procedures between September 2015 and March 2017 were collected: (1) magnetic resonance- and/or ultrasonography-guided biopsy after bpMRI; (2) postbiopsy mpMRI; and (3) radical prostatectomy with csPCa. Two radiologists scored suspected lesions on bpMRI and mpMRI independently using Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2. The diagnostic accuracy of detecting csPCa and the Dice similarity coefficient were obtained. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) ratios were also obtained for quantitative comparison between bpMRI and mpMRI.

Results

Diagnostic accuracies on bpMRI and mpMRI were 0.83 and 0.82 for reader 1; 0.80 and 0.82 for reader 2. There are no significantly different values of diagnostic sensitivities or specificities between the readers or between MRI protocols. Intra-observer Dice similarity coefficient was significantly lower in reader 2, compared to that in reader 1 between the two MRI protocols. The range of mean ADC ratio was 0.281-0.635. There was no statistically significant difference in the ADC ratio between bpMRI and mpMRI.

Conclusions

Diagnostic performance of bpMRI without dynamic contrast enhancement MRI is not significantly different from mpMRI with dynamic contrast enhancement MRI in the detection of csPCa.

MRI combined with PSA density in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer in patients with PSA serum levels of 4∼10ng/mL: Biparametric versus multiparametric MRI

PURPOSE

To compare the performance of biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) to that of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) in combination with prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in patients with PSA serum levels of 4∼10ng/mL.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 123 men (mean age, 66.3±8.9 [SD]; range: 42-83 years) with PSA serum levels of 4∼10ng/mL with suspected csPCa were included. All patients underwent mpMRI at 3 Tesla and transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in their clinical workup and were followed-up for >1 year when no csPCa was found at initial biopsy. The mpMRI images were reinterpreted according to the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS, v2.1) twice in two different sessions using either mpMRI sequences or bpMRI sequences. The patients were divided into 2 groups according to whether csPCa was detected. The PI-RADS (mpMRI or bpMRI) categories and PSAD were used in combination to detect csPCa. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and decision curve analyses were performed to compare the efficacy of the different models (mpMRI, bpMRI, PSAD, mpMRI+PSAD and bpMRI+PSAD).

RESULTS

Thirty-seven patients (30.1%, 37/123) had csPCa. ROC analysis showed that bpMRI (AUC=0.884 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.814-0.935]) outperformed mpMRI (AUC=0.867 [95% CI: 0.794-0.921]) (P=0.035) and that bpMRI and mpMRI performed better than PSAD (0.682 [95% CI: 0.592-0.763]) in detecting csPCa; bpMRI+PSAD (AUC=0.907 [95% CI: 0.841-0.952]) performed similarly to mpMRI+PSAD (AUC=0.896 [95% CI: 0.828-0.944]) (P=0.151) and bpMRI (P=0.224). The sensitivity and specificity were 81.1% (95% CI: 64.8-92.0%) and 88.4% (95% CI: 79.7-94.3%), respectively for bpMRI, and 83.8% (95% CI: 68.0-93.8%) and 80.2% (95% CI: 70.2-88.0%), respectively for mpMRI (P>0.999 for sensitivity and P=0.016 for specificity). Among the 5 decision models, the decision curve analysis showed that all models (except for PSAD) achieved a high net benefit.

CONCLUSION

In patients with PSA serum levels of 4∼10ng/mL, bpMRI and bpMRI combined with PSAD achieve better performance than mpMRI in detecting csPCa; bpMRI has a higher specificity than mpMRI, which could decrease unnecessary biopsy, and may serve as a potential alternative to mpMRI to optimize clinical workup.

The effect of capped biparametric magnetic resonance imaging slots on weekly prostate cancer imaging workload

OBJECTIVE

To introduce capped biparametric (bp) MRI slots for follow-up imaging of prostate cancer patients enrolled in active surveillance (AS) and evaluate the effect on weekly variation in the number of AS cases and total MRI workload.

METHODS

Three 20 min bpMRI AS slots on two separate days were introduced at Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge. The weekly numbers of total prostate MRIs and AS cases recorded 15 months before and after the change (Groups 1 and 2, respectively). An intergroup variation in the weekly scan numbers was assessed using the coefficient of variance (CV) and mean absolute deviation; the Mann-Whitney U test was used for an intergroup comparison of the latter.

RESULTS

In AS patients, a shift from considerable to moderate variation in weekly scan numbers was observed between the two groups (CV, 51.7 and 26.8%, respectively); mean absolute deviation of AS scans also demonstrated a significant decrease in Group 2 (1.28 vs 2.58 in Group 1; p < 0.001). No significant changes in the variation in total prostate MRIs were observed, despite a 10% increased workload in Group 2.

CONCLUSION

A significant reduction in weekly variation of AS cases was demonstrated following the introduction of capped bpMRI slots, which can be used for more accurate long-term planning of MRI workload.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

The paper illustrates the potential of introducing capped AS MRI slots using a bp protocol to reduce weekly variation in demand and allow for optimising workflow, which will be increasingly important as the demands on radiology departments increase worldwide.

Multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer diagnosis: current status and future directions

The current diagnostic pathway for prostate cancer has resulted in overdiagnosis and consequent overtreatment as well as underdiagnosis and missed diagnoses in many men. Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) of the prostate has been identified as a test that could mitigate these diagnostic errors. The performance of mpMRI can vary depending on the population being studied, the execution of the MRI itself, the experience of the radiologist, whether additional biomarkers are considered and whether mpMRI-targeted biopsy is carried out alone or in addition to systematic biopsy. A number of challenges to implementation remain, such as ensuring high-quality execution and reporting of mpMRI and ensuring that this diagnostic pathway is cost-effective. Nevertheless, emerging clinical trial data support the adoption of this technology as part of the standard of care for the diagnosis of prostate cancer.

Accuracy of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosing prostate Cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The application of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) for diagnosis of prostate cancer has been recommended by the European Association of Urology (EAU), National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), and European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) guidelines. The purpose of this study is to systematically review the literature on assessing the accuracy of mpMRI in patients with suspicion of prostate cancer.

Method

We searched Embase, Pubmed and Cochrane online databases from January 12,000 to October 272,018 to extract articles exploring the possibilities that the pre-biopsy mpMRI can enhance the diagnosis accuracy of prostate cancer. The numbers of true- and false-negative results and true- and false-positive ones were extracted to calculate the corresponding sensitivity and specificity of mpMRI. Study quality was assessed using QUADAS-2 tool. Random effects meta-analysis and a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) plot were performed for further study.

Results

After searching, we acquired 3741 articles for reference, of which 29 studies with 8503 participants were eligible for inclusion. MpMRI maintained impressive diagnostic value, the area under the HSROC curve was 0.87 (95%CI,0.84–0.90). The sensitivity and specificity for mpMRI were 0.87 [95%CI, 0.81–0.91] and 0.68 [95%CI,0.56–0.79] respectively. The positive likelihood ratio was 2.73 [95%CI 1.90–3.90]; negative likelihood ratio was 0.19 [95% CI 0.14,-0.27]. The risk of publication bias was negligible with P = 0.96.

Conclusion

Results of the meta-analysis suggest that mpMRI is a sensitive tool to diagnose prostate cancer. However, because of the high heterogeneity existing among the included studies, further studies are needed to apply the results of this meta-analysis in clinic.

Editorial for "Qualitative and Quantitative Reporting of a Unique Biparametric MRI: Towards Biparametric MRI-Based Nomograms for Prediction of Prostate Biopsy Outcome in Men With a Clinical Suspicion of Prostate Cancer (IMPROD and MULTI-IMPROD Trials)"

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

5 Technical Efficacy Stage: 5 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2020;51:1568-1569.

Clinical Utility of Mutant Antibody-Based Assays for Determination of Internally Cleaved and Intact Forms of Free Prostate-Specific Antigen

BACKGROUND

Subforms of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) have been a subject of intensive research, and use of multikallikrein immunoassays can add clinical value to the early detection of prostate cancer, overcoming known limitations of PSA. In this study, we evaluated mutant 4D4 (L3-2) antibody-assisted assay constructs against reference wild-type (wt)-4D4-based assays for determination of intact PSA (iPSA) and nicked PSA (nPSA) in plasma samples.

METHODS

Perioperative plasma samples obtained from 105 men who underwent biopsy (73 cancer, 32 noncancer) were analyzed with sandwich immunoassays for total PSA (tPSA), free PSA (fPSA), iPSA (3 constructs), and measured nPSA (2 constructs). Calculated nPSA (CN) was obtained from total fPSA - iPSA.

RESULTS

Mutant-assisted iPSA assays measured lower concentrations than the reference in both patient groups. CN separated the 2 groups with the iPSA using the mutant for capture (I-MC) performing the best (P = 0.008). In prostate volume group > median, only measured nPSA provided significant discrimination [area under the curve (AUC), 0.71; P = 0.016] but equally using mutant and wt antibodies. In the whole cohort, all ratios to tPSA performed well (AUC, 0.819-0.870; P ≤ 0.0001) with CN based on I-MC scoring highest (AUC, 0.870). Importantly, in the ≤ median volume group, the I-MC/F and CN(I-MC)/T ratios stand out as the best performing parameters (AUC, 0.825 and 0.861; P = 0.001 and P = 0.0003, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The new assay construct using the mutant 4D4 (L3-2) as a capture provides clear improvement in separating cancer from noncancer in all subgroups analyzed but especially in patients with prostate volume ≤ median.Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01864135.

Prostate Cancer Risk Stratification in Men With a Clinical Suspicion of Prostate Cancer Using a Unique Biparametric MRI and Expression of 11 Genes in Apparently Benign Tissue: Evaluation Using Machine-Learning Techniques

BACKGROUND

Accurate risk stratification of men with a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer (cSPCa) remains challenging despite the increasing use of MRI.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of a unique biparametric MRI protocol (IMPROD bpMRI) combined with clinical and molecular markers in men with cSPCa.

STUDY TYPE

Prospective single-institutional clinical trial (NCT01864135).

SUBJECTS

Eighty men with cSPCa.

FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE

3T, surface array coils. Two T₂ -weighted and three diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) acquisitions: 1) b-values 0, 100, 200, 300, 500 s/mm² ; 2) b-values 0,1500 s/mm² ; 3) b-values 0, 2000 s/mm² .

ASSESSMENT

IMPROD bpMRI examinations were qualitatively (IMPROD bpMRI Likert score) and quantitatively (DWI-based Gleason grade score) prospectively reported. Men with IMPROD bpMRI Likert 3-5 had two targeted biopsies followed by 12-core systematic biopsies (SB); those with IMPROD bpMRI Likert 1-2 had only SB. Additionally, 2-core from normal-appearing prostate areas were obtained for the mRNA expression of ACSM1, AMACR, CACNA1D, DLX1, PCA3, PLA2G7, RHOU, SPINK1, SPON2, TMPRSS2-ERG, and TDRD1 measured by quantitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction.

STATISTICAL TESTS

Univariate and multivariate analysis using regularized least-squares, feature selection and tournament leave-pair-out cross-validation (TLPOCV), as well as 10 random splits of the data in training-testing sets, were used to evaluate the mRNA, clinical and IMPROD bpMRI parameters in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer (SPCa) defined as Gleason score ≥ 3 + 4. The evaluation metric was the area under the curve (AUC).

RESULTS

IMPROD bpMRI Likert demonstrated the highest TLPOCV AUC of 0.92. The tested clinical variables had AUC 0.56-0.73, while the mRNA and additional IMPROD bpMRI parameters had AUC 0.50-0.67 and 0.65-0.89 respectively. The combination of clinical and mRNA biomarkers produced TLPOCV AUC of 0.87, the highest TLPOCV performance without including IMPROD bpMRI Likert.

DATA CONCLUSION

The qualitative IMPROD bpMRI Likert score demonstrated the highest accuracy for SPCa detection compared with the tested clinical variables and mRNA biomarkers.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1 Technical Efficacy Stage: 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2020;51:1540-1553.

Avoiding Unnecessary Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and Biopsies: Negative and Positive Predictive Value of MRI According to Prostate-specific Antigen Density, 4Kscore and Risk Calculators

The 2019 European Association of Urology guidelines recommend multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) for biopsy-naïve patients with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer (PC) and avoiding biopsy in patients with negative mpMRI and low clinical suspicion. However, consensus on the optimal definition of low clinical suspicion is lacking. We evaluated 266 biopsy-naïve patients who underwent mpMRI, the 4Kscore test, and prostate biopsy to define the best strategy to avoid unnecessary testing and biopsies. The European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer risk calculator (ERSPC-RC) and prostate-specific antigen density (PSAd) were also considered. For men with Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System v2.0 (PI-RADS) 1⿿2 lesions, the highest negative predictive value was observed for those with low or intermediate 4Kscore risk (96.9% and 97.1%), PSAd <0.10ng/ml/cm³ (98.7%), and ERSPC-RC <2% (98.7%). For men with PI-RADS 3⿿5 lesions the lowest positive predictive value was observed for those with low 4Kscore risk (0%), PSAd <0.10ng/ml/cm³ (13.2%), and ERSPC-RC <2% (12.3%). The best biopsy strategy was an initial 4Kscore followed by mpMRI if the 4Kscore was>7.5% and a subsequent biopsy if the mpMRI was positive (PI-RADS 3⿿5) or the 4Kscore was ⿥18%. This would result in missing 2.7% (2/74) of clinically significant PCs (csPCs) and avoiding 34.2% of biopsies. Initial mpMRI followed by biopsy for negative mpMRI (PI-RADS 1⿿2) if the 4Kscore was ⿥18% or PSAd was ⿥0.10ng/ml/cm³ resulted in a similar percentage of csPC missed (2.7% [2/74] and 1.3% [1/74]) but slightly fewer biopsies avoided (25.2% and 28.1%). Physicians should consider clinical risk screening tools when ordering and interpreting mpMRI results to avoid unnecessary testing and diagnostic errors. PATIENT SUMMARY: Performing the 4Kscore test in conjunction with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for men with a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer may help to reduce unnecessary biopsies.

The Role of Transrectal Ultrasound for Finding Focal Lesions in Prostate Cancer Detection Compared to Systematic Sextant Biopsy

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the difference in cancer detection rate between targeted biopsy of focal lesions detected on transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) and systematic sextant biopsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study included patients who underwent TRUS-guided prostate biopsy between April 2014 and April 2017 and classified them into three groups: (1) sextant biopsy group patients underwent systematic sextant biopsy without evaluation of focal lesions on TRUS (n = 400), (2) focal lesion group patients underwent targeted biopsy for TRUS-detected lesions (n = 496), and (3) nonfocal lesion group patients had no TRUS-detected focal lesions (n = 222). Positive biopsy rates were compared using Chi-square tests between biopsy groups in all patients and two subgroups divided by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of 10 ng/mL.

RESULTS

The positive biopsy rate decreased in the order of the focal lesion group, the sextant biopsy group, and the nonfocal lesion group. All prostate cancers and prostate cancers with a Gleason score ≥7 were detected more frequently among patients with PSA ≤10 ng/mL in the focal lesion group than in the sextant biopsy group ( p = 0.008 and 0.007, respectively) and less frequently among patients with PSA >10 ng/mL in the nonfocal lesion group than in the sextant biopsy group ( p = 0.007 and 0.003, respectively).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, searching focal lesion by TRUS is useful for improving the positive biopsy rate and risk stratification of PCa compared to systematic sextant biopsy without careful TRUS examination.

PI-RADS version 2.1: one small step for prostate MRI

Multiparametric (mp) prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is playing an increasingly prominent role in the diagnostic work-up of patients with suspected prostate cancer. Performing mpMRI before biopsy offers several advantages including biopsy avoidance under certain clinical circumstances and targeting biopsy of suspicious lesions to enable the correct diagnosis. The success of the technique is heavily dependent on high-quality image acquisition, interpretation, and report communication, all areas addressed by previous versions of the Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) recommendations. Numerous studies have validated the approach, but the widespread adoption of PI-RADS version 2 has also highlighted inconsistencies and limitations, particularly relating to interobserver variability for evaluation of the transition zone. These limitations are addressed in the recently released version 2.1. In this article, we highlight the key changes proposed in PI-RADS v2.1 and explore the background reasoning and evidence for the recommendations.

PI-RADS Steering Committee: The PI-RADS Multiparametric MRI and MRI-directed Biopsy Pathway

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.

Validation of IMPROD biparametric MRI in men with clinically suspected prostate cancer: A prospective multi-institutional trial

BACKGROUND

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) combined with targeted biopsy (TB) is increasingly used in men with clinically suspected prostate cancer (PCa), but the long acquisition times, high costs, and inter-center/reader variability of routine multiparametric prostate MRI limit its wider adoption.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

The aim was to validate a previously developed unique MRI acquisition and reporting protocol, IMPROD biparametric MRI (bpMRI) (NCT01864135), in men with a clinical suspicion of PCa in a multi-institutional trial (NCT02241122). IMPROD bpMRI has average acquisition time of 15 minutes (no endorectal coil, no intravenous contrast use) and consists of T2-weighted imaging and 3 separate diffusion-weighed imaging acquisitions. Between February 1, 2015, and March 31, 2017, 364 men with a clinical suspicion of PCa were enrolled at 4 institutions in Finland. Men with an equivocal to high suspicion (IMPROD bpMRI Likert score 3-5) of PCa had 2 TBs of up to 2 lesions followed by a systematic biopsy (SB). Men with a low to very low suspicion (IMPROD bpMRI Likert score 1-2) had only SB. All data and protocols are freely available. The primary outcome of the trial was diagnostic accuracy-including overall accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value-of IMPROD bpMRI for clinically significant PCa (SPCa), which was defined as a Gleason score ≥ 3 + 4 (Gleason grade group 2 or higher). In total, 338 (338/364, 93%) prospectively enrolled men completed the trial. The accuracy and NPV of IMPROD bpMRI for SPCa were 70% (113/161) and 95% (71/75) (95% CI 87%-98%), respectively. Restricting the biopsy to men with equivocal to highly suspicious IMPROD bpMRI findings would have resulted in a 22% (75/338) reduction in the number of men undergoing biopsy while missing 4 (3%, 4/146) men with SPCa. The main limitation is uncertainty about the true PCa prevalence in the study cohort, since some of the men may have PCa despite having negative biopsy findings.

CONCLUSIONS

IMPROD bpMRI demonstrated a high NPV for SPCa in men with a clinical suspicion of PCa in this prospective multi-institutional clinical trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02241122.