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

Comparison of systematic and combined biopsy for the detection of prostate cancer

ABSTRACT

Systematic prostate biopsy has limitations, such as overdiagnosis of clinically insignificant prostate cancer and underdiagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided biopsy, a promising alternative, might improve diagnostic accuracy. To compare the cancer detection rates of systematic biopsy and combined biopsy (systematic biopsy plus MRI-targeted biopsy) in Asian men, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of men who underwent either systematic biopsy or combined biopsy at two medical centers (Queen Mary Hospital and Tung Wah Hospital, Hong Kong, China) from July 2015 to December 2022. Descriptive statistics were calculated, and univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed. The primary and secondary outcomes were prostate cancer and clinically significant prostate cancer. A total of 1391 participants were enrolled. The overall prostate cancer detection rates did not significantly differ between the two groups (36.3% vs 36.6%, odds ratio [OR] = 1.01, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.81-1.26, P = 0.92). However, combined biopsy showed a significant advantage in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer (Gleason score ≥ 3+4) in patients with a total serum prostate-specific antigen (tPSA) concentration of 2-10 ng ml -1 (systematic vs combined: 11.9% vs 17.5%, OR = 1.58, 95% CI: 1.08-2.31, P = 0.02). Specifically, in the transperineal biopsy subgroup, combined biopsy significantly outperformed systematic biopsy in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (systematic vs combined: 12.6% vs 24.0%, OR = 2.19, 95% CI: 1.21-3.97, P = 0.01). These findings suggest that in patients with a tPSA concentration of 2-10 ng ml -1 , MRI-targeted biopsy may be of greater predictive value than systematic biopsy in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer.

Risk calculators for the detection of prostate cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer (PCa) (early) detection poses significant challenges, including unnecessary testing and the risk of potential overdiagnosis. The European Association of Urology therefore suggests an individual risk-adapted approach, incorporating risk calculators (RCs) into the PCa detection pathway. In the context of 'The PRostate Cancer Awareness and Initiative for Screening in the European Union' (PRAISE-U) project ( https://uroweb.org/praise-u ), we aim to provide an overview of the currently available clinical RCs applicable in an early PCa detection algorithm.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review to identify RCs predicting detection of clinically significant PCa at biopsy. A search was performed in the databases Medline ALL, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Google Scholar for publications between January 2010 and July 2023. We retrieved relevant literature by using the terms "prostate cancer", "screening/diagnosis" and "predictive model". Inclusion criteria included systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and clinical trials. Exclusion criteria applied to studies involving pre-targeted high-risk populations, diagnosed PCa patients, or a sample sizes under 50 men.

RESULTS

We identified 6474 articles, of which 140 were included after screening abstracts and full texts. In total, we identified 96 unique RCs. Among these, 45 underwent external validation, with 28 validated in multiple cohorts. Of the externally validated RCs, 17 are based on clinical factors, 19 incorporate clinical factors along with MRI details, 4 were based on blood biomarkers alone or in combination with clinical factors, and 5 included urinary biomarkers. The median AUC of externally validated RCs ranged from 0.63 to 0.93.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review offers an extensive analysis of currently available RCs, their variable utilization, and performance within validation cohorts. RCs have consistently demonstrated their capacity to mitigate the limitations associated with early detection and have been integrated into modern practice and screening trials. Nevertheless, the lack of external validation data raises concerns about numerous RCs, and it is crucial to factor in this omission when evaluating whether a specific RC is applicable to one's target population.

Patients With "Gray Zone" PSA Levels: Application of Prostate MRI and MRS in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer

Improving the detection rates of prostate cancer (PCa) and avoiding unnecessary prostate biopsies in men with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels within the gray zone require urgent attention. In this context, rapid advances in MR technology in recent years may offer a promising possibility. A systematic review to evaluate the applications of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) in detecting PCa and clinically significant PCa (csPCa) in men with PSA levels within the gray zone. The study type is defined as systematic review. In July 2022, out of 229 studies identified by the database search and from other sources, 23 articles related to the selected topic of interest were included in this review. No field strength or sequence restrictions. The data including the study population, study characteristics, as well as basic MRI characteristics, from the final studies included in this review, were extracted independently by two reviewers. The major results of the original study were summarized and no additional statistical analysis was performed. Among the 23 studies included in this review, 17 focused on the applications of MRS and MRI for the prebiopsy diagnosis of PCa. Nine of these 17 articles used Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score to interpret MRI results, thereby confirming the practicality of the PI-RADS score in predicting PCa and csPCa. The remaining six articles evaluated the applications of MRI and MRS in guiding prostate biopsy. Although there was a variation in the biopsy modalities used in these studies, both MRI- and MRS-guided prostate biopsies were observed to improve the detection rates of PCa and csPCa in patients with PSA levels within the gray zone. MRS and MRI showed good performance in the detection of PCa and csPCa before biopsy. In addition, MRS- or MRI-guided prostate-targeted biopsies were able to improve the detection rates of PCa and csPCa. EVIDENCE LEVEL: 3 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.

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

Purpose

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Systematic Review Registration

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

A clinical available decision support scheme for optimizing prostate biopsy based on mpMRI

BACKGROUND

Combined MRI/Ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy (TBx) and systematic biopsy (SBx) results in better prostate cancer (PCa) detection relative to either TBx or SBx alone, while at the cost of higher number of biopsy cores and greater detection of clinically insignificant PCa. We therefore developed and evaluated a simple decision support scheme for optimizing prostate biopsy based on multiparametric (mp) MRI assessment.

METHODS

Total 229 patients with suspicion of PCa underwent mpMRI before combined TBx/SBx were retrospectively included. Impacts of MRI characteristics such as Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score, lesion size, zonal origination, and location on biopsy performance were evaluated. A clinically available decision support scheme relying on mpMRI assessment was subsequently developed as a triage test to optimize prostate biopsy process. Cost (downgrade, upgrade, and biopsy core)-to-Effectiveness (detection rate) was systemically compared.

RESULTS

TBx achieved comparable detection rate to combined TBx/SBx in diagnosis of PCa and clinically significant PCa (csPCa) (PCa, 59% [135/229] vs 60.7% [139/229]; csPCa, 45.9% [105/229] vs 47.2% [108/229]; p-values > 0.05) and outperformed SBx (PCa, 42.4% [97/229]; csPCa, 28.4% [65/229]; p-values < 0.001). Specially, in personalized decision support scheme, TBx accurately detected all PCa (72.5% [74/102]) in PI-RADS 5 and larger (≥1 cm) PI-RADS 3-4 observations, adding SBx to TBx only resulted in 1.4% (1/74) upgrading csPCa. For smaller (<1 cm) PI-RADS 3-4 lesions, combined TBx/SBx resulted in relatively higher detection rate (51.2% [65/127] vs 48.0% [61/127]) and lower upgrading rate (30.6% [15/49] vs 36.7% [18/49]) than TBx.

CONCLUSIONS

The benefit of SBx added to TBx was largely restricted to smaller PI-RADS score 3-4 lesions. Using our personalized strategy of solo TBx for PI-RADS 5 and larger (≥1 cm) PI-RADS score 3-4 lesions would avoid excess SBx in 44.5% (102/229) of all biopsy-naïve patients without compromising detection rate.

PSA Based Biomarkers, Imagistic Techniques and Combined Tests for a Better Diagnostic of Localized Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer represents the most encountered urinary malignancy in males over 50 years old, and the second most diagnosed after lung cancer globally. Digital rectal examination and prostatic specific antigen were the long-time standard tools for diagnosis but with a significant risk of overdiagnosis and overtreatment. Magnetic resonance imaging recently entered the diagnosis process, but to this date, there is no specific biomarker that accurately indicates whether to proceed with the prostate biopsy. Research in this area has gone towards this direction, and recently, serum, urine, imagistic, tissue biomarkers, and Risk Calculators promise to help better diagnose and stratify prostate cancer. In order to eliminate the comorbidities that appear along with the diagnosis and treatment of this disease, there is a constant need to implement new diagnostic strategies. Important uro-oncology associations recommend the use of novel biomarkers in the grey area of prostate cancer, to better distinguish the next step in the diagnostic process. Although it is not that simple, they should be integrated according to the clinical policies, and it should be considered that statistical significance does not always equal clinical significance. In this review, we analyzed the contribution of prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based biomarkers (PHI, PHID, 4Kscore, STHLM3), imagistic techniques (mp-MRI and mp-US), and combined tests in the early diagnosis process of localized prostate cancer.