Does HistoScanning™ predict positive results in prostate biopsy? A retrospective analysis of 1,188 sextants of the prostate

Multiparametric ultrasound of prostate: role in prostate cancer diagnosis

Recent advances in ultrasonography (US) technology established modalities, such as Doppler-US, HistoScanning, contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS), elastography, and micro-ultrasound. The early results of these US modalities have been promising, although there are limitations including the need for specialized equipment, inconsistent results, lack of standardizations, and external validation. In this review, we identified studies evaluating multiparametric ultrasonography (mpUS), the combination of multiple US modalities, for prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis. In the past 5 years, a growing number of studies have shown that use of mpUS resulted in high PCa and clinically significant prostate cancer (CSPCa) detection performance using radical prostatectomy histology as the reference standard. Recent studies have demonstrated the role mpUS in improving detection of CSPCa and guidance for prostate biopsy and therapy. Furthermore, some aspects including lower costs, real-time imaging, applicability for some patients who have contraindication for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and availability in the office setting are clear advantages of mpUS. Interobserver agreement of mpUS was overall low; however, this limitation can be improved using standardized and objective evaluation systems such as the machine learning model. Whether mpUS outperforms MRI is unclear. Multicenter randomized controlled trials directly comparing mpUS and multiparametric MRI are warranted.

Recent Advances in Systematic and Targeted Prostate Biopsies

Prostate biopsy is the definitive investigation to diagnose prostate cancer. The ideal procedure would be one that offers fast and efficient results safely as an outpatient procedure. Historically, transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) biopsy is considered the gold standard but transrectal biopsy can under-sample the anterior and apical regions of the prostate and is associated with a risk of prostate biopsy-related sepsis, which may require intensive care admission. Transperineal (TP) biopsy addresses the inefficient sampling of TRUS biopsy but historically has been done under general anaesthetic, which makes it difficult to incorporate into timed diagnostic pathways such as the National Health Service (NHS) 2-week cancer pathway. TRUS biopsy has remained the mainstay of clinical diagnosis because of its simplicity; however, the recent development of simpler local anaesthetic transperineal techniques has transformed outpatient biopsy practice. These techniques practically eliminate prostate biopsy-related sepsis, have a shallow learning curve and offer effective sampling of all areas of the prostate in an outpatient setting. The effectiveness of TP biopsy has been enhanced by the introduction of multiparametric MRI prior to biopsy, the use of PSA density for risk stratification in equivocal cases and combined with more efficient targeted and systematic biopsies techniques, such as the Ginsburg Protocol, has improved the tolerability and diagnostic yield of local anaesthetic TP biopsies, reducing the risk of complications from the oversampling associated with transperineal template mapping biopsies. Areas where the literature remains unclear is the optimum number of cores needed to detect clinically significant disease (CSD) in patients with a definable lesion on MRI, in particular, whether there is a need for systematic biopsy in the face of equivocal MRI findings to ensure no CSD is missed. The Covid-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on prostate cancer referrals and prostate biopsy techniques within the UK; prior to the pandemic 65% of all prostate biopsies were TRUS, since the pandemic the proportions have reversed such that now over 65% of all prostate biopsies in the NHS are transperineal.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of Histoscanning™ in prostate cancer diagnostics

CONTEXT

The value of Histoscanning™ (HS) in prostate cancer (PCa) imaging is much debated, although it has been used in clinical practice for more than 10 years now.

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the data on HS from various PCa diagnostic perspectives to determine its potential.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a systematic search using 2 databases (Medline and Scopus) on the query "Histoscan*". The primary endpoint was HS accuracy. The secondary endpoints were: correlation of lesion volume by HS and histology, ability of HS to predict extracapsular extension or seminal vesicle invasion.

RESULTS

HS improved cancer detection rate "per core", OR = 16.37 (95% CI 13.2; 20.3), p < 0.0001, I² = 98% and "per patient", OR = 1.83 (95% CI 1.51; 2.21), p < 0.0001, I² = 95%. The pooled accuracy was markedly low: sensitivity - 0.2 (95% CI 0.19-0.21), specificity - 0.12 (0.11-0.13), AUC 0.12. 8 of 10 studiers showed no additional value for HS. The pooled accuracy with histology after RP was relatively better, yet still very low: sensitivity - 0.56 (95% CI 0.5-0.63), specificity - 0.23 (0.18-0.28), AUC 0.4. 9 of 12 studies did not show any benefit of HS.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis does not see the incremental value in comparing prostate Histoscanning with conventional TRUS in prostate cancer screening and targeted biopsy. HS proved to be slightly more accurate in predicting extracapsular extension on RP, but the available data does not allow us to draw any conclusions on its effectiveness in practice. Histoscanning is a modification of ultrasound for prostate cancer visualization. The available data suggest its low accuracy in screening and detecting of prostate cancer.

Elastography Targeted Prostate Biopsy in Patients under Active Surveillance

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to examine elastography-based prostate biopsy in prostate cancer (PCa) patients under active surveillance.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We relied on PCa patients who opted for active surveillance and underwent elastography targeted and systematic follow-up biopsy at the Braunschweig Prostate Cancer Center between October 2009 and February 2015. Each prostate sextant was considered as an individual case. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy (ACC) for elastography to predict follow-up biopsy results were analyzed, respectively, and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were carried out by using 2000 bootstrapping sample analyses.

RESULTS

Overall, 50 men and 300 sextants were identified. Overall, 27 (54%) men and 66 (22%) sextants harbored PCa at follow-up biopsy. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and ACC for elastography to predict follow-up biopsy results were: 19.7 (95% CI: 11.9-27.3), 86.8 (95% CI: 82.7-90.3), 29.6 (95% CI: 14.6-46.0), 79.3 (95% CI: 71.6-86.5), and 72.0% (95% CI: 65.7-78.3), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We recorded limited reliability of elastography-based prediction of follow-up biopsy results in active surveillance patients. Based on our analyses, we can neither recommend to rely exclusively on elastography-based targeted biopsies nor to delay or to omit follow-up biopsies based on elastography results during active surveillance.

Artificial intelligence in multiparametric prostate cancer imaging with focus on deep-learning methods

Prostate cancer represents today the most typical example of a pathology whose diagnosis requires multiparametric imaging, a strategy where multiple imaging techniques are combined to reach an acceptable diagnostic performance. However, the reviewing, weighing and coupling of multiple images not only places additional burden on the radiologist, it also complicates the reviewing process. Prostate cancer imaging has therefore been an important target for the development of computer-aided diagnostic (CAD) tools. In this survey, we discuss the advances in CAD for prostate cancer over the last decades with special attention to the deep-learning techniques that have been designed in the last few years. Moreover, we elaborate and compare the methods employed to deliver the CAD output to the operator for further medical decision making.

Prostate Imaging Compared to Transperineal Ultrasound-guided biopsy for significant prostate cancer Risk Evaluation (PICTURE): a prospective cohort validating study assessing Prostate HistoScanning

BACKGROUND

Men with negative prostate biopsies or those diagnosed with low-risk or low-volume intermediate-risk prostate cancers often require a second prostate biopsy prior to a treatment decision. Prostate HistoScanning (PHS) is an ultrasound imaging test that might inform prostate biopsy in such men.

METHODS

PICTURE was a prospective, paired-cohort validating trial to assess the diagnostic accuracy of imaging in men requiring a further biopsy (clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01492270) (11 January 2012-29 January 2014). We enrolled 330 men who had undergone a prior TRUS biopsy but where diagnostic uncertainty remained. All eligible men underwent PHS and transperineal template prostate mapping (TTPM) biopsy (reference standard). Men were blinded to the imaging results until after undergoing TTPM biopsies. We primarily assessed the ability of PHS to rule out clinically significant prostate (negative predictive value [NPV] and sensitivity) for a target histological condition of Gleason ≥4+3 and/or a cancer core length (MCCL) ≥6 mm. We also assessed the role of visually estimated PHS-targeted biopsies.

RESULTS

Of the 330 men enrolled, 249 underwent both PHS and TTPM biopsy. Mean (SD) age was 62 (7) years, median (IQR) PSA 6.8 (4.98-9.50) ng/ml, median (IQR) number of previous biopsies 1 (1-2) and mean (SD) gland size 37 (15.5) ml. One hundred and forty six (59%) had no clinically significant cancer. PHS classified 174 (70%) as suspicious. Sensitivity was 70.3% (95% CI 59.8-79.5) and NPV 41.3% (95% CI 27.0-56.8). Specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) were 14.7% (95% CI 9.1-22.0) and 36.8% (95% CI 29.6-44.4), respectively. In all, 213/220 had PHS suspicious areas targeted with targeting sensitivity 13.6% (95% CI 7.3-22.6), specificity 97.6% (95% CI 93.1-99.5), NPV 61.6% (95% CI 54.5-68.4) and PPV 80.0% (95% CI 51.9-95.7).

CONCLUSIONS

PHS is not a useful test in men seeking risk stratification following initial prostate biopsy.

Anatomic and Molecular Imaging in Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer is characterized by a complex set of heterogeneous disease states. This review aims to describe how imaging has been studied within each specific state. As physicians transition into an era of precision medicine, multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is proving to be a powerful tool leading the way for a paradigm shift in the diagnosis and management of localized prostate cancer. With further research and development, molecular imaging modalities will likely change the way we approach recurrent and metastatic disease. Given the range of possible oncological progression patterns, a thorough understanding of the underlying carcinogenesis, as it relates to imaging, is a requisite if we are to appropriately manage prostate cancer in future decades.

Application of ultrasound imaging biomarkers (HistoScanning™) improves staging reliability of prostate biopsies

Objective

Imaging biomarkers like HistoScanning™ augment the informative value of ultrasound. Analogue image-guidance might improve the diagnostic accuracy of prostate biopsies and reduce misclassifications in preoperative staging and grading.

Results

Comparison of 77 image-guided versus 88 systematic prostate biopsies revealed that incorrect staging and Gleason misclassification occurs less frequently in image-guided than in systematic prostate biopsies. Systematic prostate biopsies (4–36 cores, median 12 cores) tended to detect predominantly unilateral tumors (39% sensitivity, 90.9% specificity, 17.5% negative and 50% positive predictive values). Bilateral tumors were diagnosed more frequently by image-guided prostate biopsies (87.9% sensitivity, 72.7% specificity, 50% negative and 96.8% positive predictive values). Regarding the detection of lesions with high Gleason scores ≥ 3 + 4, systematic prostate and image-guided biopsies yielded sensitivity and specificity rates of 66.7% vs 93.5%, 86% vs 64.5%, as well as negative and positive predictive values of 71.2% vs 87%, and 83.3% vs 79.6%, respectively. Potential reason for systematic prostate biopsies missing the correct laterality and the correct Gleason score was a mismatch between the biopsy template and the respective pathological cancer localization. This supports the need for improved detection techniques such as ultrasound imaging biomarkers and image-adapted biopsies.

Ultrasound Elastography of the Prostate Using an Unconstrained Modulus Reconstruction Technique: A Pilot Clinical Study

A novel full-inversion-based technique for quantitative ultrasound elastography was investigated in a pilot clinical study on five patients for non-invasive detection and localization of prostate cancer and quantification of its extent. Conventional-frequency ultrasound images and radiofrequency (RF) data (~5 MHz) were collected during mechanical stimulation of the prostate using a transrectal ultrasound probe. Pre and post-compression RF data were used to construct the strain images. The Young's modulus (YM) images were subsequently reconstructed using the derived strain images and the stress distribution estimated iteratively using finite element (FE) analysis. Tumor regions determined based on the reconstructed YM images were compared to whole-mount histopathology images of radical prostatectomy specimens. Results indicated that tumors were significantly stiffer than the surrounding tissue, demonstrating a relative YM of 2.5 ± 0.8 compared to normal prostate tissue. The YM images had a good agreement with the histopathology images in terms of tumor location within the prostate. On average, 76% ± 28% of tumor regions detected based on the proposed method were inside respective tumor areas identified in the histopathology images. Results of a linear regression analysis demonstrated a good correlation between the disease extents estimated using the reconstructed YM images and those determined from whole-mount histopathology images (r² = 0.71). This pilot study demonstrates that the proposed method has a good potential for detection, localization and quantification of prostate cancer. The method can potentially be used for prostate needle biopsy guidance with the aim of decreasing the number of needle biopsies. The proposed technique utilizes conventional ultrasound imaging system only while no additional hardware attachment is required for mechanical stimulation or data acquisition. Therefore, the technique may be regarded as a non-invasive, low cost and potentially widely-available clinical tool for prostate cancer diagnosis.

Multiparametric ultrasound in the detection of prostate cancer: a systematic review

PURPOSE

To investigate the advances and clinical results of the different ultrasound modalities and the progress in combining them into multiparametric UltraSound (mpUS).

METHODS

A systematic literature search on mpUS and the different ultrasound modalities included: greyscale ultrasound, computerized transrectal ultrasound, Doppler and power Doppler techniques, dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound and (shear wave) elastography.

RESULTS

Limited research available on combining ultrasound modalities has presented improvement in diagnostic performance. The data of two studies suggest that even adding a lower performing ultrasound modality to a better performing modality using crude methods can already improve the sensitivity by 13-51 %. The different modalities detect different tumours. No study has tried to combine ultrasound modalities employing a system similar to the PIRADS system used for mpMRI or more advanced classifying algorithms.

CONCLUSION

Available evidence confirms that combining different ultrasound modalities significantly improves diagnostic performance.

A prospective comparative analysis of the accuracy of HistoScanning and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the localization of prostate cancer among men undergoing radical prostatectomy

INTRODUCTION

There is increasing interest in using imaging in the detection and localization of prostate cancer (PCa). Both multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and HistoScanning (HS) have been independently evaluated in the detection and localization of PCa. We undertook a prospective, blinded comparison of mpMRI and HS for cancer localization among men undergoing radical prostatectomy.

METHODS

Following approval by the institutional review board, men scheduled to undergo radical prostatectomy, who had previously undergone mpMRI at our institution, were offered inclusion in the study. Those consenting underwent preoperative HS following induction of anesthesia; mpMRI, HS, and surgical step-section pathology were independently read by a single radiologist, urologist, and pathologist, respectively, in a blinded fashion. Disease maps created by each independent reader were compared and evaluated for concordance by a 5 persons committee consisting of 2 urologists, 2 pathologists, and 1 radiologist. Logistic regression for correlated data was used to assess and compare mpMRI and HS in terms of diagnostic accuracy for cancer detection. Generalized estimating equations based on binary logistic regression were used to model concordance between reader opinion and the reference standard assessment of the same lesion site or region as a function of imaging modality.

RESULTS

Data from 31/35 men enrolled in the trial were deemed to be evaluable. On evaluation of cancer localization, HS identified cancer in 36/78 (46.2%) regions of interest, as compared with 41/78 (52.6%) on mpMRI (P = 0.3968). The overall accuracy, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and specificity for detection of disease within a region of interest were significantly better with mpMRI as compared with HS. HS detected 36/84 (42.9%) cancer foci as compared with 42/84 (50%) detected by mpMRI (P = 0.3678). Among tumors with Gleason score>6, mpMRI detected 19/22 (86.4%) whereas HS detected only 11/22 (50%, P = 0.0078). Similarly, among tumors>10mm in maximal diameter, mpMRI detected 28/34 (82.4%) whereas HS detected only 19/34 (55.9%, P = 0.0352).

CONCLUSION

In our institution, the diagnostic accuracy of HS was inferior to that of mpMRI in PCa for PCa detection and localization. Although our study warrants validation from larger cohorts, it would suggest that the HS protocol requires further refinement before clinical implementation.

Computer-aided transrectal ultrasound: does prostate HistoScanning™ improve detection performance of prostate cancer in repeat biopsies?

Background

An imaging tool providing reliable prostate cancer (PCa) detection and localization is necessary to improve common diagnostic pathway with ultrasound targeted biopsies. To determine the performance of transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) augmented by prostate HistoScanning^TM analysis (PHS) we investigated the detection of prostate cancer (PCa) foci in repeat prostate biopsies (Bx).

Methods

97 men with a mean age of 66.2 (44 – 82) years underwent PHS augmented TRUS analysis prior to a repeat Bx. Three PHS positive foci were defined in accordance with 6 bilateral prostatic sectors. Targeted Bx (tBx) limited to PHS positive foci and a systematic 14-core backup Bx (sBx) were taken. Results were correlated to biopsy outcome. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive accuracy, negative predictive value (NPV) and positive predictive value (PPV) were calculated.

Results

PCa was found in 31 of 97 (32 %) patients. Detection rate in tBx was significantly higher (p < .001). Detection rate in tBx and sBx did not differ on patient level(p ≥ 0.7). PHS sensitivity, specificity, predictive accuracy, PPV and NPV were 45 %, 83 %, 80 %, 19 % and 95 %, respectively.

Conclusions

PHS augmented TRUS identifies abnormal prostatic tissue. Although sensitivity and PPV for PCa are low, PHS information facilitates Bx targeting to vulnerable foci and results in a higher cancer detection rate. PHS targeted Bx should be considered in patients at persistent risk of PCa.

True targeting-derived prostate biopsy: HistoScanning™ remained inadequate despite advanced technical efforts

PURPOSE

To verify the reliability of HistoScanning™-based, true targeting (TT)-derived prostate biopsy.

METHODS

We relied on 40 patients suspicious for prostate cancer who underwent standard and TT-derived prostate biopsy. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and the area under the curve (AUC) were assessed for the prediction of biopsy results per octant by HistoScanning™, using different HistoScanning™ signal volume cutoffs (>0, >0.2 and >0.5 ml).

RESULTS

Overall, 319 octants were analyzed. Of those, 64 (20.1 %) harbored prostate cancer. According to different HistoScanning™ signal volume cutoffs (>0, >0.2 and >0.5 ml), the AUCs for predicting biopsy results were: 0.51, 0.51 and 0.53, respectively. Similarly, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive and negative predictive values were: 20.7, 78.2, 17.4 and 81.6 %; 20.7, 82.0, 20.3 and 82.3 %; and 12.1, 94.6, 33.3 and 82.9 %, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Prediction of biopsy results based on HistoScanning™ signals and TT-derived biopsies was unreliable. Moreover, the AUC of TT-derived biopsies was low and did not improve when additional signal volume cutoffs were applied (>0.2 and >0.5 ml). We cannot recommend a variation of well-established biopsy standards or reduction in biopsy cores based on HistoScanning™ signals.

Transrectal Ultrasound (US), Contrast-enhanced US, Real-time Elastography, HistoScanning, Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), and MRI-US Fusion Biopsy in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer

CONTEXT

Debates on overdiagnosis and overtreatment of prostate cancer (PCa) are ongoing and there is still huge uncertainty regarding misclassification of prostate biopsy results. Several imaging techniques that have emerged in recent years could overcome over- and underdiagnosis in PCa.

OBJECTIVE

To review the literature on transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-based techniques (contrast enhancement, HistoScanning, elastography) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based techniques for a nonsystematic overview of their benefits and limitations.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A comprehensive search of the PubMed database between August 2004 and August 2014 was performed. Studies assessing grayscale TRUS, contrast-enhanced (CE)-TRUS, elastography, HistoScanning, multiparametric MRI (mpMRI), and MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy were included. Publications before 2004 were included if they reported the principle or the first clinical results for these techniques.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Grayscale TRUS alone cannot detect PCa foci (detection rate 23-29%). TRUS-based (elastography) and MRI-based techniques (MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy) have significantly improved PCa diagnostics, with sensitivity of 53-74% and specificity of 72-95%. HistoScanning does not provide convincing or homogeneous results (specificity 19-82%). CE-TRUS seems to be user dependent; it is used in a low number of high-volume centers and has wide ranges for sensitivity (54-79%) and specificity (42-95%). For all the techniques reviewed, prospective multicenter studies with consistent definitions are lacking.

CONCLUSIONS

Standard grayscale TRUS is unreliable for PCa detection. Among the techniques reviewed, mpMRI and MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy seem to be suitable for enhancing PCa diagnostics. Elastography shows promising results according to the literature. CE-TRUS yields very inhomogeneous results and might not be the ideal technique for clinical practice. The value of HistoScanning must be questioned according to the literature.

PATIENT SUMMARY

New imaging modalities such as elastography and magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsies have improved the detection of prostate cancer. This may lower the burden of overtreatment as a result of more precise diagnosis.

[Value of perineal HistoScanning™ template-guided prostate biopsy]

BACKGROUND

Modern imaging modalities improve prostate diagnostics.

OBJECTIVES

This study was performed to determine the outcome characteristics of biopsy procedures using the results of HistoScanning(TM) analysis (HS) for identifying prostate cancer (PCa) in patients with perineal template-guided prostate biopsy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 104 consecutive men (mean age 69 years, mean PSA 9.9 ng/ml) underwent HS prior to the extended prostate biopsy procedure. Patients received a targeted transperineal (template-assisted) as well as a targeted transrectal prostate biopsy using HS projection reports supplemented by a standardized 14-core systematic transrectal prostate biopsy (Bx). The cancer detection rate was analyzed on the sector level and HS targeted results were correlated to biopsy outcome, sensitivity, specificity, predictive accuracy, negative predictive value (NPV) and positive predictive value (PPV).

RESULTS

Of 104 patients, 44 patients (42%) were found to have PCa. Histology detected atypical small acinar proliferation in 3 patients (2.9%), high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia in 16 (15.4%), and chronic active inflammation in 74 (71.1%), respectively. The detection rate for each region was significantly higher in HS-targeted biopsies compared to Bx. The detection rate per patient was not significantly different, although a smaller number of regions were biopsied with the targeted approach. The overall sensitivity, specificity, predictive accuracy, NPV, and PPV on the sector level were 37.2, 85.6, 78.6, 88.7 and 30.8%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The use of HS analysis results in a higher detection rate of prostate cancer compared to common transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)-guided Bx. This technique increases the informative value of TRUS imaging and improves the diagnostic impact at least in the targeted biopsy setting.

Quantitative ultrasound spectroscopic imaging for characterization of disease extent in prostate cancer patients

Three-dimensional quantitative ultrasound spectroscopic imaging of prostate was investigated clinically for the noninvasive detection and extent characterization of disease in cancer patients and compared to whole-mount, whole-gland histopathology of radical prostatectomy specimens. Fifteen patients with prostate cancer underwent a volumetric transrectal ultrasound scan before radical prostatectomy. Conventional-frequency (~5MHz) ultrasound images and radiofrequency data were collected from patients. Normalized power spectra were used as the basis of quantitative ultrasound spectroscopy. Specifically, color-coded parametric maps of 0-MHz intercept, midband fit, and spectral slope were computed and used to characterize prostate tissue in ultrasound images. Areas of cancer were identified in whole-mount histopathology specimens, and disease extent was correlated to that estimated from quantitative ultrasound parametric images. Midband fit and 0-MHz intercept parameters were found to be best associated with the presence of disease as located on histopathology whole-mount sections. Obtained results indicated a correlation between disease extent estimated noninvasively based on midband fit parametric images and that identified histopathologically on prostatectomy specimens, with an r(2) value of 0.71 (P<.0001). The 0-MHz intercept parameter demonstrated a lower level of correlation with histopathology. Spectral slope parametric maps offered no discrimination of disease. Multiple regression analysis produced a hybrid disease characterization model (r(2)=0.764, P<.05), implying that the midband fit biomarker had the greatest correlation with the histopathologic extent of disease. This work demonstrates that quantitative ultrasound spectroscopic imaging can be used for detecting prostate cancer and characterizing disease extent noninvasively, with corresponding gross three-dimensional histopathologic correlation.

Histoscanning has low sensitivity and specificity for seminal vesicle invasion

OBJECTIVE

To examine the accuracy of HistoScanning (HS) in detecting seminal vesicle (SV) invasion (SVI) within prostate cancer (PCa) patients.

METHODS

We relied on our prospective institutional database. Patients who received HS before radical prostatectomy were included in the study cohort. An experienced HS examiner retrospectively reanalyzed the HS data blinded to patient characteristics and pathologic results. The HS results for every single SV were compared with the corresponding findings from the final pathologic report after radical prostatectomy. An area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the prediction of SVI by HS was calculated. Depending on HS signal volume cut-offs (>0, >0.2, and >0.5 mL), the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for the prediction of SVI were assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, 131 patients and 262 SVs were assessable. Of those, 23 (17.5%) men had SVI, and 39 (14.9%) single SVs were infiltrated by tumor overall. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for predicting SVI by HS was 0.54. Depending on the HS signal volume cut-offs (>0, >0.2, and >0.5 mL), the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for predicting SVI were 76.9%, 10.8%, 13.1%, and 72.7%; 61.5%, 24.2%, 12.4%, and 78.3%; and 46.2%, 50.2%, 14.0%, and 84.2%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

HS results did not allow a reliable prediction of SVI within PCa patients. Despite, the application of HS signal volume cut-offs (>0.2 and >0.5 mL), the prediction of SVI within PCa patients remained insufficient.