Contemporary outcomes in the detection of prostate cancer using transrectal ultrasound-guided 12-core biopsy in Singaporean men with elevated prostate specific antigen and/or abnormal digital rectal examination

Transperineal versus transrectal prostate fiducial insertion in radiation treatment of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To provide more accurate and definitive conclusions regarding the clinical and technical complications associated with the transperineal (TP) and transrectal (TR) approaches, a comprehensive review of observational studies and randomized controlled trials was conducted. This systematic review covered all eligible studies to facilitate a thorough comparison of complications linked to the two fiducial marker insertion methods, TP and TR.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of the literature was conducted, encompassing databases such as PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, up to July 7, 2023. The relative risk and 95% confidence interval were utilized to evaluate the diagnosis and complication rates.

RESULTS

The final selection for the methodological quality analysis included 13 observational studies that utilized TP and TR gold fiducial insertion approaches. The meta-analysis revealed significantly lower risks of urinary tract infections (UTI) and rectal bleeding with the TP approach.

CONCLUSION

The use of both TP and TR techniques for placing gold seed fiducial markers has proven to be an effective, safe, and well-tolerated method for image-guided radiation therapy in prostate cancer patients. A significant benefit of the TP technique is its ability to avoid rectal puncture, thereby reducing the risk of UTIs. Although the incidence of UTIs and rectal bleeding associated with the TR method is relatively low, these complications can disrupt patient wellbeing and potentially cause delays in treatment.

Detection of anterior prostate cancer using a magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy in cases with initial biopsy and history of systematic biopsies

Background

Prostate cancer in the anterior region may be missed on a transrectal systematic biopsy (SBx). Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the performance of magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound (MRI-TRUS) fusion targeted biopsy (TBx) in detecting anterior region cancer in patients with a history of SBxs.

Methods

Prostate biopsies were performed in 224 patients after multiparametric MRI, among whom 119 patients with prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS version 2) scores of 3 to 5 underwent MRI-TRUS fusion TBxs. Afterward, cancer detection rates (CDRs) and TBx-positive core regions were compared by categorizing patients into those with or without a history of SBxs.

Results

Total CDR was 68.8% (44/64 cases) in the initial biopsy group (Initial-Bx group) and 47.3% (26/55 cases) in the previous-negative-systematic biopsy group (Pre-Neg-SBx group) (P = 0.018). Interestingly, both TBx- and SBx-core positive cases were more common in the Initial-Bx group than in the Pre-Neg-SBx group (Initial-Bx group: 75% [33/44 cases] vs. Pre-Neg-SBx group: 42.3% [11/26 cases], P = 0.006). However, only TBx-core positive cases were more common in the Pre-Neg-SBx group than in the Initial-Bx group (Initial-Bx group: 11.4% [5/44 cases] vs. Pre-Neg-SBx group: 30.8% [8/26 cases], P = 0.043). In addition, the proportion of anterior lesions detected by TBx cores was higher in the Pre-Neg-SBx group than in the Initial-Bx group (Initial-Bx group: 26.3% [10/38 cases] vs. Pre-Neg-SBx group: 52.6% [10/19 cases], P = 0.049).

Conclusion

Using MRI-TRUS fusion TBx in the evaluation of previously negative SBx cases improved the detection rate of anterior lesions, which might have been missed in previous SBxs. Especially in patients with a history of SBxs mpMRI should be performed to screen for anterior lesions.

Comparing the Detection Performance Between Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen PET/CT in Patients With Localized Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) has been promoted as an auxiliary diagnostic tool for prostate biopsy. However, prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) including 68 Ga-PSMA-11, 18 F-DCFPyL, and 18 F-PSMA-1007 applied PET/CT imaging was an emerging diagnostic tool in prostate cancer patients for staging or posttreatment follow-up, even early detecting. Many studies have used PSMA PET for comparison with mpMRI to test the diagnostic ability for early prostate cancer. Unfortunately, these studies have shown conflicting results. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the differences in diagnostic performance between PSMA PET and mpMRI for detecting and T staging localized prostatic tumors.

METHODS

This meta-analysis involved a systematic literature search of PubMed/MEDLINE and Cochrane Library databases. The pooling sensitivity and specificity of PSMA and mpMRI verified by pathological analysis were calculated and used to compare the differences between the 2 imaging tools.

RESULTS

Overall, 39 studies were included (3630 patients in total) from 2016 to 2022 in the current meta-analysis and found that the pooling sensitivity values for localized prostatic tumors and T staging T3a and T3b of PSMA PET were 0.84 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83-0.86), 0.61 (95% CI, 0.39-0.79), and 0.62 (95% CI, 0.46-0.76), respectively, whereas those of mpMRI were found to be 0.84 (95% 0.78-0.89), 0.67 (95% CI, 0.52-0.80), and 0.60 (95% CI, 0.45-0.73), respectively, without significant differences ( P > 0.05). However, in a subgroup analysis of radiotracer, the pooling sensitivity of 18 F-DCFPyL PET was higher than mpMRI (relative risk, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.03-1.17; P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis found that whereas 18 F-DCFPyL PET was superior to mpMRI at detecting localized prostatic tumors, the detection performance of PSMA PET for localized prostatic tumors and T staging was comparable to that of mpMRI.

The Detection Performance of 18 F-Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen-1007 PET/CT in Primary Prostate Cancer : A Systemic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Multiple tools are now available to determine the requirement for a biopsy to diagnose prostate cancer, and PET/CT with radiolabeled prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeting radiotracers has been recommended for detecting primary prostate cancer. Particularly, the radiotracer 18 F-PSMA-1007 was found to be more favorable for primary tumors compared with other PSMA-targeting radiotracers because of its low clearance via the urinary tract and better image resolution. Thus, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to more accurately evaluate the detection performance of 18 F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT in primary prostate cancer patients.

METHODS

An update on the databases of PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library for comprehensive literature search was performed on September 30, 2021. The pooling detection rate was calculated on a per-patient basis. The pooling median of the SUV max was analyzed from the included studies. Furthermore, the positive predictive value of 18 F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT with pathologic lesions was analyzed using the criterion standard.

RESULTS

Twelve studies (540 patients total) were included in the meta-analysis. The overall pooling detection rate of 18 F-PSMA-1007 per patient was 94%, and the pooling median of SUV max located at the intraprostate tumor was 16 (range, 3.7-77.7). The positive predictive value of 18 F-PSMA-1007 per lesion with histopathological validation was 0.90, detecting regional lymph node metastasis was 0.94, and detecting localized prostatic tumors was 0.84.

CONCLUSIONS

In the current meta-analysis, we revealed the excellent performance of 18 F-PSMA-1007 to detect localized prostatic tumor lesions and regional lymph node metastasis. Moreover, the uptake of localized tumors in primary prostate cancer was nearly liver uptake and may be considered a suspicious malignancy if it was equal to or greater than the liver uptake.

Machine Learning-Based Models Enhance the Prediction of Prostate Cancer

Purpose

PSA is currently the most commonly used screening indicator for prostate cancer. However, it has limited specificity for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. We aim to construct machine learning-based models and enhance the prediction of prostate cancer.

Methods

The data of 551 patients who underwent prostate biopsy were retrospectively retrieved and divided into training and test datasets in a 3:1 ratio. We constructed five PCa prediction models with four supervised machine learning algorithms, including tPSA univariate logistic regression (LR), multivariate LR, decision tree (DT), random forest (RF), and support vector machine (SVM). The five prediction models were compared based on model performance metrics, such as the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, calibration curve, and clinical decision curve analysis (DCA).

Results

All five models had good calibration in the training dataset. In the training dataset, the RF, DT, and multivariate LR models showed better discrimination, with AUCs of 1.0, 0.922 and 0.91, respectively, than the tPSA univariate LR and SVM models. In the test dataset, the multivariate LR model exhibited the best discrimination (AUC=0.918). The multivariate LR model and SVM model had better extrapolation and generalizability, with little change in performance between the training and test datasets. Compared with the DCA curves of the tPSA LR model, the other four models exhibited better net clinical benefits.

Conclusion

The results of the current retrospective study suggest that machine learning techniques can predict prostate cancer with significantly better AUC, accuracy, and net clinical benefits.

Development and head-to-head comparison of machine-learning models to identify patients requiring prostate biopsy

Background

Machine learning has many attractive theoretic properties, specifically, the ability to handle non predefined relations. Additionally, studies have validated the clinical utility of mpMRI for the detection and localization of CSPCa (Gleason score ≥ 3 + 4). In this study, we sought to develop and compare machine-learning models incorporating mpMRI parameters with traditional logistic regression analysis for prediction of PCa (Gleason score ≥ 3 + 3) and CSPCa on initial biopsy.

Methods

A total of 688 patients with no prior prostate cancer diagnosis and tPSA ≤ 50 ng/ml, who underwent mpMRI and prostate biopsy were included between 2016 and 2020. We used four supervised machine-learning algorithms in a hypothesis-free manner to build models to predict PCa and CSPCa. The machine-learning models were compared to the logistic regression analysis using AUC, calibration plot, and decision curve analysis.

Results

The artificial neural network (ANN), support vector machine (SVM), and random forest (RF) yielded similar diagnostic accuracy with logistic regression, while classification and regression tree (CART, AUC = 0.834 and 0.867) had significantly lower diagnostic accuracy than logistic regression (AUC = 0.894 and 0.917) in prediction of PCa and CSPCa (all P < 0.05). However, the CART illustrated best calibration for PCa (SSR = 0.027) and CSPCa (SSR = 0.033). The ANN, SVM, RF, and LR for PCa had higher net benefit than CART across the threshold probabilities above 5%, and the five models for CSPCa displayed similar net benefit across the threshold probabilities below 40%. The RF (53% and 57%, respectively) and SVM (52% and 55%, respectively) for PCa and CSPCa spared more unnecessary biopsies than logistic regression (35% and 47%, respectively) at 95% sensitivity for detection of CSPCa.

Conclusion

Machine-learning models (SVM and RF) yielded similar diagnostic accuracy and net benefit, while spared more biopsies at 95% sensitivity for detection of CSPCa, compared with logistic regression. However, no method achieved desired performance. All methods should continue to be explored and used in complementary ways.

Outcome of TRUS Biopsy with Limited Cores in Patients with PSA More Than 50 ng/dL: Can We Reduce the Number of Cores Without Affecting Outcomes?

The aims of our study were to see outcomes of limited core biopsy and compare its outcomes with standard 12-core biopsy in patients with PSA more than 50 ng/dL. We did a retrospective analysis of 149 patients undergoing prostatic biopsy with PSA more than 50 ng/dL between January 2014 and December 2018. Out of 149 patients, 49 underwent limited core (2 to 6 cores) TRUS biopsy with no systemic 12-core biopsy. Other 100 patients underwent standard 12-core biopsy under TRUS guidance. Total of 149 patient's records were analyzed and were included in the final analysis. There was no significant difference in demographics and prostate-specific antigen among the cohorts. All 49 patients in limited core TRUS biopsy had a positive biopsy with no need of re-biopsy. Fourteen out of 100 patients in TRUS biopsy had a negative biopsy. All 14 patients with negative biopsy had an average follow-up of 3.8 years with no conversion to positive biopsy. Patients with PSA more than 50 ng/dL and high clinical suspicion of prostate cancer can undergo limited core biopsy without systemic 12-core biopsy. In patients with no clinical evidence of prostate cancer, 12-core biopsy remains the gold standard for evaluation of prostate cancer.

Detection of clinically significant cancer in the anterior prostate by transperineal biopsy

OBJECTIVE

To determine the incidence of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detected exclusively in the anterior prostate using transperineal prostate biopsy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Histopathology results of all patients who underwent transperineal prostate biopsy between February 2016 and March 2018 at a single institution were assessed for distribution of cancer within the prostate. Patients with cancer found exclusively in the anterior prostate were then compared to those with any cancer found in the posterior or lateral prostate with International Society of Urological Pathology Grade Group 2-5 cancers being considered csPCa.

RESULTS

A total of 508 patients were included. Overall, 12.0% of the cohort had csPCa detected only in anterior biopsies. When stratified by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, 6.6% of men with a PSA level of 4.1-10.0 ng/mL and 8.2% of men with a PSA level of >10.0 ng/mL had csPCa detected in the anterior prostate alone.

CONCLUSION

Transperineal biopsy has the ability to diagnose anteriorly located csPCa that would potentially have been missed by the transrectal approach.

Outcomes of standard 12-core transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in biopsy naive Indian men -single center experience

Introduction:

Prostate cancer is now the second-most common cancer in many parts of India. Despite being the second-largest population in the world, data regarding outcomes of biopsy in Indian men are limited. We report the correlation of biopsy finding with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level in Indian men undergoing biopsy for either elevated PSA and/or abnormal digital rectal examination (DRE) findings.

Materials and Methods:

We retrospectively analyzed data of 853 men who underwent TRUS-guided prostate biopsy in a single institution from January 2014 to October 2019. The biopsy was performed when serum PSA was more than 4.00 ng/mL and/or DRE findings were suspicious for malignancy.

Results:

Overall cancer detection rate was 38.8%. Patients were classified in five groups based on PSA levels, irrespective of DRE findings (0–3.99 ng/mL, 4.00–9.99 ng/mL, 10.00–19.99 ng/mL, 20.00–39.99 ng/mL, and ≥40 ng/mL). Overall prostate cancer detection rates at corresponding at PSA levels were 3/23 (13%), 62/282 (21.9%), 86/226 (38.05%), 66/126 (52.3%), and 165/196 (84.18%), respectively. 331 (38.8%) patients of the total 853 had suspicious DRE, the cancer detection rate in corresponding PSA groups, based on DRE alone was 3/23 (13.04%), 23/42 (54.76%), 39/56 (69.64%), 43/52 (82.69%), and 157/160 (98.13%), respectively.

Conclusion:

The overall prostate cancer detection rate at our center was 38.8%, which is much higher as compared to other Indian data. Our study also emphasizes the role of DRE in Indian men presenting with elevated PSA.

Predictive factors of prostate cancer diagnosis with PSA 4.0-10.0 ng/ml in a multi-ethnic Asian population, Malaysia

OBJECTIVES

To identify the associated factors determining prostate cancer detection using transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy, within a multi-ethnic Malaysian population with prostate specific antigen (PSA) between 4.0 and 10.0 ng/ml.

METHODS

Study subjects included men with initial PSA between 4.0 and 10.0 ng/ml that have undergone 12-core TRUS-guided prostate biopsy between 2009 and 2016. The prostate cancer detection rate was calculated, while potential factors associated with detection were investigated via univariable and multivariable analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 617 men from a multi-ethnic background encompassing Chinese (63.5%), Malay (23.1%) and Indian (13.3%) were studied. The overall cancer detection rate was 14.3% (88/617), which included cancers detected at biopsy 1 (first biopsy), biopsy 2 (second biopsy with previous negative biopsy) and biopsy ≥ 3 (third or more biopsies with prior negative biopsies). Indian men displayed higher detection rate (23.2%) and increased risk of prostate cancer development (OR 1.85, 95% CI 1.03-3.32, p < 0.05), compared to their Malay (9.8%) and Chinese (14.0%) counterparts. Multivariable analysis revealed that ethnicity and PSA density (PSAD) are independent factors associated with overall prostate cancer detection rate. A unit increase of PSAD reflected an increase in PSA after controlling for prostate volume.

CONCLUSION

Prostate cancer detection in Malaysia is comparatively lower. Our study suggests that ethnicity and PSA density should be considered when recommending first or repeat TRUS-guided prostate biopsy for prostate cancer detection in a multi-ethnic Malaysian population.

Transperineal versus transrectal prostate biopsy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Because conventional prostate biopsy has some limitations, optimal variations of prostate biopsy strategies have emerged to improve the diagnosis rate of prostate cancer. We conducted the systematic review to compare the diagnosis rate and complications of transperineal versus transrectal prostate biopsy.

Main body of the abstract

We searched for online publications published through June 27, 2018, in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure databases. The relative risk and 95% confidence interval were utilized to appraise the diagnosis and complication rate. The condensed relative risk of 11 included studies indicated that transperineal prostate biopsy has the same diagnosis accuracy of transrectal prostate biopsy; however, a significantly lower risk of fever and rectal bleeding was reported for transperineal prostate biopsy. No clue of publication bias could be identified.

Short conclusion

To conclude, this review indicated that transperineal and transrectal prostate biopsy have the same diagnosis accuracy, but the transperineal approach has a lower risk of fever and rectal bleeding. More studies are warranted to confirm these findings and discover a more effective diagnosis method for prostate cancer.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12957-019-1573-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Endoscopic Band Ligation to Treat a Massive Hemorrhoidal Hemorrhage Following a Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Prostate Biopsy

Prostate cancer is commonly diagnosed by using a transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided biopsy. Although this procedure is usually well tolerated, rarely it may be complicated by massive rectal bleeding. We report a case of a 77-year-old male who underwent a TRUS biopsy and subsequently developed recurrent episodes of rectal bleeding with syncope and anemia requiring the transfusion of multiple units of blood. A sigmoidoscopy revealed the source of the bleeding: a large hemorrhoid on the anterior wall of the rectum with an overlying ulceration. We successfully applied a band to ligate the hemorrhoid, and the patient's condition improved. To our knowledge, this case represents the first report of a successful band ligation to treat massive bleeding from a hemorrhoid that had been punctured in the course of the TRUS biopsy procedure.

TRUS Biopsy Yield in Indian Population: A Retrospective Analysis

INTRODUCTION

The reported cancer detection rate of Trans-Rectal Ultrasonography (TRUS) biopsies (TRUS biopsy yield) has been around 30 percent in western countries. However it is much lower in Asian countries, including India. Hence a larger proportion of patients in India undergo unnecessary biopsies.

AIMS

To find out the cancer detection rate of TRUS biopsy (TRUS biopsy yield) in contemporary Indian population. Also, to study the positive predictive values at different serum Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA)/PSA Density (PSAD) cut off levels and suspicious Digital Rectal Examination (DRE) findings.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study was carried out in a tertiary care institute. All symptomatic patients who underwent TRUS guided biopsy for indication of raised serum PSA level (>4 ng/ml) or suspicious DRE findings (nodule, irregularity, hard consistency, immobile rectal mucosa) from January 2012 to December 2014 were included. For serum PSA range (4-10) ng/ml, TRUS guided biopsy was done in patients with percent free/total PSA < 25. Statistical analysis used were Chi-square test, Mann-Whitney U-test, Spearman's rank correlation analysis and Receiver-Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve.

RESULTS

Out of the 235 patients included, 60 patients had malignancy (overall cancer detection rate= 25.53%). The cancer detection rate for PSA ranges of (4-10) and (10-20) ng/ml was as low as 5.95% and 13.16% respectively. Patients with malignant disease had significantly smaller prostate gland size than patients with benign disease (53.89 vs 63.06; p-value <0.05). On the other hand, cancer detection rate was 100% for PSA greater than 50ng/ml. The cancer detection rates were only upto 10% for PSA density ranges upto 0.25 ng/ml/cm³. The Area Under the Curve (AUC) for PSA and PSAD was 0.876 and 0.884 respectively. Only one patient (0.43%) had post-biopsy complication (acute bacterial prostatitis) requiring hospital admission.

CONCLUSION

The current serum PSA and PSAD cut offs of 4 ng/ml and 0.15 ng/ml/cm³ need to be raised for Indian population to increase its positive predictive value. Prospective study validation of this finding is lacking.

Development and external multicenter validation of Chinese Prostate Cancer Consortium prostate cancer risk calculator for initial prostate biopsy

OBJECTIVE

Substantial differences exist in the relationship of prostate cancer (PCa) detection rate and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level between Western and Asian populations. Classic Western risk calculators, European Randomized Study for Screening of Prostate Cancer Risk Calculator, and Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Risk Calculator, were shown to be not applicable in Asian populations. We aimed to develop and validate a risk calculator for predicting the probability of PCa and high-grade PCa (defined as Gleason Score sum 7 or higher) at initial prostate biopsy in Chinese men.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Urology outpatients who underwent initial prostate biopsy according to the inclusion criteria were included. The multivariate logistic regression-based Chinese Prostate Cancer Consortium Risk Calculator (CPCC-RC) was constructed with cases from 2 hospitals in Shanghai. Discriminative ability, calibration and decision curve analysis were externally validated in 3 CPCC member hospitals.

RESULTS

Of the 1,835 patients involved, PCa was identified in 338/924 (36.6%) and 294/911 (32.3%) men in the development and validation cohort, respectively. Multivariate logistic regression analyses showed that 5 predictors (age, logPSA, logPV, free PSA ratio, and digital rectal examination) were associated with PCa (Model 1) or high-grade PCa (Model 2), respectively. The area under the curve of Model 1 and Model 2 was 0.801 (95% CI: 0.771-0.831) and 0.826 (95% CI: 0.796-0.857), respectively. Both models illustrated good calibration and substantial improvement in decision curve analyses than any single predictors at all threshold probabilities. Higher predicting accuracy, better calibration, and greater clinical benefit were achieved by CPCC-RC, compared with European Randomized Study for Screening of Prostate Cancer Risk Calculator and Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Risk Calculator in predicting PCa.

CONCLUSIONS

CPCC-RC performed well in discrimination and calibration and decision curve analysis in external validation compared with Western risk calculators. CPCC-RC may aid in decision-making of prostate biopsy in Chinese or in other Asian populations with similar genetic and environmental backgrounds.