Accuracy of Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Reader Experience Matters

Clinical Efficacy of Gadobutrol: Review of Over 25 Years of Use Exceeding 100 Million Administrations

BACKGROUND

Gadobutrol has been administered more than 100 million times worldwide, since February 1998, that is, over the last 25 years. Numerous clinical studies in a broad range of indications document the long-term experience with gadobutrol.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to provide a literature-based overview on gadobutrol's efficacy in 9 approved indications and use in children.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Efficacy results in patients of all age groups including sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive/negative predictive values were identified by a systematic literature search on Embase until December 31, 2022. Nine approved indications were considered: central nervous system (CNS), magnetic resonance angiography (MRA), breast, heart, prostate, kidney, liver, musculoskeletal, whole body, and various indications in children.

RESULTS

Sixty-five publications (10 phase III, 2 phase IV, 53 investigator-initiated studies) reported diagnostic efficacy results obtained from 7806 patients including 271 children, at 369 centers worldwide. Indication-specific sensitivity ranges were 59%-98% (CNS), 53%-100% (MRA), 80%-100% (breast), 64%-90% (heart), 64%-96% (prostate), 71-85 (kidney), 79%-100% (liver), 53%-98% (musculoskeletal), and 78%-100% (children). Indication-specific specificity ranges were 75%-100% (CNS), 64%-99% (MRA), 58%-98% (breast), and 47%-100% (heart).

CONCLUSIONS

The evaluated body of evidence, consisting of 65 studies with 7806 patients, including 271 children and 7535 adults, showed that gadobutrol is an efficacious magnetic resonance imaging contrast agent for all age groups in various approved indications throughout the whole body.

The role of urology and radiology in prostate biopsy: current trends and future perspectives

PURPOSE

Prostate biopsy is central to the accurate histological diagnosis of prostate cancer. In current practice, the biopsy procedure can be performed using a transrectal or transperineal route with different technologies available for targeting of lesions within the prostate. Historically, the biopsy procedure was performed solely by urologists, but with the advent of image-guided techniques, the involvement of radiologists in prostate biopsy has become more common. Herein, we discuss the pros, cons and future considerations regarding their ongoing role.

METHODS

A narrative review regarding the current evidence was completed. PubMed and Cochrane central register of controlled trials were search until January 2024. All study types were of consideration if published after 2000 and an English language translation was available.

RESULTS

There are no published studies that directly compare outcomes of prostate biopsy when performed by a urologist or radiologist. In all published studies regarding the learning curve for prostate biopsy, the procedure was performed by urologists. These studies suggest that the learning curve for prostate biopsy is between 10 and 50 cases to reach proficiency in terms of prostate cancer detection and complications. It is recognised that many urologists are poorly able to accurately interpret multi parametric (mp)-MRI of the prostate. Collaboration between the specialities is of importance with urology offering the advantage of being involved in prior and future care of the patient while radiology has the advantage of being able to expertly interpret preprocedure MRI.

CONCLUSION

There is no evidence to suggest that prostate biopsy should be solely performed by a specific specialty. The most important factor remains knowledge of the relevant anatomy and sufficient volume of cases to develop and maintain skills.

An Update on the Role of mpMRI and 68Ga-PSMA PET Imaging in Primary and Recurrent Prostate Cancer

The objective of this work was to review comparisons of the efficacy of 68Ga-PSMA-11 (prostate-specific membrane antigen) PET/CT and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in the detection of prostate cancer among patients undergoing initial staging prior to radical prostatectomy or experiencing recurrent prostate cancer, based on histopathological data. A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed and Web of Science, and relevant articles were analyzed with various parameters, including year of publication, study design, patient count, age, PSA (prostate-specific antigen) value, Gleason score, standardized uptake value (SUVmax), detection rate, treatment history, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and PI-RADS (prostate imaging reporting and data system) scores. Only studies directly comparing PSMA-PET and mpMRI were considered, while those examining combined accuracy or focusing on either modality alone were excluded. In total, 24 studies comprising 1717 patients were analyzed, with the most common indication for screening being staging, followed by relapse. The findings indicated that 68Ga-PSMA-PET/CT effectively diagnosed prostate cancer in patients with suspected or confirmed disease, and both methods exhibited comparable efficacy in identifying lesion-specific information. However, notable heterogeneity was observed, highlighting the necessity for standardization of imaging and histopathology systems to mitigate inter-study variability. Future research should prioritize evaluating the combined diagnostic performance of both modalities to enhance sensitivity and reduce unnecessary biopsies. Overall, the utilization of PSMA-PET and mpMRI in combination holds substantial potential for significantly advancing the diagnosis and management of prostate cancer.

Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Prostate Cancer Screening at the Age of 45 Years: Results from the First Screening Round of the PROBASE Trial

BACKGROUND

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been suggested as a tool for guiding biopsy recommendations in prostate cancer (PC) screening.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the performance of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) in young men at age 45 yr who participated in a PC screening trial (PROBASE) on the basis of baseline prostate-specific antigen (PSA).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Participants with confirmed PSA ≥3 ng/ml were offered mpMRI followed by MRI/transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy (FBx) with targeted and systematic cores. mpMRI scans from the first screening round for men randomised to an immediate PSA test in PROBASE were evaluated by local readers and then by two reference radiologists (experience >10 000 prostate MRI examinations) blinded to the histopathology. The PROBASE trial is registered as ISRCTN37591328 OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The local and reference Prostate Imaging-Data and Reporting System (PI-RADS) scores were compared, and the sensitivity, negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy were calculated for both readings for different cutoffs (PI-RADS 3 vs 4).

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Of 186 participants, 114 underwent mpMRI and FBx. PC was detected in 47 (41%), of whom 33 (29%) had clinically significant PC (csPC; International Society of Urological Pathology grade group ≥2). Interobserver reliability between local and reference PI-RADS scores was moderate (k = 0.41). At a cutoff of PI-RADS 4, reference reading showed better performance for csPC detection (sensitivity 79%, NPV 91%, accuracy of 85%) than local reading (sensitivity 55%, NPV 80%, accuracy 68%). Reference reading did not miss any PC cases for a cutoff of PI-RADS <3. If PI-RADS ≥4 were to be used as a biopsy cutoff, mpMRI would reduce negative biopsies by 68% and avoid detection of nonsignificant PC in 71% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Prostate MRI in a young screening population is difficult to read. The MRI accuracy of for csPC detection is highly dependent on reader experience, and double reading might be advisable. More data are needed before MRI is included in PC screening for men at age 45 yr.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Measurement of prostate specific antigen (PSA) is an effective screening test for early detection of prostate cancer (PC) and can reduce PC-specific deaths, but it can also lead to unnecessary biopsies and treatment. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) after a positive PSA test has been proposed as a way to reduce the number of biopsies, with biopsy only recommended for men with suspicious MRI findings. Our results indicate that MRI accuracy is moderate for men aged 45 years but can be increased by a second reading of the images by expert radiologists. For broad application of MRI in routine screening, double reading may be advisable.

Management Strategy for Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Category 3 Lesions

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) category 3 lesions present a clinical dilemma due to their uncertain nature, which complicates the development of a definitive management strategy. These lesions have an incidence rate of approximately 22-32%, with clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) accounting for about 10-30%. Therefore, a thorough evaluation is warranted.

RECENT FINDINGS

This review highlights the need for radiology peer review, including the confirmation of dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) compliance, as the initial step. Additional MRI models such as VERDICT or Tofts need to be verified. Current evidence shows that imaging and clinical indicators can be used for risk stratification of PI-RADS 3 lesions. For low-risk lesions, a safety net monitoring approach involving annual repeat MRI can be employed. In contrast, lesions deemed potentially risky based on prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD), 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT, MPS, Proclarix, or AI/machine learning models should undergo biopsy. It is recommended to establish a multidisciplinary team that takes into account factors such as age, PSAD, prostate, and lesion size, as well as previous biopsy pathological findings. Combining expert opinions, clinical-imaging indicators, and emerging methods will contribute to the development of management strategies for PI-RADS 3 lesions.

[Common errors, pitfalls, and management of complications of prostate biopsy : The most common diagnostic and procedural challenges of transrectal fusion prostate biopsy in the initial diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer]

BACKGROUND

Transrectal (TR) prostate biopsy is the gold standard in diagnosis of prostate cancer (PC). It requires a precise and safe technique for sample acquisition.

OBJECTIVE

Several approaches will be discussed to avoid overdiagnosis, false-negative results, and complications of the procedure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed national and European guidelines, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, as well as prospective and retrospective studies to describe current trends in indication and performance of biopsies.

RESULTS

Incorporation of risk calculators and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) into daily routine reduces biopsy rates and results in a more precise diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPC). Combination of random- and MRI-fusion guided biopsy-but also extending the radius of sampling by 10 mm beyond the MRI lesion and a transperineal (TP) sampling approach - lead to a higher tumor-detection rate. Bleeding is the most common complication after prostate biopsy and is usually self-limiting. Postbiopsy infection rates can be reduced through TP biopsy.

CONCLUSION

TR MRI-fusion guided biopsy is a widely acknowledged tool in primary diagnostics of csPC. Higher detection rates and safety can be achieved through a TP sampling approach.

Canadian Association of Radiologists Prostate MRI White Paper

Prostate cancer is the most common malignancy and the third most common cause of death in Canadian men. In light of evolving diagnostic pathways for prostate cancer and the increased use of MRI, which now includes its use in men prior to biopsy, the Canadian Association of Radiologists established a Prostate MRI Working Group to produce a white paper to provide recommendations on establishing and maintaining a Prostate MRI Programme in the context of the Canadian healthcare system. The recommendations, which are based on available scientific evidence and/or expert consensus, are intended to maintain quality in image acquisition, interpretation, reporting and targeted biopsy to ensure optimal patient care. The paper covers technique, reporting, quality assurance and targeted biopsy considerations and includes appendices detailing suggested reporting templates, quality assessment tools and sample image acquisition protocols relevant to the Canadian healthcare context.

Comparison of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging with Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Positron-Emission Tomography Imaging in Primary Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Multiparametric magnetic-resonance imaging (mpMRI) has proven utility in diagnosing primary prostate cancer. However, the diagnostic potential of prostate-specific membrane antigen positron-emission tomography (PSMA PET) has yet to be established. This study aims to systematically review the current literature comparing the diagnostic performance of mpMRI and PSMA PET imaging to diagnose primary prostate cancer. A systematic literature search was performed up to December 2021. Quality analyses were conducted using the QUADAS-2 tool. The reference standard was whole-mount prostatectomy or prostate biopsy. Statistical analysis involved the pooling of the reported diagnostic performances of each modality, and differences in per-patient and per-lesion analysis were compared using a Fisher’s exact test. Ten articles were included in the meta-analysis. At a per-patient level, the pooled values of sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) for mpMRI and PSMA PET/CT were 0.87 (95% CI: 0.83−0.91) vs. 0.93 (95% CI: 0.90−0.96, p < 0.01); 0.47 (95% CI: 0.23−0.71) vs. 0.54 (95% CI: 0.23−0.84, p > 0.05); and 0.84 vs. 0.91, respectively. At a per-lesion level, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC value for mpMRI and PSMA PET/CT were lower, at 0.63 (95% CI: 0.52−0.74) vs. 0.79 (95% CI: 0.62−0.92, p < 0.001); 0.88 (95% CI: 0.81−0.95) vs. 0.71 (95% CI: 0.47−0.90, p < 0.05); and 0.83 vs. 0.84, respectively. High heterogeneity was observed between studies. PSMA PET/CT may better confirm the presence of prostate cancer than mpMRI. However, both modalities appear comparable in determining the localisation of the lesions.

A Combined Radiomics and Machine Learning Approach to Distinguish Clinically Significant Prostate Lesions on a Publicly Available MRI Dataset

Although prostate cancer is one of the most common causes of mortality and morbidity in advancing-age males, early diagnosis improves prognosis and modifies the therapy of choice. The aim of this study was the evaluation of a combined radiomics and machine learning approach on a publicly available dataset in order to distinguish a clinically significant from a clinically non-significant prostate lesion. A total of 299 prostate lesions were included in the analysis. A univariate statistical analysis was performed to prove the goodness of the 60 extracted radiomic features in distinguishing prostate lesions. Then, a 10-fold cross-validation was used to train and test some models and the evaluation metrics were calculated; finally, a hold-out was performed and a wrapper feature selection was applied. The employed algorithms were Naïve bayes, K nearest neighbour and some tree-based ones. The tree-based algorithms achieved the highest evaluation metrics, with accuracies over 80%, and area-under-the-curve receiver-operating characteristics below 0.80. Combined machine learning algorithms and radiomics based on clinical, routine, multiparametric, magnetic-resonance imaging were demonstrated to be a useful tool in prostate cancer stratification.