Prebiopsy Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis in Biopsy-naive Men with Suspected Prostate Cancer Based on Elevated Prostate-specific Antigen Values: Results from a Randomized Prospective Blinded Controlled Trial

Japanese clinical practice guidelines for prostate cancer 2023

This fourth edition of the Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Prostate Cancer 2023 is compiled. It was revised under the leadership of the Japanese Urological Association, with members selected from multiple academic societies and related organizations (Japan Radiological Society, Japanese Society for Radiation Oncology, the Department of EBM and guidelines, Japan Council for Quality Health Care (Minds), Japanese Society of Pathology, and the patient group (NPO Prostate Cancer Patients Association)), in accordance with the Minds Manual for Guideline Development (2020 ver. 3.0). The most important feature of this revision is the adoption of systematic reviews (SRs) in determining recommendations for 14 clinical questions (CQs). Qualitative SRs for these questions were conducted, and the final recommendations were made based on the results through the votes of 24 members of the guideline development group. Five algorithms based on these results were also created. Contents not covered by the SRs, which are considered textbook material, have been described in the general statement. In the general statement, a literature search for 14 areas was conducted; then, based on the general statement and CQs of the Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Prostate Cancer 2016, the findings revealed after the 2016 guidelines were mainly described. This article provides an overview of these guidelines.

Role of Systematic Biopsy in the Era of Targeted Biopsy: A Review

Prostate cancer (PCa) is a major public health issue, as the second most common cancer and the fifth leading cause of cancer-related deaths among men. Many PCa cases are indolent and pose minimal risk, making active surveillance a suitable management approach. However, clinically significant prostate carcinoma (csPCa) can lead to serious health issues, including progression, metastasis, and death. Differentiating between insignificant prostate cancer (inPCa) and csPCa is crucial for determining appropriate treatment. Diagnosis of PCa primarily involves trans-perineal and transrectal systematic biopsies. Systematic transrectal prostate biopsy, which typically collects 10-12 tissue samples, is a standard method, but it can miss csPCa and is associated with some complications. Recent advancements, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsies, have been suggested to improve risk stratification and reduce overtreatment of inPCa and undertreatment of csPCa, thereby enhancing patient quality of life and treatment outcomes. Guided biopsies are increasingly recommended for their ability to better detect high-risk cancers while reducing identification of low-risk cases. MRI-targeted biopsies, especially when used as an initial biopsy in biopsy-naïve patients and those under active surveillance, have become more common. Utilization of MRI-TB alone can decrease septic complications; however, the combining of targeted biopsies with perilesional sampling is recommended for optimal detection of csPCa. Future advancements in imaging and biopsy techniques, including AI-augmented lesion detection and robotic-assisted sampling, promise to further improve the accuracy and effectiveness of PCa detection.

A Scaled Proteomic Discovery Study for Prostate Cancer Diagnostic Markers Using ProteographTM and Trapped Ion Mobility Mass Spectrometry

There is a significant unmet need for clinical reflex tests that increase the specificity of prostate-specific antigen blood testing, the longstanding but imperfect tool for prostate cancer diagnosis. Towards this endpoint, we present the results from a discovery study that identifies new prostate-specific antigen reflex markers in a large-scale patient serum cohort using differentiating technologies for deep proteomic interrogation. We detect known prostate cancer blood markers as well as novel candidates. Through bioinformatic pathway enrichment and network analysis, we reveal associations of differentially abundant proteins with cytoskeletal, metabolic, and ribosomal activities, all of which have been previously associated with prostate cancer progression. Additionally, optimized machine learning classifier analysis reveals proteomic signatures capable of detecting the disease prior to biopsy, performing on par with an accepted clinical risk calculator benchmark.

The Added Value of MRI-Based Targeted Biopsy in Biopsy-Naïve Patients: A Propensity-Score Matched Comparison

BACKGROUND

Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (mpMRI)-based targeted biopsy has shown to be beneficial in detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer (csPCa) and avoiding diagnosis of Non-csPCa (ncsPCa); however, its role in the treatment of biopsy-naïve patients is still under discussion.

METHODS

After identifying predictors for the diagnosis of csPCa via Multivariate Logistic Regression Analysis (MLRA), a propensity-score (1:1 nearest neighbor) matched comparison was performed between a Systematic-Only Biopsy (SOB) cohort and a mpMRI-based Combined (systematic + targeted) Biopsy (CB) cohort from two tertiary urologic centers (SOB: Department of Urology, University General Hospital of Heraklion, University of Crete, School of Medicine, Heraklion, Crete, Greece; CB: LKH Hall in Tirol, Austria). Only biopsy-naïve patients were included in the study. The study period for the included patients was from February 2018 to July 2023 for the SOB group and from July 2017 to June 2023 for the CB group. The primary outcome was the diagnosis of csPCa (≥ISUP 2); secondary outcomes were overall cancer detection, the added value of targeted biopsy in csPCa detection, and the reduction in ncsPCa diagnosis with CB compared to SOB. To estimate the Average Treatment effect of the Treated groups (ATT), cluster-robust standard errors were used to perform g-computation in the matched sample. p-values < 0.05 with a two-sided 95% confidence interval were considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Matching achieved well-balanced groups (each n = 140 for CB and SOB). In the CB group, 65/140 (46.4%) patients were diagnosed with csPCa compared to 44/140 (31.4%) in the SOB group (RR 1.48, 95%-CI: 1.09-2.0, p = 0.01). In the CB group, 4.3% (6/140) and 1.4% (2/140) of csPCa cases were detected with targeted-only and systematic-only biopsy cores, respectively. In the CB group, 22/140 (15.7%) patients were diagnosed with ncsPCa compared to 33/140 (23.6%) in the SOB group (RR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.41-1.08, p = 0.1). When comparing SOB to CB (ATT), the marginal OR was 0.56 (95% CI: 0.38-0.82, p = 0.003) for the diagnosis of csPCa and 0.75 (95% CI: 0.47-1.05, p = 0.085) for the diagnosis of overall cancer (≥ISUP 1).

CONCLUSION

The CB approach was superior to the SOB approach in detecting csPCa, while no additional detection of ncsPCa was seen. Our results support the application of mpMRI for biopsy-naïve patients with suspicions of prostate cancer.

Clinical and economic impact of the introduction of pre-biopsy MRI-based assessment on a large prostate cancer centre diagnostic population and activity: 10 years on

INTRODUCTION

Prostate mpMRI was introduced in 2011 as a secondary test and subsequently integrated into a prostate cancer (PCa) diagnostics unit representing a population of approximately 550,000 people. The following represents an audit of its step-wise introduction between 2 index years, 2009 and 2018, focusing on the activity, patient outcomes and economic benefits. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The 2 distinct years were selected for relying on a transrectal ultrasound biopsy pathway in 2009 to an mpMRI-based pathway in 2018. All referrals were retrospectively screened and compared for age, PSA levels, DRE findings, biopsy history, biopsy and mpMRI allocation data. Cost analysis was determined using local unit procedure costs.

RESULTS

Patients referred included 648 in 2009 and 714 in 2018. mpMRI seldomly informed decision to biopsy in 2009 (9.8%), while in 2018 it was performed in the pre-biopsy setting in 87.9% cases and enabled biopsy avoidance in 137 patients. In 2018, there was a 31.8% decrease in the number of biopsies in patients without previous PCa diagnosis, coupled with an increase in diagnostic rates of csPCa, from 28.6 to 49.0% (p < 0.0001) and a reduction in negative biopsy rates from 52.3 to 33.8%. mpMRI had a positive impact on the system with reduced patient morbidity and post-procedural complications. The estimated overall cost savings amount to approximately £75,000/year for PCa diagnosis and £11,000/year due to reduced complications.

CONCLUSION

Our evaluation shows the mpMRI-based pathway has improved early detection of csPCa and reduction of repeat biopsies, resulting in significant financial benefits for the local healthcare system.

'Stealth' Prostate Tumors

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to determine the false negative rates of prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and MRI-ultrasound (US) 12-core systematic prostate biopsy (PBx) by analyzing radical prostatectomy specimens.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 3600 prostate cancer (PCa) patients who underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Based on comparison of lobe-specific data on final pathology with preoperative biopsy and imaging data, the study population was subdivided into group I-contralateral (CL) benign PBx (n = 983), group II-CL and/or bilateral (BL) non-suspicious mpMRI (n = 2223) and group III-CL benign PBx + non-suspicious mpMRI (n = 688). This population was studied for the presence of PCa, clinically significant PCa (csPCa), extracapsular extension (ECE) (pathological stage pT3), positive frozen section and final positive surgical margin (PSM) in the CL lobe. Descriptive statistics were performed.

RESULTS

In subgroups I, II and III, PCa was respectively detected in 21.5%, 37.7% and 19.5% of cases, and csPCa in 11.3%, 16.3% and 10.3% of cases. CL pT3 disease was seen in 4.5%, 4% and 5.5%, and CL surgical margins and/or frozen section analysis were positive in 6%, 7% and 5% of cases in subgroups I, II and III, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

There are still significant rates of false negatives in the standard care diagnostics of PCa. Further strategies are required to improve the accuracy of diagnosis and determination of tumor location.

Re-evaluating the diagnostic efficacy of PSA as a referral test to detect clinically significant prostate cancer in contemporary MRI-based image-guided biopsy pathways

Introduction

Modern image-guided biopsy pathways at diagnostic centres have greatly refined the investigations of men referred with suspected prostate cancer. However, the referral criteria from primary care are still based on historical prostate-specific antigen (PSA) cut-offs and age-referenced thresholds. Here, we tested whether better contemporary pathways and biopsy methods had improved the predictive utility value of PSA referral thresholds.

Methods

PSA referral thresholds, age-referenced ranges and PSA density (PSAd) were assessed for positive predictive value (PPV) in detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa - histological ⩾ Grade Group 2). Data were analysed from men referred to three diagnostics centres who used multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-guided prostate biopsies for disease characterisation. Findings were validated in a separate multicentre cohort. Results: Data from 2767 men were included in this study. The median age, PSA and PSAd were 66.4 years, 7.3 ng/mL and 0.1 ng/mL2, respectively. Biopsy detected csPCa was found in 38.7%. The overall area under the curve (AUC) for PSA was 0.68 which is similar to historical performance. A PSA threshold of ⩾ 3 ng/mL had a PPV of 40.3%, but this was age dependent (PPV: 24.8%, 32.7% and 56.8% in men 50-59 years, 60-69 years and ⩾ 70 years, respectively). Different PSA cut-offs and age-reference ranges failed to demonstrate better performance. PSAd demonstrated improved AUC (0.78 vs 0.68, p < 0.0001) and improved PPV compared to PSA. A PSAd of ⩾ 0.10 had a PPV of 48.2% and similar negative predictive value (NPV) to PSA ⩾ 3 ng/mL and out-performed PSA age-reference ranges. This improved performance was recapitulated in a separate multi-centre cohort (n = 541).

Conclusion

The introduction of MRI-based image-guided biopsy pathways does not appear to have altered PSA diagnostic test characteristics to positively detect csPCa. We find no added value to PSA age-referenced ranges, while PSAd offers better PPV and the potential for a single clinically useful threshold (⩾0.10) for all age groups.

Level of evidence

IV.

The Role of CT Imaging in Characterization of Small Renal Masses

Small renal masses (SRM) are increasingly detected incidentally during imaging. They vary widely in histology and aggressiveness, and include benign renal tumors and renal cell carcinomas that can be either indolent or aggressive. Imaging plays a key role in the characterization of these small renal masses. While a confident diagnosis can be made in many cases, some renal masses are indeterminate at imaging and can present as diagnostic dilemmas for both the radiologists and the referring clinicians. This review focuses on CT characterization of small renal masses, perhaps helping us understand small renal masses. The following aspects were considered for the review: (a) assessing the presence of fat, (b) assessing the enhancement, (c) differentiating renal tumor subtype, and (d) identifying valuable CT signs.

Emerging Strategies of Engineering and Tracking Dendritic Cells for Cancer Immunotherapy

Dendritic cells (DCs), a kind of specialized immune cells, play key roles in antitumor immune response and promotion of innate and adaptive immune responses. Recently, many strategies have been developed to utilize DCs in cancer therapy, such as delivering antigens and adjuvants to DCs and using scaffold to recruit and activate DCs. Here we outline how different DC subsets influence antitumor immunity, summarize the FDA-approved vaccines and cancer vaccines under clinical trials, discuss the strategies for engineering DCs and noninvasive tracking of DCs to improve antitumor immunotherapy, and reveal the potential of artificial neural networks for the design of DC based vaccines.

Advantageous Detection of Significant Prostate Cancer Using a Low-Field, Office-Based MRI System

Background Methods to diagnose prostate cancer (PCa), a highly prevalent disease, remain inadequate in terms of accuracy, cost, and logistical constraints for both patients and providers. Early and accurate detection of PCa is crucial to patient management, most notably in increasing quality of life and lowering cost burdens when considering the associated treatment and follow-up pathways. This article aims to discuss the impact to care pathways for nine patients whose PCa was detected by a novel Food and Drug Administration-cleared low-field magnetic resonance imager (MRI) for transperineal PCa interventions but was missed by standard-of-care systematic transrectal ultrasound (TRUS). Methodology From December 2020 to March 2022, 41 men with elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, positive digital rectal exam findings, and Prostate Imaging Reporting & Data System scores of three or higher were enrolled. Patients first underwent targeted transperineal biopsy guided by a low-field MRI (MRIgTBx) and co-registered with T2-weighted images from a pre-procedural 3-T MRI with suspicious lesions annotated by a board-certified radiologist. Following this procedure, patients underwent standard-of-care systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUSgSBx). The entire procedure was supervised by a board-certified urologist. Results Of the 41 enrolled patients, both MRIgTBx and TRUSgSBx biopsies detected PCa in 20 patients. MRIgTBx detected PCa in an additional nine patients that were missed by TRUSgSBx. Five of the nine patients elected to pursue immediate treatment. Patients with suspected PCa and a negative biopsy return to the clinic every three to six months for PSA tests, with additional biopsies performed every year for cases with increasing PSA levels. Conclusions Early detection of PCa in nine of the 41 patients using a novel MRIgTBx method has allowed for change management resulting in an improved quality of life and cost saving for those who opted for immediate treatment. Early intervention in cases where the standard-of-care TRUSgSBx treatment was falsely negative ultimately led to a decrease in additional screening procedures, biopsies, associated tests, and an improved pathway for patient management.

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.

Assessing the impact of MRI based diagnostics on pre-treatment disease classification and prognostic model performance in men diagnosed with new prostate cancer from an unscreened population

Introduction

Pre-treatment risk and prognostic groups are the cornerstone for deciding management in non-metastatic prostate cancer. All however, were developed in the pre-MRI era. Here we compared categorisation of cancers using either only clinical parameters or with MRI enhanced information in men referred for suspected prostate cancer from an unscreened population.

Patient and methods

Data from men referred from primary care to our diagnostic service and with both clinical (digital rectal examination [DRE] and systematic biopsies) and MRI enhanced attributes (MRI stage and combined systematic/targeted biopsies) were used for this study. Clinical vs MRI data were contrasted for clinico-pathological and risk group re-distribution using the European Association of Urology (EAU), American Urological Association (AUA) and UK National Institute for Health Care Excellence (NICE) Cambridge Prognostic Group (CPG) models. Differences were retrofitted to a population cohort with long-term prostate cancer mortality (PCM) outcomes to simulate impact on model performance. We further contrasted individualised overall survival (OS) predictions using the Predict Prostate algorithm.

Results

Data from 370 men were included (median age 66y). Pre-biopsy MRI stage reassignments occurred in 7.8% (versus DRE). Image-guided biopsies increased Grade Group 2 and ≥ Grade Group 3 assignments in 2.7% and 2.9% respectively. The main change in risk groups was more high-risk cancers (6.2% increase in the EAU and AUA system, 4.3% increase in CPG4 and 1.9% CPG5). When extrapolated to a historical population-based cohort (n = 10,139) the redistribution resulted in generally lower concordance indices for PCM. The 5-tier NICE-CPG system outperformed the 4-tier AUA and 3-tier EAU models (C Index 0.70 versus 0.65 and 0.64). Using an individualised prognostic model, changes in predicted OS were small (median difference 1% and 2% at 10- and 15-years’ respectively). Similarly, estimated treatment survival benefit changes were minimal (1% at both 10- and 15-years’ time frame).

Conclusion

MRI guided diagnostics does change pre-treatment risk groups assignments but the overall prognostic impact appears modest in men referred from unscreened populations. Particularly, when using more granular tiers or individualised prognostic models. Existing risk and prognostic models can continue to be used to counsel men about treatment option until long term survival outcomes are available.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09955-w.

A prospective multi-center randomized comparative trial evaluating outcomes of transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided 12-core systematic biopsy, mpMRI-targeted 12-core biopsy, and artificial intelligence ultrasound of prostate (AIUSP) 6-core targeted biopsy for prostate cancer diagnosis

BACKGROUND

Artificial intelligence ultrasound of prostate (AIUSP)-targeted biopsy has been used for prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis. The objective of this prospective multi-center head-to-head clinical randomized comparative trail (RCT) is to compare PCa detection rate in the TRUS-guided 12-core standard systematic biopsy (TRUS-SB) group and cognitive fused mpMRI-guided 12-core biopsy (mpMRI) group against AIUSP group.

METHODS

Four hundred patients were randomized to three arms and underwent biopsies by TRUS-SB (n = 133), mpMRI (n = 134), and AIUSP (n = 133) between January 2015 and December 2017. In TRUS-SB group, a standard 12-core systematic biopsy was performed. In mpMRI group, mpMRI-suspicious lesions (PI-RADS 3-5) were targeted by 2-core biopsy followed by a 10-core systematic biopsy. Otherwise, 12-core systematic biopsy was performed. In AIUSP group, a 6-core targeted biopsy was performed. The primary endpoint was PCa detection rate.

RESULTS

AIUSP detected the highest rate of PCa (66/133, 49.6%) compared to TRUS-SB (46/133, 34.6%, p = 0.036) and mpMRI (48/134, 35.8%, p = 0.052). Compared to TRUS-SB (35/133, 26.3%) and mpMRI (31/134, 23.1%) groups, clinically significant PCa (csPCa) detection rate was 32.3% (43/133) in AIUSP group. Overall biopsy core positive rate in the TRUS-SB group (11.0%, 176/1598) and in the mpMRI group (12.7%, 204/1608) was significantly lower than that in the AIUSP group (22.7%, 181/798, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

AIUSP detected the highest rate of overall and significant PCa compared to TRUS-SB and mpMRI, and could be used as an alternative to systematic biopsy in the future.

REGISTRATION

This trial was registered in ISRCTN (ISRCTN18033113).

Paradigm Shift in Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: Pre-Biopsy Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Targeted Biopsy

With regard to the indolent clinical characteristics of prostate cancer (PCa), the more selective detection of clinically significant PCa (CSC) has been emphasized in its diagnosis and management. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has advanced technically, and recent international cooperation has provided a standardized imaging and reporting system for prostate MRI. Accordingly, prostate MRI has recently been investigated and utilized as a triage tool before biopsy to guide tissue sampling to increase the detection rate of CSC beyond the staging tool for patients in whom PCa was already confirmed on conventional systematic biopsy. Radiologists must understand the current paradigm shift for better PCa diagnosis and management. This article reviewed the recent literature, demonstrating the diagnostic value of pre-biopsy prostate MRI with targeted biopsy and discussed unsolved issues regarding the paradigm shift in the diagnosis of PCa.

Evidence-based guideline recommendations on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer: A Cancer Care Ontario updated clinical practice guideline

INTRODUCTION

This clinical practice guideline is based on a systematic review to assess the use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) for biopsy-naive men and men with a prior negative transrectal ultrasound-guided systematic biopsy (TRUS-SB) at elevated risk.

METHODS

The methods of the clinical practice guideline included searches to September of 2020 of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Internal and external reviews were conducted.

RESULTS

The recommendations are:Recommendation 1: For biopsy-naive patients at elevated risk of csPCa, mpMRI is recommended prior to biopsy in patients who are candidates for curative management with suspected clinically localized prostate cancer.- If the mpMRI is positive, mpMRI-targeted biopsy (TB) and TRUS-SB should be performed together to maximize detection of csPCa.- If the mpMRI is negative, consider forgoing any biopsy after discussion of the risks and benefits with the patient as part of shared decision-making and ongoing followup.Recommendation 2: In patients who had a prior negative TRUS-SB and demonstrate a high risk of having csPCa in whom curative management is being considered:- mpMRI should be performed.- If the mpMRI is positive, targeted biopsy should be performed. Concomitant TRUS-SB can be considered depending on the patient's risk profile and time since prior TRUS-SB biopsy.- If the mpMRI is negative, consider forgoing a TRUS-SB only after discussion of the risks and benefits with the patient as part of shared decision-making and ongoing followup.Recommendation 3: mpMRI should be performed and interpreted in compliance with the current Prostate Imaging Reporting & Data System (PI-RADS) guidelines.

Usefulness of MRI targeted prostate biopsy for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer in men with low prostate-specific antigen levels

We aimed to evaluate the detection rates of prostate cancer (PCa) and clinically significant PCa (csPCa) using magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy (MRI-TBx) in men with low prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels (2.5–4.0 ng/mL). Clinicopathologic data of 5502 men with PSA levels of 2.5–10.0 ng/mL who underwent transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS-Bx) or MRI-TBx were reviewed. Participants were divided into four groups: LP-T [low PSA (2.5–4.0 ng/mL) and TRUS-Bx, n = 2018], LP-M (low PSA and MRI-TBx, n = 186), HP-T [high PSA (4.0–10.0 ng/mL) and TRUS-Bx, n = 2953], and HP-M (high PSA and MRI-TBx, n = 345). The detection rates of PCa and csPCa between groups were compared, and association of biopsy modality with detection of PCa and csPCa in men with low PSA levels were analyzed. The detection rates of PCa (20.0% vs. 38.2%; P < 0.001) and csPCa (11.5% vs. 32.3%; P < 0.001) were higher in the LP-M group than in the LP-T group. Conversely, there were no significant differences in the detection rates of PCa (38.2% vs. 43.2%; P = 0.263) and csPCa (32.3% vs. 39.4%; P = 0.103) between the LP-M and HP-M groups. Multivariate analyses revealed that using MRI-TBx could predict the detection of csPCa (odds ratio 2.872; 95% confidence interval 1.996‒4.132; P < 0.001) in men with low PSA levels. In summary, performing MRI-TBx in men with low PSA levels significantly improved the detection rates of PCa and csPCa as much as that in men with high PSA levels.

Efficacy of additional periprostatic apex nerve block on pain in each of 12 transrectal prostate core biopsies: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

We identified pain variation according to prostate biopsy sites and compared differences in pain relief according to the site of periprostatic nerve block (PNB).

METHODS

This retrospective study collected data from 312 patients who underwent transrectal prostate biopsies between January 2019 and August 2020. Patients were stratified into two groups according to the site of local anesthesia (base vs. base and apex PNB), with each block achieved with 2.5 cm3 of 2% lidocaine. Pain scores were assessed using the visual analog scale at the following time points: probe insertion, PNB at base, PNB at apex, each of the 12 core biopsy sites, and 15 min after biopsy. The results were analyzed using a linear mixed model.

RESULTS

The average pain scores were significantly higher in the base-only PNB group than were those in the base and apex PNB group (3.88 vs 2.82, p < 0.001). In the base-only PNB group, the pain scores increased from base to apex (p < 0.001), and the pain at each site also gradually increased as the biopsy proceeded (p < 0.001). In contrast, in the base and apex PNB group, there was minor change in pain scores throughout the procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

The pain scores varied at each site during the prostate biopsy. The provision of a base and apex PNB provided greater pain relief than does base-only PNB during prostate biopsy.

The accuracy of prostate cancer diagnosis in biopsy-naive patients using combined magnetic resonance imaging and transrectal ultrasound fusion-targeted prostate biopsy

Background

This study aimed to estimate whether multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) fusion biopsy (FUS-TB) increases the detection rates of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) compared with TRUS-guided systematic biopsy (TRUS-GB).

Methods

This retrospective study focused on patients who underwent mpMRI before prostate biopsy (PB) with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADS v2) scores ≥3 and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level between 2.5 and 20 ng/mL. Before FUS-TB, the biopsy needle position was checked virtually using three-dimensional mapping. After confirming the position of the target within the prostate, biopsy needle was inserted and PB was performed. Suspicious lesions were generally targeted with 2 to 4 cores. Subsequently, 10–12 cores were biopsied for TRUS-GB. The primary endpoint was the PCa detection rate (PCDR) for patients with PCa who underwent combined FUS-TB and TRUS-GB.

Results

According to PI-RADS v2, 76.7% of the patients with PI-RADS v2 score ≥3 were diagnosed with PCa. The PCDRs in patients with PI-RADS v2 score of 4 or 5 were significantly higher than those in patients with PI-RADS v2 score of 3 (3 vs. 4, P<0.001; 3 vs. 5, P<0.001; 4 vs. 5, P=0.073). According to PCDR, the detection rates of PCa and csPCa in the FUS-TB were significantly higher than that in the TRUS-GB.

Conclusions

Following detection of suspicious tumor lesions on mpMRI, FUS-TB use detects a higher number of PCa cases compared with TRUS-GB.

Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: an Updated Systematic Review

There has been growing utilisation of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MPMRI) as a non-invasive tool to diagnose and localise clinically significant prostate cancer (CSPCa). This updated systematic review examines the use of MPMRI in patients with an elevated risk of CSPCa who have had a prior negative transrectal ultrasound systematic biopsy (TRUS-SB) and who were biopsy naïve. MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for existing systematic reviews published up to September 2020. The literature search of the electronic databases combined disease-specific terms (prostate cancer, prostate carcinoma, etc.) and treatment-specific terms (magnetic resonance, etc.). Studies were included if they were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing MPMRI to template transperineal mapping biopsy (TPMB) or to TRUS-SB. Thirty-six RCTs were eligible. For biopsy-naïve men, accuracy of diagnosis of CSPCa showed sensitivities from 87 to 96% and specificities ranging from 29 to 45%. Meta-analyses for CSPCa showed increased detection favouring MPMRI-targeted biopsy over TRUS-SB by 3% (95% confidence interval 0-7%, P = 0.03) and decreased detection of clinically insignificant prostate cancer (CISPCa) favouring MPMRI by 8% (95% confidence interval -11 to 5%, P < 0.00001). Accuracy of MPMRI for men with prior negative biopsy showed sensitivities of 78-100% and specificities of 30-100%. Meta-analyses comparing MPMRI to TRUS-SB showed increased detection of 5% (95% confidence interval 3-7%, P < 0.0001) with a reduction of CISPCa detection of 7% (95% confidence interval 4-9%, P < 0.00001). The growing acceptance of MPMRI utilisation internationally and the recent publication of several RCTs regarding MPMRI in reducing CISPCa detection rates, particularly in biopsy-naïve men, without loss of sensitivity for CSPCa necessitates the synthesis of updated evidence examining MPMRI in the diagnosis of CSPCa.

MRI-Targeted Prostate Biopsy Techniques: AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review

Prostate cancer is the second most common malignancy in men worldwide. Systematic transrectal prostate biopsy is commonly used to obtain tissue to establish the diagnosis. However, in recent years, MRI-targeted biopsy (based on an MRI examination performed prior to consideration of biopsy) has been shown to detect more clinically significant cancer and less clinically insignificant cancer compared to systematic biopsy. This approach of performing MRI prior to biopsy has become, or is becoming, a standard of practice in centers throughout the world. This growing use of an MRI-directed pathway is leading to performance of a larger volume of MRI-targeted prostate biopsies. The three common MRI-targeted biopsy techniques are cognitive biopsy, MRI-ultrasound software fusion biopsy, and MRI in-bore guided biopsy. These techniques for using MRI information at the time of biopsy can be performed via a transrectal or transperineal approach. This narrative review presents the three MRI-targeted biopsy techniques along with their advantages and shortcomings. Comparisons among the techniques are summarized based on the available evidence. Studies to date have provided heterogeneous results, and the preferred technique remains debated.

Quantitative ultrasound shear wave elastography (USWE)-measured tissue stiffness correlates with PIRADS scoring of MRI and Gleason score on whole-mount histopathology of prostate cancer: implications for ultrasound image-guided targeting approach

OBJECTIVE

To correlate quantitative tissue stiffness measurements obtained by transrectal ultrasound shear wave elastography (USWE) with PI-RADS scoring of multiparametric magnetic imaging resonance (mpMRI) using Gleason scores of radical prostatectomy as a reference standard.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

196 men with localised prostate cancer were prospectively recruited into the study and had quantitative prostate tissue stiffness measurements in kilopascals (kPa) using transrectal USWE prior to radical prostatectomy. PI-RADS scores of mpMRI were also obtained in all the men. Imaging and histopathology of radical prostatectomy specimen were oriented to each other using patient specific customised 3D moulds to guide histopathology grossing of radical prostatectomy specimens. All included patients had confirmed PCa on TRUS-guided biopsies, had both USWE and mpMRI imaging data, and underwent radical prostatectomy. Chi-square test with 95% confidence interval was used to assess the difference between Gleason score (GS) of radical prostatectomy and PI-RADS classification, as well as GS of radical prostatectomy and stiffness (in Kpa) using USWE. The correlation coefficient (r) was calculated in order to investigate relation between PI-RADS classification and tissue stiffness in kPa.

RESULTS

There was a statistically significant correlation between USWE-measured tissue stiffness and GS (χ2 (2, N = 196) = 23.577, p < 0.001). Also, there was a statistically significant correlation between Gleason score and PI-RADS score (χ2 (2, N = 196) = 12.838, p = 0.002). High PIRADS on MRI and high stiffness on USWE (> 100 kPa) detected more than 80% and 90% high risk prostate cancer disease. However, a weak correlation coefficient of 0.231 was observed between PI-RADS score and level of tissue stiffness measured in kPa.

CONCLUSION

Quantitative USWE and mpMRI using PI-RADS classification provide a good degree of prediction for Gleason score of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). Stiffer lesions on ultrasound showed a weak correlation with PI-RADS scoring system. USWE could be used to target suspected prostate cancer.

The value of MRI in the detection of prostate cancer in a peripheral center

INTRODUCTION

This study evaluated the value of pre-biopsy MRI and target biopsy in detection of significant prostate cancer in a peripheral center.

METHODS

A retrospective study included all patients of whom a MRI of the prostate was performed before biopsy, initial and repeated biopsy, between June 2016 and May 2017. Patients underwent transrectal ultrasound guided 8-12 cores prostate biopsy and cognitive fusion target biopsy was performed if a suspicious lesion was seen on MRI. The prostate cancer detection was compared between the MRI cognitive target biopsy and standard random biopsy.

RESULTS

In a total of 265 patients a MRI was performed of whom 115 underwent prostate biopsy, 96 patients underwent MRI before initial biopsies and 19 patients had previous negative biopsies. In the initial biopsy group 83 MRI's were abnormal and only 7 (8.4%) target biopsies had an additional value in detecting or upstaging prostate cancer. Prostate cancer was found in 4 of 13 (30.8%) normal MRI's. In the prior negative biopsy group, 4 of 18 abnormal MRI's had an additional value in upstaging or detecting prostate cancer.

CONCLUSION

In this study the pre-biopsy MRI had a limited additional value compared to standard biopsy in detecting or upstaging prostate cancer.

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate: Lights and shadows

Prostate cancer is the second most commonly diagnosed cancer in man. Since the first MRI was performed, enormous progress has been made in diagnosis, treatment, and follow up of PCa, mainly due to multiparametric prostatic MRI (mpMRI). Although mpMRI has become the best imaging tool for identifying PCa, some limitations still exist. Prostate imaging with mpMRI is, to date, the best way to locate suspicious lesions to trigger prostate biopsy, plan active surveillance, or definitive treatment. In case of relapse, mpMRI can help detect local disease and provide specific management. It is well known that there is a subset of patients in whom mpMRI fails to depict csPCa. These missed significant cancers demand great attention. Prostate mpMRI quality depends on several factors related to equipment (including equipment vendor, magnet field and gradient strength, coil set used, software and hardware levels, sequence parameter choices), patient (medications, body habitus, motion, metal implants, rectal gas), and most importantly the radiologic interpretation of images (learning curve effects, subjectivity of observations, interobserver variations, and reporting styles). Inter-reader variability represents a huge current limitation of this method. Therefore, mpMRI remains the best imaging tool available to detect PCa, guiding diagnosis, treatment, and follow up while inter-reader variability represents the best limitation. Radiomics can help identifying imaging biomarkers to help radiologist in detecting significant PCa, reducing examination times, and costs.

A Prospective Study on the Efficacy of Cognitive Targeted Transrectal Ultrasound Prostate Biopsy in Diagnosing Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer

Purpose

We present our study, done to identify the diagnostic yield of cognitive targeted biopsy using mpMRI data, to diagnose clinically significant prostate cancers, in a cohort of biopsy and treatment naive men.

Materials and Methods

This is a prospective, single institutional study, done from September 2018 to March 2020 in 75 biopsy naive men. The patients with 3, 4 and 5 PIRADS scores underwent mpMRI cognitive target biopsy (mpMRI CTB) followed by standard biopsy (SB) in the same setting by two different urologists. Diagnostic yield of biopsy cores, complications, and stage migration of Gleason’s grades was analyzed.

Results

Out of 75 patients, 34.6% had abnormal digital rectal examination (DRE), and the median serum PSA was 10.6 (4.5–20) ng/mL. Total MRI suspicious lesions were 163. Out of 1263 SB cores, 371 cores were positive for cancer (29.35%), and out of 326 mpMRI CTB cores, 120 were positive for cancer (36.8%) (P<0.0001). Histopathological examination (HPE) revealed 88%, 92%, and 100% clinically significant cancers in PIRADS 3, 4 and 5 lesions. SB and mpMRI CTB in combination have better cancer detection yield than either of the modality when used alone (P-<0.0001). Clavien-Dindo grade 1 and grade 4a complication were seen in 47 (62.6%) and three (4%) patients.

Conclusion

In biopsy-naive men with suspected prostate cancer and equivocal DRE, the addition of pre-biopsy mpMRI detects greater numbers of people with clinically significant prostate cancer when compared with SB alone. Combining SB with mpMRI CTB has a superior diagnosing ability when compared with either of the biopsy modalities when used alone.

The clinical impact of strict criteria for active surveillance of prostate cancer in Korean population: Results from a prospective cohort

Purpose

To evaluate the clinical impact of strict selection criteria for active surveillance (AS) of prostate cancer in a Korean population.

Materials and Methods

A single-center, prospectively collected AS cohort from December 2016 to February 2019 was used. Following pre-determined criteria, patients were categorized into “strict AS” and “non-strict AS” groups. Clinicopathological progression-free survival (PFS) and treatment-free survival (TFS) of the two groups were compared using the Kaplan–Meier curve and log-rank test. Age-adjusted hazard ratios for clinicopathological progression was calculated using Cox proportional regression analysis.

Results

Of 54 eligible patients, 25 and 29 were assigned to “strict AS” and “non-strict AS,” respectively. Clinicopathological progression and definitive treatment rates were 24.0% (6 of 25 patients) vs. 51.7% (15 of 29 patients) and 32.0% (8 of 25 patients) vs. 62.1% (18 of 29 patients) in “strict AS” and “non-strict AS” groups. Progress to high-risk cancer (pathologic T3 or surgical Gleason Grade 2 over) in radical prostatectomy was higher in “non-strict AS” than “strict AS”. PFS (mean 34.6±2.9 mo vs. 22.6±2.7 mo; p=0.025) and TFS (mean 31.8±3.2 mo vs. 19.6±2.4 mo; p=0.018) favor the “strict AS” group than “non-strict AS” group. Age-adjusted hazard ratio for clinicopathological progression of strict criteria was 0.36 (95% confidence interval, 0.14–0.94; p=0.04).

Conclusions

PFS and TFS were better in the “strict AS” group than in the “non-strict AS” group. This finding should be informed to relevant patients during decision making and considered in Korean guidelines.

MRI-targeted prostate biopsy: the next step forward!

Aim

For decades, the gold standard technique for diagnosing prostate cancer was the 10 to 12 core systematic transrectal or transperineal biopsy, under ultrasound guidance. Over the past years, an increased rate of false negative results and detection of clinically insignificant prostate cancer has been noted, resulting into overdiagnosis and overtreatment. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the changes in diagnosis and management of prostate cancer brought by MRI-targeted prostate biopsy.

Methods

A critical review of literature was carried out using the Medline database through a PubMed search, 37 studies meeting the inclusion criteria: prospective studies published in the past 8 years with at least 100 patients per study, which used multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging as guidance for targeted biopsies.

Results

In-Bore MRI targeted biopsy and Fusion targeted biopsy outperform standard systematic biopsy both in terms of overall and clinically significant prostate cancer detection, and ensure a lower detection rate of insignificant prostate cancer, with fewer cores needed. In-Bore MRI targeted biopsy performs better than Fusion biopsy especially in cases of apical lesions.

Conclusion

Targeted biopsy is an emerging and developing technique which offers the needed improvements in diagnosing clinically significant prostate cancer and lowers the incidence of insignificant ones, providing a more accurate selection of the patients for active surveillance and focal therapies.

Clinical Utility of Negative Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer and Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer

Background

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly used to diagnose prostate cancer (PCa). It is not yet established whether all men with negative MRI (Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System version 2 score <3) should undergo prostate biopsy or not.

Objective

To develop and validate a prediction model that uses clinical parameters to reduce unnecessary prostate biopsies by predicting PCa and clinically significant PCa (csPCa) for men with negative MRI findings who are at risk of harboring PCa.

Design setting and participants

This was a retrospective analysis of 200 men with negative MRI at risk of PCa who underwent prostate biopsy (2014-2020) with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) >4 ng/ml, 4Kscore of >7%, PSA density ≥0.15 ng/ml/cm³, and/or suspicious digital rectal examination. The validation cohort included 182 men from another centre (University of Miami) with negative MRI who underwent systematic prostate biopsy with the same criteria.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

csPCa was defined as Gleason grade group ≥2 on biopsy. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed using coefficients of logit function for predicting PCa and csPCa. Nomogram validation was performed by calculating the area under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) and comparing nomogram-predicted probabilities with actual rates of PCa and csPCa.

Results and limitations

Of 200 men in the development cohort, 18% showed PCa and 8% showed csPCa on biopsy. Of 182 men in the validation cohort, 21% showed PCa and 6% showed csPCa on biopsy. PSA density, 4Kscore, and family history of PCa were significant predictors for PCa and csPCa. The AUC was 0.80 and 0.87 for prediction of PCa and csPCa, respectively. There was agreement between predicted and actual rates of PCa in the validation cohort. Using the prediction model at threshold of 40, 47% of benign biopsies and 15% of indolent PCa cases diagnosed could be avoided, while missing 10% of csPCa cases. The small sample size and number of events are limitations of the study.

Conclusions

Our prediction model can reduce the number of prostate biopsies among men with negative MRI without compromising the detection of csPCa.

Patient summary

We developed a tool for selection of men with negative MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) findings for prostate cancer who should undergo prostate biopsy. This risk prediction tool safely reduces the number of men who need to undergo the procedure.

Diagnostic performance of MRI/TRUS fusion-guided biopsies vs. systematic prostate biopsies in biopsy-naïve, previous negative biopsy patients and men undergoing active surveillance

BACKGROUND

We aimed to assess the detection rate of overall PCa and csPCa, and the clinical impact of MRI/TRUS fusion targeted biopsy (FUSION-TB) compared to TRUS guided systematic biopsy (SB) in patients with different biopsy settings.

METHODS

Three hundred and five patients were submitted to FUSION-TB, divided into three groups: biopsy naïve patients, previous negative biopsies and patients under active surveillance (AS). All patients had a single suspicious index lesion at mpMRI. Within these groups, we enrolled men underwent both to FUSION-TB and SB in the same session. Overall detection rate of PCa and csPCa for the two biopsy methods were compared separately between the three groups of patients.

RESULTS

No differences were observed between the three groups concerning clinical and radiological characteristics. We found no differences in terms of overall PCa detection (66% vs. 63.8%, P=0.617) and csPCa detection (56.4% vs. 51.1%; P=0.225) concerning biopsy naïve patients. In patients previously submitted to a negative biopsy, FUSION-TB showed higher detection rate of csPCa compared to SB alone (41,3% vs. 27% respectively, P=0.038). In patients under AS, no differences were observed between FUSION-TB and SB in terms of overall PCa (50% vs. 73.1%) and csPCa (30.8% vs. 26.9%, respectively; P=0.705) detection.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that in men with previously negative biopsy, FUSION-TB showed significantly higher diagnostic performance for clinically significant PCa as compared to SB. Combination of FUSION-TB and SB should be recommended in AS population to offer higher chance of csPCa diagnosis.

The Utility of Combined Target and Systematic Prostate Biopsies in the Diagnosis of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Using Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 Based on Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging

This study aimed to determine the predictive value of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADS v2) based on biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) with combined target biopsy (TBx) and systematic biopsy (SBx) in patients with suspicion of having clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). In this retrospective study, we reviewed the clinical and pathological records of 184 consecutive patients who underwent bpMRI before prostate biopsy. We focused on patients with PI-RADS v2 scores ≥ 3. MRI was performed using a 3-Tesla clinical scanner with a 32-channel phased-array receiver coil. PI-RADS v2 was used to describe bpMRI findings based on T2-weighted imaging and diffusion-weighted imaging scores. The primary endpoint was the diagnostic accuracy rate of PI-RADS v2 based on bpMRI for patients with prostate cancer (PCa) who underwent combined TBx and SBx. A total of 104 patients were enrolled in this study. Combined TBx and SBx was significantly superior to either method alone for PCa detection in patients with suspicious lesions according to PI-RADS v2. TBx and SBx detected concordant csPCa in only 24.1% of the patients. In addition, the rate of increase in the Gleason score was similar between SBx (41.5%) and TBx (34.1%). The diagnostic accuracy of bpMRI is comparable to that of standard multiparametric MRI for the detection of csPCa. Moreover, combined TBx and SBx may be optimal for the accurate determination of csPCa diagnosis, the International Society of Urological Pathology grade, and risk classification.

Comparing confirmatory biopsy outcomes between MRI-targeted biopsy and standard systematic biopsy among men being enrolled in prostate cancer active surveillance

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the ability of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsy combined with systematic biopsy (MRI-biopsy) to reduce negative biopsies and detect clinically significant prostate cancer compared to systematic biopsy (SB) alone in the confirmatory biopsy setting using matched cohorts.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were identified from an active surveillance database who had a previously positive transrectal ultrasonography-guided SB followed by a confirmatory biopsy at a single institution between 2006 and 2019. Patients were divided into two cohorts based on confirmatory biopsy technique: SB alone or MRI-biopsy (which included MRI-targeted and systematic biopsies). Cohorts were then matched on age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, number of positive cores on initial biopsy and initial biopsy Gleason grade group (GG). Logistic regression was performed to identify associations with confirmatory biopsy upgrading.

RESULTS

After matching, 514 patients were identified (257 per cohort). PSA, prostate volume and PSA density prior to initial biopsy, in addition to total number of initial biopsy positive cores and GG, were similar between the matched cohorts. After confirmatory biopsy, 118/257 patients (45.9%) in the MRI-biopsy cohort were upgraded compared to 46/257 patients (17.9%) in the SB cohort (P < 0.001). The rate of negative confirmatory biopsy was 32/257 (12.5%) compared to 97/257 (37.7%) in the MRI-biopsy and SB cohorts, respectively (P < 0.001). Confirmatory MRI-biopsy was associated with greater odds of confirmatory biopsy upgrade from GG 1 to ≥GG 2 compared to SB alone (odds ratio 3.62, 95% confidence interval 1.97-6.63; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The addition of MRI-targeted biopsies to SB in the confirmatory biopsy setting among men with previously detected prostate cancer resulted in fewer negative confirmatory biopsies and detection of more clinically significant prostate cancer compared to SB alone.

Is Additional Systematic Biopsy Necessary in All Initial Prostate Biopsy Patients With Abnormal MRI?

Purpose

To determine whether additional systematic biopsy is necessary in all biopsy naïve patients with MRI visible lesions by taking PI-RADS score and prostate volume into consideration.

Materials and Methods

Patients who underwent combined systematic biopsy (SB) and cognitive MRI-targeted biopsy (TB) in our hospital between May 2018 and June 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. The detection rate of clinical significant prostate cancer (csPCa), biopsy grade group (GG) concordance, and disease upgrading rate on radical prostatectomy were compared between SB and TB and further stratified by PI-RADS v2.0 category and prostate volume.

Results

A total of 234 patients were analyzed in this study. TB alone detected more csPCa and less clinically insignificant prostate cancer (cisPCa) than SB alone in the whole cohort (57.3 vs 53%, P = 0.041; 3.8 vs 7.7%, P = 0.049 respectively). The additional SB indicated only a marginal increase of csPCa detection but a remarkable increase of cisPCa detection compared with targeted biopsy (59.4 vs 57.3%, P = 0.064; 3.8 vs 7.7%, P = 0.012). As stratified by PI-RADS category, the difference of csPCa detection rate between TB and SB was not significant either in PI-RADS 5 subgroup (83.8 vs 76.3%, P = 0.07) or in PI-RADS 3–4 subgroup (43.5 vs 40.9%, P = 1.0). Additional SB decreased the rate of disease upgrading on radical prostatectomy (RP) than TB alone in PI-RADS 3–4 subgroup (14.5 vs 25.5%, P = 0.031) other than PI-RADS 5 subgroup (6 vs 6%, P = 1.0). When stratified by prostate volume (PV), TB alone detected more csPCa than SB in small prostate (PV < 30 ml) group (81.0 vs 71.0%, P = 0.021) but not in large prostate (PV ≥ 30 ml) group (44.0 vs 42.7%, P = 0.754). The additional SB did not significantly decrease the rate of disease upgrading on RP than TB alone in either small or large prostate (6.4 vs 8.5%, P = 1.0; 13.8 vs 22.4%, P = 0.063).

Conclusion

The combination biopsy method was no superior than targeted biopsy alone in PI-RADS 5 or in small volume prostate subgroup.

Assessment of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-fusion prostate biopsy with concurrent standard systematic ultrasound-guided biopsy among men requiring repeat biopsy

INTRODUCTION

The role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-fusion biopsy (FB) remains unclear in men with prior negative prostate biopsies. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of FB with concurrent systematic biopsy (SB) in patients requiring repeat prostate biopsies.

METHODS

Patients with previous negative prostate biopsies requiring repeat biopsies were included. Those without suspicious lesions (≥Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System [PI-RADS] 3) on MRI were excluded. All patients underwent FB followed by SB. The primary outcome was the sensitivity for clinically significant prostate cancer (Gleason score ≥7). The secondary objective was identification of potential predictive factors of biopsy performance.

RESULTS

A total of 53 patients were included; 41 (77%) patients were found to have clinically significant prostate cancer. FB had a higher detection rate of significant cancer compared to SB (85% vs. 76%, respectively, p=0.20) and lower diagnosis of indolent (Gleason score 3+3=6) cancer (10% vs. 27%, respectively, p=0.05). FB alone missed six (15%) clinically significant cancers, compared to 10 (24%) with SB. SB performance was significantly impaired in patients with anterior lesions and high prostate volumes (p<0.05). There was high degree of pathological discordance between the two approaches, with concordance seen in only 34% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with prior negative biopsies and ongoing suspicion for prostate cancer, a combined approach of FB with SB is needed for optimal detection and risk classification of clinically significant disease. Anterior tumors and large prostates were significant predictors of poor SB performance and an MRI-fusion alone approach in these settings could be considered.

mpMRI-targeted biopsy versus systematic biopsy for clinically significant prostate cancer diagnosis: a systematic review and metaanalysis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We aimed to compare the accuracy of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) diagnosis by magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy (MRI-TB) versus systematic biopsy (SB) in men suspected of having prostate cancer (PCa).

RECENT FINDINGS

In biopsy-naïve patients, MRI-TB was more accurate to identify csPCa than SB. However, when comparing specifically MRI-TB versus transperineal (SB), we did not find any difference. Furthermore, in a repeat biopsy scenario, MRI-TB found more csPCa than SB as well. Finally, postanalysis comparing combined biopsy (SB plus MRI-TB) suggests that the later alone may play a role in both scenarios for identifying csPCa.

SUMMARY

MRI-TB found more csPCa than SB in patients with suspected PCa in both scenarios, naïve and repeat biopsies, but more studies comparing those methods are warranted before any recommendation on this topic.

Arguments against using an abbreviated or biparametric prostate MRI protocol

Currently there is a lot of interest in the use of a "biparametric" or "abbreviated" prostate MR protocol, which usually refers to removal of the dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI, in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. In this article we describe the benefits of DCE as part of the PI-RADS lexicon, with particular reference to its role in PI-RADS V2 category 3 peripheral zone lesions. We also discuss the benefits of triplanar T2-weighted images, and finally discuss how a mpMRI protocol is of benefit in prostate cancer staging, in evaluating for local disease recurrence, and as a biomarker for neoadjuvant therapy response.

The application of a targeted periprostatic nerve block in transperineal template-guided prostate biopsies

Background

Our study aims to evaluate the anesthetic efficacy of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound (mpMRI/TRUS) fusion-guided targeted periprostatic nerve block (PNB) for transperineal template-guided prostate biopsy (TTPB).

Methods

The patients who underwent mpMRI/TRUS fusion-guided prostate biopsy from May 2018 to March 2019 were randomized into two groups using a random number table. The intervention group (n=47) and the control group (n=45) received targeted PNB and traditional PNB, respectively. Visual analog scale (VAS) and visual numeric scale (VNS) scores were used to assess the patients' pain and quantify their satisfaction.

Results

The total detection rate for prostate cancer was 45.7%, with a comparable positive rate between the intervention group (42.6%) and the control group (48.9%), which meant there was no significant difference between the groups (P=0.542). Patient age, prostate-specific antigen, prostate volume, suspicious lesions on mpMRI, number of cores, operation time, and biopsy time were comparable between the groups. The VAS scores during biopsy were significantly lower in the intervention group than in the control group [2 (1 to 3) vs. 2 (1 to 4), P=0.019]. Conversely, the VNS scores during biopsy were higher in the intervention group [3 (2 to 4) vs. 3 (2 to 3), P=0.015]. There were no significant differences in the pain scores or the satisfaction scores at 30 min after the procedure between the two groups. There were no significant differences between the groups for complications, such as hematuria, urinary retention, infection, hemospermia, and vasovagal reaction (P>0.05).

Conclusions

Targeted PNB significantly relieved the pain and did not increase the incidence of complications for patients when compared with traditional PNB.

MRI-targeted biopsy versus standard transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

For men with a suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa), the transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS-Bx) was recommended. Multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) could be more useful to more accurately selected patients who are with a clinical suspicion of PCa and eligible for biopsy, and avoid a biopsy if the result was negative. In the present study, we compared the MRI-targeted biopsy (MRI-TBx) with TRUS-Bx.

METHODS

We searched the following online database: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library, and the search was updated to March 2019.

RESULTS

Finally, a total of 8 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comprising 2593 patients were enrolled in the final analysis. MRI-TBx and TRUS-Bx did not significantly differ in overall PCa (RR = 1.30; 95% CI 0.98-1.72; P = 0.067), clinically significant PCa (RR = 1.35; 95% CI 0.98-1.86; P = 0.065), and clinically insignificant PCa (RR = 0.76; 95% CI 0.40-1.46; P = 0.416). While in patients with initial biopsy, MRI-TBx had a significantly higher detection rate of overall PCa (RR = 1.40; 95% CI 1.01-1.94; P = 0.045).

CONCLUSION

In the present study, we found that MRI-TBx potentially benefits the detection of overall and clinically significant PCa compared with TRUS-Bx in patients with a suspicion of PCa. Furthermore, in patients with initial biopsy, MRI-TBx had a significantly higher detection rate of overall PCa and a potentially higher detection rate of clinically significant PCa. While for patients with prior negative biopsy, we did not detect significant differences in overall and clinically significant PCa between two groups. More large and multicenter RCTs are further required.

MRI-targeted or systematic random biopsies for prostate cancer diagnosis in biopsy naïve patients: follow-up of a PRECISION trial-like retrospective cohort

BACKGROUND

To test clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) rates during follow-up in biopsy naïve patients that underwent two different diagnostic pathways: (1) SB GROUP (n = 354): systematic random biopsies (SB) vs. (2) TB GROUP (n = 264): multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and only targeted biopsies (TB) of PI-RADS ≥ 3 lesions. Patients with PI-RADS ≤ 2 score avoided prostate biopsies.

METHODS

Retrospective single centre study of 618 biopsy naive patients (2015-2018). Two different definitions of csPCa were used: (1) csPCa ISUP GG ≥ 2 (ISUP grade group [GG] ≥ 2) and (2) csPCa ISUP GG ≥ 3. Kaplan-Meier plots and univariable Cox regression models tested rates over time of csPCa ISUP GG ≥ 2 and caPCa ISUP GG ≥ 3 in SB GROUP vs. TB GROUP.

RESULTS

At initial biopsy, TB achieved higher rates of csPCa ISUP GG ≥ 2 (35.3 vs. 18.9%; p < 0.001) and csPCa ISUP GG ≥ 3 (12.6 vs. 6.2%; p = 0.04), relative to SB. After a median time follow-up of 36 months, the rates of csPCa ISUP GG ≥ 2 (6.1 vs. 4.4%; p = 0.6) and csPCa ISUP GG ≥ 3 (3.3 vs. 1.1%; p = 0.2) were similar in SB GROUP vs. TB GROUP. Moreover, in TB GROUP patients that avoided prostate biopsies because of negative baseline mpMRI (n = 145), only 4.1% exhibited csPCa ISUP GG ≥ 2 during follow-up. Moreover, none of these patients (PI-RADS ≤ 2) had csPCa ISUP GG ≥ 3.

CONCLUSIONS

In biopsy naïve setting, a diagnostic pathway including pre-biopsy mpMRI and TB of only PCa suspicious lesions is not associated with higher rates of csPCa during follow-up, relative to a diagnostic pathway of SB. Moreover, patients with negative baseline mpMRI could safely avoid prostate biopsies and could be followed with repeated PSA testing, since only a small proportion of them would harbor csPCa.

Moving away from systematic biopsies: image-guided prostate biopsy (in-bore biopsy, cognitive fusion biopsy, MRUS fusion biopsy) -literature review

OBJECTIVE

To compare the detection rate of clinically significant cancer (CSCa) by magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy (MRI-TB) with that by standard systematic biopsy (SB) and to evaluate the role of MRI-TB as a replacement from SB in men at clinical risk of prostate cancer.

METHODS

The non-systematic literature was searched for peer-reviewed English-language articles using PubMed, including the prospective paired studies, where the index test was MRI-TB and the comparator text was SB. Also the randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are included if one arm was MRI-TB and another arm was SB.

RESULTS

Eighteen prospective studies used both MRI-TB and TRUS-SB, and eight RCT received one of the tests for prostate cancer detection. In most prospective trials to compare MRI-TB vs. SB, there was no significant difference in any cancer detection rate; however, MRI-TB detected more men with CSCa and fewer men with CISCa than SB.

CONCLUSION

MRI-TB is superior to SB in detection of CSCa. Since some significant cancer was detected by SB only, a combination of SB with the TB technique would avoid the underdiagnosis of CSCa.

Zeolites for theranostic applications

Theranostic platforms bring about a revolution in disease management. During recent years, theranostic nanoparticles have been utilized for imaging and therapy simultaneously. Zeolites, because of their porous structure and tunable properties, which can be modified with various materials, can be used as a delivery agent. The porous structure of a zeolite enables it to be loaded and unloaded with various molecules such as therapeutic agents, photosensitizers, biological macromolecules, MRI contrast agents, radiopharmaceuticals, near-infrared (NIR) fluorophores, and microbubbles. Furthermore, theranostic zeolite nanocarriers can be further modified with targeting ligands, which is highly interesting for targeted cancer therapies.

Role of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Predicting Pathologic Outcomes in Prostate Cancer

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and the introduction of standardized protocols for its interpretation have had a significant impact on the field of prostate cancer (PC). Multiple randomized controlled trials have shown that the sensitivity for detection of clinically significant PC is increased when mpMRI results are the basis for indication of a prostate biopsy. The added value with regards to sensitivity has been strongest for patients with persistent suspicion for PC after a prior negative biopsy. Although enhanced sensitivity of mpMRI is convincing, studies that have compared mpMRI with prostatectomy specimens prepared by whole-mount section analysis have shown a significant number of lesions that were not detected by mpMRI. In this context, the importance of an additional systematic biopsy (SB) is still being debated. While SB in combination with targeted biopsies leads to an increased detection rate, most of the tumors detected by SB only are considered clinically insignificant. Currently, multiple risk calculation tools are being developed that include not only clinical parameters but mpMRI results in addition to clinical parameters in order to improve risk stratification for PC, such as the Partin tables. In summary, mpMRI of the prostate has become a standard procedure recommended by multiple important guidelines for the diagnostic work-up of patients with suspicion of PC.

Multicentre clinical evaluation of the safety and performance of a simple transperineal access system for prostate biopsies for suspected prostate cancer: The CAMbridge PROstate Biopsy DevicE (CamPROBE) study

Objectives:

To report the prospective multicentre clinical evaluation of a first-in-man disposable device, Cambridge Prostate Biopsy Device, to undertake local anaesthetic outpatient transperineal prostate biopsies.

Material and methods:

Disposable single-use Cambridge Prostate Biopsy devices were manufactured based on a previous prototype. The lead site developed a user training course and disseminated the method to other sites. The Cambridge Prostate Biopsy Device (CamPROBE) was offered as an alternative to transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy to men due for a biopsy as part of their clinical management. Data on safety (infections and device performance), clinical utility, patient reported experience, biopsy quality and cancer detection were collected. Procedure time and local anaesthetic use was recorded in the lead site. The study was funded by a United Kingdom National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) i4i product development award.

Results:

A total of 40 patients were recruited (median age 69 y) across six sites; five sites were new to the procedure. Overall, 19/40 were first prostate biopsies and 21/40 repeat procedures. Both image-targeted and systematic biopsy cores taken. There were no infections, device deficiencies or safety issues reported. The procedure was well tolerated with excellent patient-reported perception and low pain scores (median of 3, scale 0–10). Histopathology quality was good and the overall cancer diagnosis rate (first diagnostic procedures) was 68% (13/19) and for significant cancers (⩾ histological Grade Group 2), 47% (9/19). In the lead centre (most experienced), median procedure time was 25 minutes, and median local anaesthetic use 11 ml (n=17).

Conclusions:

Data from this device evaluation study demonstrate that the United Kingdom-developed Cambridge Prostate Biopsy Device/method for transperineal biopsies is safe, transferable and maintains high diagnostic yields. The procedure is well tolerated by patients, suited to the local anaesthetic outpatient setting and could directly replace transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy.

Level of evidence:

Level III

Effect of information on prostate biopsy history on biopsy outcomes in the era of MRI-targeted biopsies

Purpose

To describe the predictive value of information on previous benign biopsy for the outcome of MRI-targeted biopsies.

Methods

An exploratory analysis was conducted using data from a prospective, multicenter, paired diagnostic study of 532 men undergoing diagnostics for prostate cancer during 2016–2017. All men underwent 1.5 T MRI; systematic prostate biopsies; and MRI-targeted biopsies to MRI lesions with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2, PI-RADS ≥ 3. The main outcome was numbers of detected prostate cancer characterized by grade group (GG) where GG ≥ 2 defined clinically significant cancer (csPCa).

Results

Men with previous biopsies had significantly more often negative MRI (26% vs. 17%, p < 0.05) compared to men without previous biopsies. Men with previous biopsies showed higher rates of benign biopsies (41% vs. 26%, p < 0.05) and lower rates of GG2 (17% vs. 30%, p < 0.05) and GG ≥ 3 (5% vs. 10%, p < 0.05) cancer. Biopsy-naïve men had higher proportions of highly suspicious MRI lesions (PIRADS 5; p < 0.05) and a higher proportion of significant cancer in those lesions (p = 0.05). In multivariate regression analysis, a previous benign prostate biopsy was associated with less than half the odds of csPCa (OR 0.38; 95% CI 0.20–0.71).

Conclusion

In this large prospective multicenter trial, we showed that men with a previous prostate biopsy had higher proportions of MRIs without lesions and lower proportion of highly suspicious lesions than biopsy-naïve men. Further, biopsy-naïve men showed higher detection of clinically significant cancer when using MRI-targeted biopsies. Also, in the era of MRI-targeted biopsy strategies, biopsy history should be carefully considered in biopsy decisions.

Trial registration

NCT02788825 (ClinicalTrials.gov). Date of registration June 2, 2016.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00345-020-03277-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Targeted Biopsy With Reduced Number of Cores: Optimal Sampling Scheme in Patients Undergoing Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Prostate Biopsy

The 3 Tesla (3T) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) combined ultrasound (TRUS) targeted biopsy plus 12-core systematic biopsy (TBx + 12-SBx) was considered a reliable method for prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis. To find another optimal sampling scheme with fewer cores and the same efficiency as TBx + 12-SBx for prostate biopsy, 113 patients who underwent five different hypothetical sampling schemes were analyzed and compared with TBx + 12-SBx. The detection rates of targeted biopsy plus 6-core lateral systematic biopsy (TBx + lateral 6-SBx) for PCa and clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) (99.1% and 96.4%, respectively) were higher than other schemes, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of TBx + lateral 6-SBx for PCa and csPCa (0.991 and 0.990, respectively) were also significantly higher than other sampling schemes except TBx plus 6-core ipsilateral systematic biopsy (TBx + ipsilateral 6-SBx). Additionally, TBx + lateral 6-SBx had the lowest missed diagnosis rate. Thus, the TBx + lateral 6-SBx may be the optimal scheme for patients undergoing MRI/TRUS fusion prostate biopsy.

What Type of Prostate Cancer Is Systematically Overlooked by Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging? An Analysis from the PROMIS Cohort

BACKGROUND

All risk stratification strategies in cancer overlook a spectrum of disease. The Prostate MR Imaging Study (PROMIS) provides a unique opportunity to explore cancers that are overlooked by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI).

OBJECTIVE

To summarise attributes of cancers that are systematically overlooked by mpMRI.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

PROMIS tested performance of mpMRI and transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)-guided biopsy, using 5 mm template mapping (TPM) biopsy as the reference standard.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Outcomes were overall and maximum Gleason scores, maximum cancer core length (MCCL), and prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD). Cancer attributes were compared between cancers that were overlooked and those that were detected.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Of men with cancer, 7% (17/230; 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.4-12%) had significant disease overlooked by mpMRI according to definition 1 (Gleason ≥ 4 + 3 of any length or MCCL ≥ 6 mm of any grade) and 13% (44/331; 95% CI 9.8-17%) according to definition 2 (Gleason ≥ 3 + 4 of any length or MCCL ≥ 4 mm). In comparison, TRUS-guided biopsy overlooked 52% (119/230; 95% CI 45-58%) of significant disease by definition 1 and 40% (132/331; 95% CI 35-45%) by definition 2. Prostate cancers undetected by mpMRI had significantly lower overall and maximum Gleason scores (p = 0.0007; p < 0.0001) and shorter MCCL (median difference: 3 mm [5 vs 8 mm], p < 0.0001; 95% CI 1-3) than cancers that were detected. No tumours with overall Gleason score > 3 + 4 (Gleason Grade Groups 3-5; 95% CI 0-6.4%) or maximum Gleason score > 4 + 3 (Gleason Grade Groups 4-5; 95% CI 0-8.0%) on TPM biopsy were undetected by mpMRI. Application of a PSAD threshold of 0.15 reduced the proportion of men with undetected cancer to 5% (12/230; 95% CI 2.7-8.9%) for definition 1 and 9% (30/331; 95% CI 6.2-13%) for definition 2. Application of a PSAD threshold of 0.10 reduced the proportion of men with undetected disease to 3% (6/230; 95% CI 1.0-5.6%) for definition 1 cancer and to 3% (11/331; 95% CI 1.7-5.9%) for definition 2 cancer. Limitations were post hoc analysis and uncertain significance of undetected lesions.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, a small proportion of cancers are overlooked by mpMRI, with estimates ranging from 4.4% (lower boundary of 95% CI for definition 1) to 17% (upper boundary of 95% CI for definition 2). Prostate cancers undetected by mpMRI are of lower grade and shorter length than cancers that are detected.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Prostate cancers that are undetected by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are smaller and less aggressive than those that are detected, and none of the most aggressive cancers are overlooked by MRI.

Diagnostic Value of Transrectal Shear Wave Elastography for Prostate Cancer Detection in Peripheral Zone: Comparison with Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Objective: To assess the diagnostic value of transrectal shear wave elastography (SWE) for detecting prostate cancer (PCa) in peripheral zone and compare it with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Materials and Methods: Two hundred twenty-one patients suspected of PCa were enrolled, in which 172 patients of them underwent both SWE and MRI. Elastic value was measured in the area prepared for systematic biopsy and suspicious lesion detected on B-mode or SWE, histopathological result was compared for each biopsy. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy were derived by obtaining optimal threshold from receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. The correlation between the stiffness of PCa and Gleason scores, prognostic grades, and percentage of cancer in biopsy were evaluated by Spearman rank correlation. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to determine predictors for diagnosing PCa. The diagnostic capacity of MRI and SWE for detecting PCa and clinically significant PCa in the peripheral zone were assessed by comparing area under curve of ROC curve. Results: A value of 42 kPa was used as the cutoff for differentiating benign from malignant prostatic tissue; the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy were 78.97%, 90.67%, 71.30%, 93.66% and 88.03%, respectively. Rank correlation analysis revealed that the stiffness of PCa had a correlation with Gleason score, prognostic grade, and percentage of cancer in biopsy. On multivariate analysis, the age, free prostate-specific antigen (PSA), PSA density, SWE, and MRI were independent predictors for diagnosing PCa. There was no statistical difference for diagnosing PCa between SWE and MRI (p = 0.259). However, for clinically significant PCa, the diagnostic capacity of SWE was a little higher than MRI (p = 0.013). Conclusions: SWE may provide additional information for PCa detection, which could increase the positive rate of PCa in targeted biopsy and reduce unnecessary biopsy. SWE is compatible with MRI for detecting PCa in the peripheral zone.

Magnetic resonance as imaging diagnostic tool in prostate cancer: New evidences-The EAU Section of Uro-Technology position

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second leading cause of cancer-related mortality and the most frequently diagnosed male malignant disease among men. The manifestation of PCa ranges from indolent to highly aggressive disease and due to this high variation in PCa progression, the diagnosis and subsequent treatment planning can be challenging. The current diagnostic approach with PSA testing and digital rectal examination followed by transrectal ultrasound biopsies lack in both sensitivity and specificity in PCa detection and offers limited information about the aggressiveness and stage of the cancer. Scientific work supports the rapidly growing use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging as the most sensitive and specific imaging tool for detection, lesion characterization and staging of PCa. Therefore, we carried out an updated review of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnostic PCa reviewing the latest papers published in PubMed.