Cost-effectiveness of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and targeted biopsy in diagnosing prostate cancer

MRI software and cognitive fusion biopsies in people with suspected prostate cancer: a systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis

Background

Magnetic resonance imaging localises cancer in the prostate, allowing for a targeted biopsy with or without transrectal ultrasound-guided systematic biopsy. Targeted biopsy methods include cognitive fusion, where prostate lesions suspicious on magnetic resonance imaging are targeted visually during live ultrasound, and software fusion, where computer software overlays the magnetic resonance imaging image onto the ultrasound in real time. The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of software fusion technologies compared with cognitive fusion biopsy are uncertain.

Objectives

To assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness of software fusion biopsy technologies in people with suspected localised and locally advanced prostate cancer. A systematic review was conducted to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy, clinical efficacy and practical implementation of nine software fusion devices compared to cognitive fusion biopsies, and with each other, in people with suspected prostate cancer. Comprehensive searches including MEDLINE, and Embase were conducted up to August 2022 to identify studies which compared software fusion and cognitive fusion biopsies in people with suspected prostate cancer. Risk of bias was assessed with quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies-comparative tool. A network meta-analysis comparing software and cognitive fusion with or without concomitant systematic biopsy, and systematic biopsy alone was conducted. Additional outcomes, including safety and usability, were synthesised narratively. A de novo decision model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of targeted software fusion biopsy relative to cognitive fusion biopsy with or without concomitant systematic biopsy for prostate cancer identification in biopsy-naive people. Scenario analyses were undertaken to explore the robustness of the results to variation in the model data sources and alternative assumptions.

Results

Twenty-three studies (3773 patients with software fusion, 2154 cognitive fusion) were included, of which 13 informed the main meta-analyses. Evidence was available for seven of the nine fusion devices specified in the protocol and at high risk of bias. The meta-analyses show that patients undergoing software fusion biopsy may have: (1) a lower probability of being classified as not having cancer, (2) similar probability of being classified as having non-clinically significant cancer (International Society of Urological Pathology grade 1) and (3) higher probability of being classified at higher International Society of Urological Pathology grades, particularly International Society of Urological Pathology 2. Similar results were obtained when comparing between same biopsy methods where both were combined with systematic biopsy. Evidence was insufficient to conclude whether any individual devices were superior to cognitive fusion, or whether some software fusion technologies were superior to others. Uncertainty in the relative diagnostic accuracy of software fusion versus cognitive fusion reduce the strength of any statements on its cost-effectiveness. The economic analysis suggests incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for software fusion biopsy versus cognitive fusion are within the bounds of cost-effectiveness (£1826 and £5623 per additional quality-adjusted life-year with or with concomitant systematic biopsy, respectively), but this finding needs cautious interpretation.

Limitations

There was insufficient evidence to explore the impact of effect modifiers.

Conclusions

Software fusion biopsies may be associated with increased cancer detection in relation to cognitive fusion biopsies, but the evidence is at high risk of bias. Sufficiently powered, high-quality studies are required. Cost-effectiveness results should be interpreted with caution given the limitations of the diagnostic accuracy evidence.

Study registration

This trial is registered as PROSPERO CRD42022329259.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Evidence Synthesis programme (NIHR award ref: 135477) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 61. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further information.

Transperineal biopsy devices in people with suspected prostate cancer - a systematic review and economic evaluation

Background

People with suspected prostate cancer are usually offered either a local anaesthetic transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy or a general anaesthetic transperineal prostate biopsy. Transperineal prostate biopsy is often carried out under general anaesthetic due to pain caused by the procedure. However, recent studies suggest that performing local anaesthetic transperineal prostate biopsy may better identify cancer in particular regions of the prostate and reduce infection rates, while being carried out in an outpatient setting. Devices to assist with freehand methods of local anaesthetic transperineal prostate may also help practitioners performing prostate biopsies.

Objectives

To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of local anaesthetic transperineal prostate compared to local anaesthetic transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate and general anaesthetic transperineal prostate biopsy for people with suspected prostate cancer, and local anaesthetic transperineal prostate with specific freehand devices in comparison with local anaesthetic transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate and transperineal prostate biopsy conducted with a grid and stepping device conducted under local or general anaesthetic.

Data sources and methods

We conducted a systematic review of studies comparing the diagnostic yield and clinical effectiveness of different methods for performing prostate biopsies. We used pairwise and network meta-analyses to pool evidence on cancer detection rates and structured narrative synthesis for other outcomes. For the economic evaluation, we reviewed published and submitted evidence and developed a model to assess the cost-effectiveness of the different biopsy methods.

Results

We included 19 comparative studies (6 randomised controlled trials and 13 observational comparative studies) and 4 single-arm studies of freehand devices. There were no statistically significant differences in cancer detection rates for local anaesthetic transperineal prostate (any method) compared to local anaesthetic transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate (relative risk 1.00, 95% confidence interval 0.85 to 1.18) (n = 5 randomised controlled trials), as was the case for local anaesthetic transperineal prostate with a freehand device compared to local anaesthetic transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate (relative risk 1.40, 95% confidence interval 0.96 to 2.04) (n = 1 randomised controlled trial). Results of meta-analyses of observational studies were similar. The economic analysis indicated that local anaesthetic transperineal prostate is likely to be cost-effective compared with local anaesthetic transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate (incremental cost below £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained) and less costly and no less effective than general anaesthetic transperineal prostate. local anaesthetic transperineal prostate with a freehand device is likely to be the most cost-effective strategy: incremental cost versus local anaesthetic transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate of £743 per quality-adjusted life-year for people with magnetic resonance imaging Likert score of 3 or more at first biopsy.

Limitations

There is limited evidence for efficacy in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer. There is comparative evidence for the PrecisionPoint™ Transperineal Access System (BXTAccelyon Ltd, Burnham, UK) but limited or no evidence for the other freehand devices. Evidence for other outcomes is sparse. The cost-effectiveness results are sensitive to uncertainty over cancer detection rates, complication rates and the numbers of core samples taken with the different biopsy methods and the costs of processing them.

Conclusions

Transperineal prostate biopsy under local anaesthetic is equally efficient at detecting prostate cancer as transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy under local anaesthetic but it may be better with a freehand device. local anaesthetic transperineal prostate is associated with urinary retention type complications, whereas local anaesthetic transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate has a higher infection rate. local anaesthetic transperineal prostate biopsy with a freehand device appears to meet conventional levels of costeffectiveness compared with local anaesthetic transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42021266443.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Evidence Synthesis programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR134220) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment Vol. 28, No. 60. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Early economic evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer detection in primary care

Objectives

To explore the potential impacts of incorporating prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging into primary care as a triage test within the prostate cancer diagnostic pathway.

Subjects and methods

Decision analytic modelling with decision trees was utilised for this early economic evaluation. A conceptual model was developed reflecting the common primary care routes to diagnosis for prostate cancer: opportunistic, asymptomatic prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening or symptomatic presentation. The use of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) or biparametric MRI (bpMRI) as a primary care triage test following an elevated PSA result was evaluated. A health system perspective was adopted with a time horizon of 12 months. Health effects were expressed in terms of utilities drawn from the literature. The primary outcome was prostate cancer diagnosis. Evidence used to inform the model was drawn from published primary studies, systematic reviews, and secondary analyses of primary and secondary care datasets.

Results

Base case analysis showed that the PSA pathway was dominated by both mpMRI- and bpMRI-based pathways for patients undergoing opportunistic screening and symptomatic assessment. bpMRI pathways had greater improvement in cost and utility than mpMRI pathways in both clinical scenarios. Significantly more MRI scans would be performed using the modelled approach (66 626 scans vs. 37 456 scans per 100 000 patients per annum), with fewer subsequent urgent suspected cancer referrals for both mpMRI (38% reduction for screening and symptomatic patients) and bpMRI (72% reduction for screening; 71% for symptomatic) pathways, and a small increase in number of missed cancer diagnoses. Deterministic sensitivity analyses, varying each parameter to its upper and lower 95% confidence intervals, showed no significant change in the dominance of the MRI-based prostate cancer diagnostic pathways.

Conclusion

Using prostate MRI as a second-level triage test for suspected prostate cancer in primary care could reduce health service costs without a detrimental effect on patient utility.

A contemporary review: mpMRI in prostate cancer screening and diagnosis

Prostate cancer (PCa) screening has evolved beyond PSA and digital rectal exam to include multiparametric prostate MRI (mpMRI). Incorporating this advanced imaging tool has further limited the well-established problem of overdiagnosis, aiding in the identification of higher grade, clinically significant cancers. For this reason, mpMRI has become an important part of the diagnostic pathway and is recommended across guidelines in biopsy naïve patients or for patients with prior negative biopsy. This contemporary review evaluates the most recent literature on the role of mpMRI in the screening and diagnosis of prostate cancer. Barriers to utilization of mpMRI still exist including variable access, high cost, and requisite expertise, encouraging evaluation of novel techniques such as biparametric MRI. Future screening and diagnostic practice patterns will undoubtedly evolve as our understanding of novel biomarkers and artificial intelligence improves.

Systematic Review on the Cost Effectiveness of Prostate Cancer Screening in Europe

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

In Europe, prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common cancer in men. Screening may therefore be crucial to lower health care costs, morbidity, and mortality. This systematic review aimed to provide a contemporary overview of the costs and benefits of PCa screening programmes.

METHODS

A peer-reviewed literature search was conducted, using the PICO method. A detailed search strategy was developed in four databases based on the following key search terms: "PCa", "screening", and "cost effectiveness". Any type of economic evaluation was included. The search strategy was restricted to European countries, but no restrictions were set on the year of publication.

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

A total of 7484 studies were identified initially. Of these, 19 studies described the cost effectiveness of PCa screening in Europe. Among the studies using an initially healthy study population, most focussed on risk- and/or age- and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based screening in addition to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing and compared this with no screening. Incremental cost ratios (ICERs) varied from €5872 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) to €372 948/QALY, with a median of €56 487/QALY. Risk-based screening followed by MRI testing seemed to be a more cost-effective strategy than no screening.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

This systematic review indicates that screening programmes incorporating a risk-based approach and MRI have the potential to be cost effective.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In this review, we looked at the cost effectiveness of prostate cancer screening in Europe. We found that a risk-based approach and incorporation of magnetic resonance imaging has the potential to be cost effective. However, there remains a knowledge gap regarding cost effectiveness of prostate cancer screening. Therefore, determinants of cost effectiveness require further investigation.

Economic evaluation of prostate cancer risk assessment methods: A cost-effectiveness analysis using population data

BACKGROUND

The current prostate cancer (PCa) screening standard of care (SOC) leads to unnecessary biopsies and overtreatment because decisions are guided by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, which have low specificity in the gray zone (3-10 ng/mL). New risk assessment tools (RATs) aim to improve biopsy decision-making. We constructed a modeling framework to assess new RATs in men with gray zone PSA from the British Columbia healthcare system's perspective.

METHODS

We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of a new RAT used in biopsy-naïve men aged 50+ with a PSA of 3-10 ng/mL using a time-dependent state-transition model. The model was informed by engaging patient partners and using linked administrative health data, supplemented with published literature. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and the probability of the RAT being cost-effective were calculated. Probabilistic analysis was used to assess parameter uncertainty.

RESULTS

In the base case, a RAT based on an existing biomarker's characteristics was a dominant strategy associated with a cost savings of $44 and a quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gain of 0.00253 over 18 years of follow-up. At a cost-effectiveness threshold of $50,000/QALY, the probability that using a RAT is cost-effective relative to the SOC was 73%. Outcomes were sensitive to RAT costs and accuracy, especially the detection rate of high-grade PCa. Results were also impacted by PCa prevalence and assumptions about undetected PCa survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings showed that a more accurate RAT to guide biopsy can be cost-effective. Our proposed general model can be used to analyze the cost-effectiveness of any novel RAT.

Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis of Economic Evaluations of Prostate Cancer Diagnostic Pathways Incorporating Prebiopsy Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Context

Prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the prostate has been shown to increase the accuracy of the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer. However, evidence is still evolving about how best to integrate prebiopsy MRI into the diagnostic pathway and for which patients, and whether MRI-based pathways are cost effective.

Objective

This systematic review aimed to assess the evidence for the cost effectiveness of prebiopsy MRI-based prostate cancer diagnostic pathways.

Evidence acquisition

INTERTASC search strategies were adapted and combined with terms for prostate cancer and MRI, and used to search a wide range of databases and registries covering medicine, allied health, clinical trials, and health economics. No limits were set on country, setting, or publication year. Included studies were full economic evaluations of prostate cancer diagnostic pathways with at least one strategy including prebiopsy MRI. Model-based studies were assessed using the Philips framework, and trial-based studies were assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist.

Evidence synthesis

A total of 6593 records were screened after removing duplicates, and eight full-text papers, reporting on seven studies (two model based) were included in this review. Included studies were judged to have a low-to-moderate risk of bias. All studies reported cost-effectiveness analyses based in high-income countries but had significant heterogeneity in diagnostic strategies, patient populations, treatment strategies, and model characteristics. Prebiopsy MRI-based pathways were cost effective compared with pathways relying on ultrasound-guided biopsy in all eight studies.

Conclusions

Incorporation of prebiopsy MRI into prostate cancer diagnostic pathways is likely to be more cost effective in than that into pathways relying on prostate-specific antigen and ultrasound-guided biopsy. The optimal prostate cancer diagnostic pathway design and method of integrating prebiopsy MRI are not yet known. Variations between health care systems and diagnostic approaches necessitate further evaluation for a particular country or setting to know how best to apply prebiopsy MRI.

Patient summary

In this report, we looked at studies that measured the health care costs and benefits and harms to patients of using prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), to decide whether men need a prostate biopsy for possible prostate cancer. We found that using prostate MRI before biopsy is likely to be less costly for health care services and probably has better outcomes for patients being investigated for prostate cancer. It is still unclear what the best way to use prostate MRI is.

Cost-Effectiveness of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Targeted Biopsy Versus Systematic Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to systematically review the cost-effectiveness studies of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-guided biopsy (MRGB) compared with systematic transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)-guided biopsy for diagnosing prostate cancer (PCa).

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science core collection, Embase and Scopus, and reference lists of the included studies were searched with no date and language restrictions through January 2020 for full economic evaluation studies (cost-effectiveness, cost-utility analysis, cost-benefit analysis) that assessed mpMRI and MRGB compared with systematic TRUS-guided biopsy or other sequential biopsy strategies in men undergoing initial prostate biopsy or men with previous negative prostate biopsy, with clinical suspicion of PCa based on abnormal prostate-specific antigen or digital rectal examination increase or both. Data were tabulated and analyzed using narrative synthesis. The reporting quality of included studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist. This systematic review was performed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement.

RESULTS

Finally, 9 studies were included. All studies were conducted in high-income countries. All studies found that mpMRI and MRGB was cost-effective in the initial and before repeat biopsy in men with previous negative biopsy. The cognitive-targeted TRUS-guided biopsy was cost-effective in the initial biopsy (dominant or cost-effective at willingness-to-pay threshold of the countries); it was not evaluated for repeat biopsy in men. The direct in-bore magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided biopsy was cost-effective for the initial biopsy (€323 per quality-adjusted life-year gained). The superiority of one of the targeted biopsy approaches (fusion, cognitive, or in-bore) over other approaches has not yet been established.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that pre-TRUS-guided biopsy MRI is more cost-effective than TRUS-guided biopsy alone. Furthermore, the use of MRI-ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy in the diagnosis of PCa in the initial biopsy and repeat biopsy and cognitive-targeted TRUS-guided biopsy in the initial biopsy is cost-effective.

Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness Models in Prostate Cancer: Exploring New Developments in Testing and Diagnosis

OBJECTIVES

Recent innovations in prostate cancer diagnosis include new biomarkers and more accurate biopsy methods. This study assesses the evidence base on cost-effectiveness of these developments (eg, Prostate Health Index and magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]-guided biopsy) and identifies areas of improvement for future cost-effectiveness models.

METHODS

A systematic review using the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, MEDLINE, Embase, Health Technology Assessment databases, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines, and United Kingdom National Screening Committee guidance was performed, between 2009 and 2021. Relevant data were extracted on study type, model inputs, modeling methods and cost-effectiveness conclusions, and results narratively synthesized.

RESULTS

A total of 22 model-based economic evaluations were included. A total of 11 compared the cost-effectiveness of new biomarkers to prostate-specific antigen testing alone and all found biomarkers to be cost saving. A total of 8 compared MRI-guided biopsy methods to transrectal ultrasound-guided methods and found MRI-guided methods to be most cost-effective. Newer detection methods showed a reduction in unnecessary biopsies and overtreatment. The most cost-effective follow-up strategy in men with a negative initial biopsy was uncertain. Many studies did not model for stage or grade of cancer, cancer progression, or the entire testing and treatment pathway. Few fully accounted for uncertainty.

CONCLUSIONS

This review brings together the cost-effectiveness literature for novel diagnostic methods in prostate cancer, showing that most studies have found new methods to be more cost-effective than standard of care. Several limitations of the models were identified, however, limiting the reliability of the results. Areas for further development include accurately modeling the impact of early diagnostic tests on long-term outcomes of prostate cancer and fully accounting for uncertainty.

Cost-Effectiveness of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Prostate Cancer Screening: A Microsimulation Study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with combinations of targeted biopsy (TBx) and systematic biopsy (SBx) for early prostate cancer detection in Sweden.

METHODS

A cost-utility analysis was conducted from a lifetime societal perspective using a microsimulation model. Five strategies included no screening and quadrennial screening for men aged 55 to 69 years using SBx alone, TBx on positive MRI (MRI + TBx), combined TBx/SBx on positive MRI (MRI + TBx/SBx), and SBx on negative MRI with TBx/SBx on positive MRI (MRI - SBx, MRI + TBx/SBx). Test characteristics were based on a recent Cochrane review. We predicted the number of biopsies, costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.

RESULTS

The screening strategies were classified in Sweden as high costs per QALY gained compared with no screening. Using MRI + TBx and MRI + TBx/SBx reduced the number of biopsy episodes across a lifetime by approximately 40% compared with SBx alone. Both strategies showed strong dominance over SBx alone and MRI - SBx, MRI + TBx. Compared with MRI + TBx, the MRI + TBx/SBx strategy had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of more than €200 000 per QALY gained, which was classified in Sweden as a very high cost. These predictions were robust in the probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Limitations included generalizability of the model assumptions and uncertainty regarding the health-state values and study heterogeneity from the Cochrane review.

CONCLUSIONS

MRI + TBx and MRI + TBx/SBx showed strong dominance over alternative screening strategies. MRI + TBx resulted in similar or marginally lower gains in QALYs and lower costs than MRI + TBx/SBx. MRI + TBx was considered the optimal choice among the screening strategies.

Role of MRI-Based Functional Imaging in Improving the Therapeutic Index of Radiotherapy in Cancer Treatment

Advances in radiation technology, such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), have largely enabled a biological dose escalation of the target volume (TV) and reduce the dose to adjacent tissues or organs at risk (OARs). However, the risk of radiation-induced injury increases as more radiation dose utilized during radiation therapy (RT), which predominantly limits further increases in TV dose distribution and reduces the local control rate. Thus, the accurate target delineation is crucial. Recently, technological improvements for precise target delineation have obtained more attention in the field of RT. The addition of functional imaging to RT can provide a more accurate anatomy of the tumor and normal tissues (such as location and size), along with biological information that aids to optimize the therapeutic index (TI) of RT. In this review, we discuss the application of some common MRI-based functional imaging techniques in clinical practice. In addition, we summarize the main challenges and prospects of these imaging technologies, expecting more inspiring developments and more productive research paths in the near future.

Cost-effectiveness of MRI targeted biopsy strategies for diagnosing prostate cancer in Singapore

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of six diagnostic strategies involving magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) targeted biopsy for diagnosing prostate cancer in initial and repeat biopsy settings from the Singapore healthcare system perspective.

METHODS

A combined decision tree and Markov model was developed. The starting model population was men with mean age of 65 years referred for a first prostate biopsy due to clinical suspicion of prostate cancer. The six diagnostic strategies were selected for their relevance to local clinical practice. They comprised MRI targeted biopsy following a positive pre-biopsy multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) [Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score ≥ 3], systematic biopsy, or saturation biopsy employed in different testing combinations and sequences. Deterministic base case analyses with sensitivity analyses were performed using costs from the healthcare system perspective and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained as the outcome measure to yield incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

RESULTS

Deterministic base case analyses showed that Strategy 1 (MRI targeted biopsy alone), Strategy 2 (MRI targeted biopsy ➔ systematic biopsy), and Strategy 4 (MRI targeted biopsy ➔ systematic biopsy ➔ saturation biopsy) were cost-effective options at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of US$20,000, with ICERs ranging from US$18,975 to US$19,458. Strategies involving MRI targeted biopsy in the repeat biopsy setting were dominated. Sensitivity analyses found the ICERs were affected mostly by changes to the annual discounting rate and prevalence of prostate cancer in men referred for first biopsy, ranging between US$15,755 to US$23,022. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed Strategy 1 to be the least costly, and Strategies 2 and 4 being the preferred strategies when WTP thresholds were US$20,000 and US$30,000, respectively.

LIMITATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

This study found MRI targeted biopsy to be cost-effective in diagnosing prostate cancer in the biopsy-naïve setting in Singapore.

A 25-year perspective on evaluation and understanding of biomarkers in urologic cancers

The past 25 years have witnessed an explosion of investigative attempts to identify clinically useful biomarkers which can have meaningful impacts for patients with urologic cancers. However, in spite of the enormous amount of research aiming to identify markers with the hope of impacting patient care, only a handful have proven to have true clinical utility. Improvements in targeted imaging, pan-omics evaluation, and genetic sequencing at the tissue and single-cell levels have yielded many potential targets for continued biomarker investigation. This article, as one in this series for the 25th Anniversary Issue of Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations, serves to give a perspective on our progress and failures over the past quarter-century in our highest volume urologic cancers: prostate, bladder, and kidney cancers.

Cost-effectiveness of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and MRI-guided biopsy in a population-based prostate cancer screening setting using a micro-simulation model

BACKGROUND

The introduction of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and MRI-guided biopsy has improved the diagnosis of prostate cancer. However, it remains uncertain whether it is cost-effective, especially in a population-based screening strategy.

METHODS

We used a micro-simulation model to assess the cost-effectiveness of an MRI-based prostate cancer screening in comparison to the classical prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening, at a population level. The test sensitivity parameters for the mpMRI and MRI-guided biopsy, grade misclassification rates, utility estimates, and the unit costs of different interventions were obtained from literature. We assumed the same screening attendance rate and biopsy compliance rate for both strategies. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis, consisting of 1000 model runs, was performed to estimate a mean incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and assess uncertainty. A €20,000 willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained, and a discounting rate of 3.5% was considered in the analysis.

RESULTS

The MRI-based screening improved the life-years (LY) and QALYs gained by 3.5 and 3, respectively, in comparison to the classical screening pathway. Based on the probabilistic sensitivity analyses, the MRI screening pathway leads to total discounted mean incremental costs of €15,413 (95% confidence interval (CI) of €14,556-€16,272) compared to the classical screening pathway. The corresponding discounted mean incremental QALYs gained was 1.36 (95% CI of 1.31-1.40), resulting in a mean ICER of €11,355 per QALY gained. At a WTP threshold of €20,000, the MRI screening pathway has about 84% chance to be more cost-effective than the classical screening pathway.

CONCLUSIONS

For triennial screening from age 55-64, incorporation of mpMRI as a reflex test after a positive PSA test result with a subsequent MRI-guided biopsy has a high probability to be more cost-effective as compared with the classical prostate cancer screening pathway.

Impact of MRI/US fusion‐guided prostate biopsy on biopsy‐naïve patients: A single urologist’s experience

Objectives

To report our experience with imaging‐guided targeted prostate biopsy (IGTpBx) for patients undergoing initial prostate biopsy in a clinical setting.

Materials and methods

From July 2014 to February 2020, 305 men who had IGTpBx performed as their first prostate biopsy were enrolled. Two dedicated magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) radiologists segmented at least 1 region of interest (ROI) for each of these men using screening 1.5T MRI images. A single urologist employed the robotic‐assisted Artemis MRI/ultrasonography (US) fusion platform to obtain 2‐3 targeted samples from each ROI and additional random samples from the zones of the prostate outside the ROIs (a total of 12 zonal samples). Biopsy outcomes were categorized based on the Gleason score (GS) grade group (GG) as no cancer, favorable (GG < 3 or GS < 4 + 3), or clinically significant (GG ≥ 3 or GS ≥ 4 + 3) cancer.

Results

The overall cancer detection rate was 75%:31% clinically significant, 44% favorable, and 25% no cancer. These findings triggered active interventions in 176 (58%) patients. A prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) level of 0–4 ng/mL was detected in 39 (66%) of 59 patients (32 favorable, 7 significant), 4–10 ng/mL in 147 (77%) of 190 patients (85 favorable, 62 significant), and 10 ng/mL and over in 44 (80%) of 55 patients (17 favorable, 27 significant).

Conclusions

The tumor detection rate was 75% with IGTpBx in patients without a previous biopsy. In addition, about 42% of detected cancers were deemed clinically significant and led to active interventions. IGTpBx as a patient’s first prostate biopsy improves the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer when compared with historical data for random systematic prostate biopsy.

Analyzing the learning curves of a novice and an experienced urologist for transrectal magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion prostate biopsy

Background

The aim of the current study was to evaluate and compare the learning curves of transrectal magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion biopsy for two urologists with different backgrounds (Operator 1: experienced, self-trained and Operator 2: novice, trained by a mentor/MRI reading courses).

Methods

A cohort of 400 patients who underwent fusion prostate biopsy in our department was analyzed. The learning curves were assessed in terms of overall and clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa) detection rates, percentage of positive biopsy cores/targeted and the percentage of PCa tissue on positive targeted cores.

Results

Increasing trends were observed for both urologists in terms of all biopsy outcomes during the study time. For the novice urologist, a significant increase was observed for overall PCa detection rate, but not for clinically significant disease (25.44%, P=0.04/15%, P=0.145). Operator 1 showed an increasing diagnosis yield of clinically significant disease up to 104 cases. Similar cancer detection rates were observed when comparing the first and last biopsies performed by both operators. Multivariate analysis adjusted for age, PSA, prostate volume, lesion diameter and PIRADS score showed an increase of PCa detection with 51% for every 52 biopsies performed (P=0.022).

Conclusions

When starting with magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion prostate biopsy, mentoring and prostate magnetic resonance imaging reading training allow a novice urologist to demonstrate a good initial PCa detection rate. After about 52 cases, he reached a stable PCa and clinically significant PCa detection rate, that was similar to that of an experienced urologist.

The comparative effectiveness of mpMRI and MRI-guided biopsy vs regular biopsy in a population-based PSA testing: a modeling study

The benefit of prostate cancer screening is counterbalanced by the risk of overdiagnosis and overtreatment. The use of a multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) test after a positive prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test followed by magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsy (MRIGB) may reduce these harms. The aim of this study was to determine the effects of mpMRI and MRIGB vs the regular screening pathway in a population-based prostate cancer screening setting. A micro-simulation model was used to predict the effects of regular PSA screening (men with elevated PSA followed by TRUSGB) and MRI based screening (men with elevated PSA followed by mpMRI and MRIGB). We predicted reduction of overdiagnosis, harm-benefit ratio (overdiagnosis per cancer death averted), reduction in number of biopsies, detection of clinically significant cancer, prostate cancer death averted, life-years gained (LYG), and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) gained for both strategies. A univariate sensitivity analysis and threshold analysis were performed to assess uncertainty around the test sensitivity parameters used in the MRI strategy.In the MRI pathway, we predicted a 43% reduction in the risk of overdiagnosis, compared to the regular pathway. Similarly a lower harm-benefit ratio (overdiagnosis per cancer death averted) was predicted for this strategy compared to the regular screening pathway (1.0 vs 1.8 respectively). Prostate cancer mortality reduction, LY and QALYs gained were also slightly increased in the MRI pathway than the regular screening pathway. Furthermore, 30% of men with a positive PSA test could avoid a biopsy as compared to the regular screening pathway. Compared to regular PSA screening, the use of mpMRI as a triage test followed by MRIGB can substantially reduce the risk of overdiagnosis and improve the harm-benefit balance, while maximizing prostate cancer mortality reduction and QALYs gained.

PI-RADS: what is new and how to use it

The prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) has revolutionized the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the management of prostate cancer (PCa). The most recent version 2.1, PI-RADS v2.1, provides specific refinements in the performance, relaxing some recommendations which were not found to be helpful, while reinforcing and clarifying others. The interpretation of T2-weighted imaging (T2WI) in the transition zone (TZ), and the overall assessment of TZ nodules, now allows for a clearer distinction between those which are clearly benign and those which might warrant tissue sampling. Additional changes also resolve discrepancies in T2WI and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) of the peripheral zone (PZ). PI-RADS v2.1 is a simpler, more straightforward, and more reproducible method to better communicate between physicians regarding findings on prostate MRI.

Round table: arguments against using multiparametric prostate MRI protocols

Biparametric MRI (bpMRI), which uses only T2-weighted imaging and diffusion-weighted imaging, continues to gain support for the detection of prostate cancer, as this imaging technique offers many benefits over traditional mpMRI. However, the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) v2.1 document released in 2019 emphasized that mpMRI is still preferred over bpMRI in most clinical scenarios. As one article in a series of four providing arguments for and against using mpMRI and bpMRI protocols, this paper provides arguments against using mpMRI. Within this article, we discuss recent data suggesting equivalent performance between bpMRI and mpMRI in the detection of prostate cancer. The limited utility of dynamic contrast enhancement in the evaluation of prostate cancer according to the PI-RADS v2.1 document is also reviewed. Finally, we detail the large financial and time costs, legal and logistical issues, and potential for patient harm that must be considered with the administration of contrast.

All change in the prostate cancer diagnostic pathway

Following detection of high levels of serum prostate-specific antigen, many men are advised to have transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy in an attempt to locate a cancer. This nontargeted approach lacks accuracy and carries a small risk of potentially life-threatening sepsis. Worse still, it can detect clinically insignificant cancer cells, which are unlikely to be the origin of advanced-stage disease. The detection of these indolent cancer cells has led to overdiagnosis, one of the major problems of contemporary medicine, whereby many men with clinically insignificant disease are advised to undergo unnecessary radical surgery or radiotherapy. Advances in imaging and biomarker discovery have led to a revolution in prostate cancer diagnosis, and nontargeted prostate biopsies should become obsolete. In this Perspective article, we describe the current diagnostic pathway for prostate cancer, which relies on nontargeted biopsies, and the problems linked to this pathway. We then discuss the utility of prebiopsy multiparametric MRI and novel tumour markers. Finally, we comment on how the incorporation of these advances into a new diagnostic pathway will affect the current risk-stratification system and explore future challenges.

Multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer diagnosis: current status and future directions

The current diagnostic pathway for prostate cancer has resulted in overdiagnosis and consequent overtreatment as well as underdiagnosis and missed diagnoses in many men. Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) of the prostate has been identified as a test that could mitigate these diagnostic errors. The performance of mpMRI can vary depending on the population being studied, the execution of the MRI itself, the experience of the radiologist, whether additional biomarkers are considered and whether mpMRI-targeted biopsy is carried out alone or in addition to systematic biopsy. A number of challenges to implementation remain, such as ensuring high-quality execution and reporting of mpMRI and ensuring that this diagnostic pathway is cost-effective. Nevertheless, emerging clinical trial data support the adoption of this technology as part of the standard of care for the diagnosis of prostate cancer.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsy Versus Systematic Biopsy in the Detection of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

CONTEXT

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted prostate biopsy (MRI-TB) may be an alternative to systematic biopsy for diagnosing prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE

The primary aims of this systematic review and meta-analysis were to compare the detection rates of clinically significant and clinically insignificant cancer by MRI-TB with those by systematic biopsy in men undergoing prostate biopsy to identify prostate cancer.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A literature search was conducted using the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane library, and Clinicaltrials.gov databases. We included prospective and retrospective paired studies where the index test was MRI-TB and the comparator test was systematic biopsy. We also included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) if one arm included MRI-TB and another arm included systematic biopsy. The risk of bias was assessed using a modified Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 checklist. In addition, the Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool was used for RCTs.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

We included 68 studies with a paired design and eight RCTs, comprising a total of 14709 men who either received both MRI-TB and systematic biopsy, or were randomised to receive one of the tests. MRI-TB detected more men with clinically significant cancer than systematic biopsy (detection ratio [DR] 1.16 [95% confidence interval {CI} 1.09-1.24], p<0.0001) and fewer men with clinically insignificant cancer than systematic biopsy (DR 0.66 [95% CI 0.57-0.76], p<0.0001). The proportion of cores positive for cancer was greater for MRI-TB than for systematic biopsy (relative risk 3.17 [95% CI 2.82-3.56], p<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

MRI-TB is an attractive alternative diagnostic strategy to systematic biopsy.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We evaluated the published literature, comparing two methods of diagnosing prostate cancer. We found that biopsies targeted to suspicious areas on magnetic resonance imaging were better at detecting prostate cancer that needs to be treated and avoiding the diagnosis of disease that does not need treatment than the traditional systematic biopsy.

The Evolution of MRI of the Prostate: The Past, the Present, and the Future

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article is to discuss the evolution of MRI in prostate cancer from the early 1980s to the current day, providing analysis of the key studies on this topic. CONCLUSION. The rapid diffusion of MRI technology has meant that residual variability remains between centers regarding the quality of acquisition and the quality and standardization of reporting.

Financial implications of biparametric prostate MRI

BACKGROUND

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MP-MRI) targeted biopsy has been shown to identify more clinically-significant cancers and reduce the detection of clinically-insignificant disease when compared to systematic biopsy; however, the wide-spread accessibility of MP-MRI is limited. A potential strategy for reducing the cost, study time, and contrast-associated risks associated with MP-MRI is elimination of the dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) sequence, relying instead on biparametric MRI (BP-MRI). BP-MRI has been shown to have a diagnostic accuracy and cancer detection rate that are equivalent to those of MP-MRI.

METHODS

We modeled the potential cost of BP-MRI compared to MP-MRI to determine what cost savings would occur if DCE was eliminated from these studies.

RESULTS

When controlled for a 45 min time window that allows for one full MP-MRI or three full BP-MRI studies, the BP-MRI 45 min gross profit is $1531.32. This is an increase in gross profit of $892.58 for the 45 min time window or $10,710.98 in a 9-h business day when performing BP-MRI compared to MP-MRI for prostate cancer detection.

CONCLUSIONS

BP-MRI has the potential to result in substantial cost benefit and increased access to MRI in the diagnostic workflow and risk-stratification of men being evaluated for prostate cancer when compared to conventional MP-MRI.

A calculator based on prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 (PI-RADS V2) is a promising prostate cancer predictor

This research is to develop a new tool to improve the performance of predicting prostate cancer (PCa) and reducing unnecessary biopsies. The clinical data of patients who were definitely diagnosed by prostate biopsy were retrospectively analyzed. PCa risks that include age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), PSA density (PSAD), free-PSA (fPSA), the ratio of fPSA to PSA (%fPSA), prostate volume (PV), digital rectal examination (DRE) and multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (MP-MRI) were selected by univariate and multivariate analysis. The satisfactory risks were used to establish predictor (Prostate Biopsy Rating Scale, PBRS). The total score (TS) that was obtained from PBRS was performed to forecast PCa. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and the net reclassification index (NRI) were used to compare the predictive ability. A total of 1078 cases were recruited. The mean values of TS in PCa and non-PCa were 15.94 ± 3.26 and 10.49 ± 3.36 points respectively. The AUC of PBRS was higher than PSA, PSAD and MP-MRI (0.87 vs. 0.75, 0.78, 0.80, respectively). PBRS can reduce unnecessary biopsies compared with PSA, PSAD and MP-MRI by up to 63%, 54% and 44%, respectively. In brief, PBRS is a promising predictor of forecasting PCa.

Multiparametric MRI to improve detection of prostate cancer compared with transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy alone: the PROMIS study

BACKGROUND

Men with suspected prostate cancer usually undergo transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy. TRUS-guided biopsy can cause side effects and has relatively poor diagnostic accuracy. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) used as a triage test might allow men to avoid unnecessary TRUS-guided biopsy and improve diagnostic accuracy.

OBJECTIVES

To (1) assess the ability of mpMRI to identify men who can safely avoid unnecessary biopsy, (2) assess the ability of the mpMRI-based pathway to improve the rate of detection of clinically significant (CS) cancer compared with TRUS-guided biopsy and (3) estimate the cost-effectiveness of a mpMRI-based diagnostic pathway.

DESIGN

A validating paired-cohort study and an economic evaluation using a decision-analytic model.

SETTING

Eleven NHS hospitals in England.

PARTICIPANTS

Men at risk of prostate cancer undergoing a first prostate biopsy.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants underwent three tests: (1) mpMRI (the index test), (2) TRUS-guided biopsy (the current standard) and (3) template prostate mapping (TPM) biopsy (the reference test).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Diagnostic accuracy of mpMRI, TRUS-guided biopsy and TPM-biopsy measured by sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) using primary and secondary definitions of CS cancer. The percentage of negative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans was used to identify men who might be able to avoid biopsy.

RESULTS

Diagnostic study - a total of 740 men were registered and 576 underwent all three tests. According to TPM-biopsy, the prevalence of any cancer was 71% [95% confidence interval (CI) 67% to 75%]. The prevalence of CS cancer according to the primary definition (a Gleason score of ≥ 4 + 3 and/or cancer core length of ≥ 6 mm) was 40% (95% CI 36% to 44%). For CS cancer, TRUS-guided biopsy showed a sensitivity of 48% (95% CI 42% to 55%), specificity of 96% (95% CI 94% to 98%), PPV of 90% (95% CI 83% to 94%) and NPV of 74% (95% CI 69% to 78%). The sensitivity of mpMRI was 93% (95% CI 88% to 96%), specificity was 41% (95% CI 36% to 46%), PPV was 51% (95% CI 46% to 56%) and NPV was 89% (95% CI 83% to 94%). A negative mpMRI scan was recorded for 158 men (27%). Of these, 17 were found to have CS cancer on TPM-biopsy. Economic evaluation - the most cost-effective strategy involved testing all men with mpMRI, followed by MRI-guided TRUS-guided biopsy in those patients with suspected CS cancer, followed by rebiopsy if CS cancer was not detected. This strategy is cost-effective at the TRUS-guided biopsy definition 2 (any Gleason pattern of ≥ 4 and/or cancer core length of ≥ 4 mm), mpMRI definition 2 (lesion volume of ≥ 0.2 ml and/or Gleason score of ≥ 3 + 4) and cut-off point 2 (likely to be benign) and detects 95% (95% CI 92% to 98%) of CS cancers. The main drivers of cost-effectiveness were the unit costs of tests, the improvement in sensitivity of MRI-guided TRUS-guided biopsy compared with blind TRUS-guided biopsy and the longer-term costs and outcomes of men with cancer.

LIMITATIONS

The PROstate Magnetic resonance Imaging Study (PROMIS) was carried out in a selected group and excluded men with a prostate volume of > 100 ml, who are less likely to have cancer. The limitations in the economic modelling arise from the limited evidence on the long-term outcomes of men with prostate cancer and on the sensitivity of MRI-targeted repeat biopsy.

CONCLUSIONS

Incorporating mpMRI into the diagnostic pathway as an initial test prior to prostate biopsy may (1) reduce the proportion of men having unnecessary biopsies, (2) improve the detection of CS prostate cancer and (3) increase the cost-effectiveness of the prostate cancer diagnostic and therapeutic pathway. The PROMIS data set will be used for future research; this is likely to include modelling prognostic factors for CS cancer, optimising MRI scan sequencing and biomarker or translational research analyses using the blood and urine samples collected. Better-quality evidence on long-term outcomes in prostate cancer under the various management strategies is required to better assess cost-effectiveness. The value-of-information analysis should be developed further to assess new research to commission.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN16082556 and NCT01292291.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 39. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. This project was also supported and partially funded by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at University College London (UCL) Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and UCL and by The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and The Institute of Cancer Research Biomedical Research Centre and was co-ordinated by the Medical Research Council's Clinical Trials Unit at UCL (grant code MC_UU_12023/28). It was sponsored by UCL. Funding for the additional collection of blood and urine samples for translational research was provided by Prostate Cancer UK.

Diagnostic Accuracy of a Rapid Biparametric MRI Protocol for Detection of Histologically Proven Prostate Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the performance of a rapid, low cost, noncontrast MRI examination as a secondary screening tool in detection of clinically significant prostate cancer.

METHODS

In this prospective single institution study, 129 patients with elevated prostate-specific antigen levels or abnormal digital rectal examination findings underwent MRI with an abbreviated biparamatric MRI protocol consisting of high-resolution axial T2- and diffusion-weighted images. Index lesions were classified according to modified Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System (mPI-RADS) version 2.0. All patients underwent standard transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy after MRI with the urologist being blinded to MRI results. Subsequently, all patients with suspicious lesions (mPI-RADS 3, 4, or 5) underwent cognitively guided targeted biopsy after discussion of MRI results with the urologist. Sensitivity and negative predictive value for identification of clinically significant prostate cancer (Gleason score 3+4 and above) were determined.

RESULTS

Rapid biparametric MRI discovered 176 lesions identified in 129 patients. Rapid MRI detected clinically significant cancers with a sensitivity of 95.1% with a negative predictive value of 95.1% and positive predictive value of 53.2%, leading to a change in management in 10.8% of the patients. False negative rate of biparametric (bp) MRI was 4.7%.

CONCLUSION

We found that a bp-MRI examination can detect clinically significant lesions and changed patient management in 10.8% of the patients. A rapid MRI protocol can be used as a useful secondary screening tool in men presenting with suspicion of prostate cancer.

Prostate cancer diagnostic pathway: Is a one-stop cognitive MRI targeted biopsy service a realistic goal in everyday practice? A pilot cohort in a tertiary referral centre in the UK

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the feasibility of a novel multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) and cognitive fusion transperineal targeted biopsy (MRTB) led prostate cancer (PCa) diagnostic service with regard to cancer detection and reducing time to diagnosis and treatment.

DESIGN

Consecutive men being investigated for possible PCa under the UK 2-week wait guidelines.

SETTING

Tertiary referral centre for PCa in the UK.

PARTICIPANTS

Men referred with a raised prostate-specific antigen (PSA) or abnormal digital rectal examination between February 2015 and March 2016 under the UK 2-week rule guideline.

INTERVENTIONS

An mpMRI was performed prior to patients attending clinic, on the same day. If required, MRTB was offered. Results were available within 48 hours and discussed at a specialist multidisciplinary team meeting. Patients returned for counselling within 7 days PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcome measures in this regard included the time to diagnosis and treatment of patients referred with a suspicion of PCa. Quality control outcome measures included clinically significant and total cancer detection rates.

RESULTS

112 men were referred to the service. 111 (99.1%) underwent mpMRI. Median PSA was 9.4 ng/mL (IQR 5.6-21.0). 87 patients had a target on mpMRI with 25 scoring Likert 3/5 for likelihood of disease, 26 4/5 and 36 5/5.57 (51%) patients received a local anaesthetic, Magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy (MRTB). Cancer was detected in 45 (79%). 43 (96%) had University College London definition 2 disease or greater. The times to diagnosis and treatment were a median of 8 and 20 days, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This approach greatly reduces the time to diagnosis and treatment. Detection rates of significant cancer are high. Similar services may be valuable to patients with a potential diagnosis of PCa.

Advances in prostate cancer imaging

Many exciting advances in medical imaging have been made in recent years that will alter the way we diagnose, stage, and treat patients with prostate cancer. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is emerging as the main modality for prostate cancer imaging. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound and shear wave elastography may be strong alternatives in patients who cannot undergo MRI. Prostate-specific membrane antigen-directed positron emission tomography/computed tomography has proven to be valuable in the primary staging of high-risk disease and for detecting disease in patients with biochemical recurrence. As more studies continue to emerge, it is becoming clear that the standard algorithm for diagnosing and staging prostate cancer will undergo significant changes in the near future.

Cost and efficacy comparison of five prostate biopsy modalities: a platform for integrating cost into novel-platform comparative research

BACKGROUND

The cornerstone of prostate cancer diagnosis remains the transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS-BX), which most frequently occurs in the office setting under local anesthesia. However, there are now other techniques of prostate biopsy aimed at improving outcomes such as patient comfort, significant cancer detection, and infectious complications. The purpose of the present study is to compare the cost and efficacy outcomes of five different approaches.

METHODS

We compared the comprehensive costs of a random sample size of 20-30 cases from each of the following: (1) local anesthesia TRUS-BX (reference), (2) sedation TRUS-BX, (3) general anesthesia transperineal template biopsy (TP), (4) sedation MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy (FB), and (5) sedation in-bore MRI biopsy (IB-MRI). Cost categories included pre-procedure, anesthesia pharmacy and recovery, and the technical/professional costs from urology, radiology, and pathology services. For procedure outcomes, we compared the larger cohorts of TRUS-BX, TP, and FB in terms of indication, cancer yield, and downstream decision impact.

RESULTS

Compared with standard TRUS-BX, the total costs of sedation TRUS-BX, TP, FB, and IB-MRI increased significantly ×1.9 (90%), ×2.5 (153%), ×2.5 (150%), and ×2.2 (125%), respectively (p < 0.001). Although there was no statistical difference between the total costs of TP, FB, and IB-MRI, these costs were significantly higher than those of TRUS-BX under either local anesthesia or sedation (p < 0.05). The cost of TRUS-BX under sedation was significantly higher than that of TRUS-BX under local anesthesia (p < 0.001). Compared to TRUS-BX, more significant cancers were detected in FB (16% vs. 36%) and TP (16% vs. 34%) groups (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with standard TRUS-BX, the additions of imaging, sedation anesthesia, and transperineal template increase costs significantly, and can be considered along with known improvements in accuracy and side effects. Ongoing efforts to combine imaging and transperineal biopsy, especially in an outpatient/local anesthesia setting may lead to a higher cost/benefit.

MRI-Targeted or Standard Biopsy for Prostate-Cancer Diagnosis

BACKGROUND

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), with or without targeted biopsy, is an alternative to standard transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy for prostate-cancer detection in men with a raised prostate-specific antigen level who have not undergone biopsy. However, comparative evidence is limited.

METHODS

In a multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial, we assigned men with a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer who had not undergone biopsy previously to undergo MRI, with or without targeted biopsy, or standard transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy. Men in the MRI-targeted biopsy group underwent a targeted biopsy (without standard biopsy cores) if the MRI was suggestive of prostate cancer; men whose MRI results were not suggestive of prostate cancer were not offered biopsy. Standard biopsy was a 10-to-12-core, transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy. The primary outcome was the proportion of men who received a diagnosis of clinically significant cancer. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of men who received a diagnosis of clinically insignificant cancer.

RESULTS

A total of 500 men underwent randomization. In the MRI-targeted biopsy group, 71 of 252 men (28%) had MRI results that were not suggestive of prostate cancer, so they did not undergo biopsy. Clinically significant cancer was detected in 95 men (38%) in the MRI-targeted biopsy group, as compared with 64 of 248 (26%) in the standard-biopsy group (adjusted difference, 12 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4 to 20; P=0.005). MRI, with or without targeted biopsy, was noninferior to standard biopsy, and the 95% confidence interval indicated the superiority of this strategy over standard biopsy. Fewer men in the MRI-targeted biopsy group than in the standard-biopsy group received a diagnosis of clinically insignificant cancer (adjusted difference, -13 percentage points; 95% CI, -19 to -7; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of risk assessment with MRI before biopsy and MRI-targeted biopsy was superior to standard transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy in men at clinical risk for prostate cancer who had not undergone biopsy previously. (Funded by the National Institute for Health Research and the European Association of Urology Research Foundation; PRECISION ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02380027 .).

Cost and cost-effectiveness studies in urologic oncology using large administrative databases

OBJECTIVE

Urologic cancers are not only among the most common types of cancers, but also among the most expensive cancers to treat in the United States. This study aimed to review the use of CEAs and other cost analyses in urologic oncology using large databases to better understand the value of management strategies of these cancers.

METHODS

A literature review on CEAs and other cost analyses in urologic oncology using large databases.

RESULTS

The options for and costs of diagnosing, treating, and following patients with urologic cancers can be expected to rise in the coming years. There are numerous opportunities in each urologic cancer to use CEAs to both lower costs and provide high-quality services. Improved cancer care must balance the integration of novelty with ensuring reasonable costs to patients and the health care system.

CONCLUSION

With the increasing focus cost containment, appreciating the value of competing strategies in caring for our patients is pivotal. Leveraging methods such as CEAs and harnessing large databases may help evaluate the merit of established or emerging strategies.

Optimising the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer in the Era of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis Based on the Prostate MR Imaging Study (PROMIS)

BACKGROUND

The current recommendation of using transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUSB) to diagnose prostate cancer misses clinically significant (CS) cancers. More sensitive biopsies (eg, template prostate mapping biopsy [TPMB]) are too resource intensive for routine use, and there is little evidence on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MPMRI).

OBJECTIVE

To identify the most effective and cost-effective way of using these tests to detect CS prostate cancer.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Cost-effectiveness modelling of health outcomes and costs of men referred to secondary care with a suspicion of prostate cancer prior to any biopsy in the UK National Health Service using information from the diagnostic Prostate MR Imaging Study (PROMIS).

INTERVENTION

Combinations of MPMRI, TRUSB, and TPMB, using different definitions and diagnostic cut-offs for CS cancer.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Strategies that detect the most CS cancers given testing costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) given long-term costs.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The use of MPMRI first and then up to two MRI-targeted TRUSBs detects more CS cancers per pound spent than a strategy using TRUSB first (sensitivity = 0.95 [95% confidence interval {CI} 0.92-0.98] vs 0.91 [95% CI 0.86-0.94]) and is cost effective (ICER = £7,076 [€8350/QALY gained]). The limitations stem from the evidence base in the accuracy of MRI-targeted biopsy and the long-term outcomes of men with CS prostate cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

An MPMRI-first strategy is effective and cost effective for the diagnosis of CS prostate cancer. These findings are sensitive to the test costs, sensitivity of MRI-targeted TRUSB, and long-term outcomes of men with cancer, which warrant more empirical research. This analysis can inform the development of clinical guidelines.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We found that, under certain assumptions, the use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging first and then up to two transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy is better than the current clinical standard and is good value for money.

Magnetic resonance imaging in the early detection of prostate cancer and review of the literature on magnetic resonance imaging-stratified clinical pathways

INTRODUCTION

With level 1 evidence now available on the diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) we must now utilise this data in developing an MRI-stratified diagnostic pathway for the early detection of prostate cancer. Areas covered: A literature review was conducted and identified seven randomised control trials (RCT's) assessing the diagnostic accuracy of such a pathway against the previously accepted systematic/random trans-rectal ultrasound guided (TRUS) biopsy pathway. The studies were heterogeneous in their design. Five studies assessed the addition of MRI-targeted biopsies to a standard care systematic TRUS biopsy pathway. Three of these studies showed either an increase in their diagnostic accuracy or the potential to remove systematic biopsies. Two studies looked specifically at a targeted biopsy only pathway and although the results were again mixed, there was no decrease in the diagnostic rate and overall significantly fewer biopsy cores were taken in the MRI group. Expert commentary: Results from these RCT's together with multiple retrospective and prospective studies point towards either an improved diagnostic rate for clinically significant cancer and/or a reduction in the need for systematic biopsies with a MRI-stratified pathway. The challenge for the urological community will be to implement pre-biopsy MRI into a routine clinical pathway with likely independent monitoring of standards.

Prostate cancer detection among readers with different degree of experience using ultra-high b-value diffusion-weighted Imaging: Is a non-contrast protocol sufficient to detect significant cancer?

AIM

To evaluate the accuracy of a T2-weighted (T2w) - and a parallel transmit zoomed b = 2000 s/mm2 (b2000) - diffusion-weighted imaging sequence among three readers with different degrees of experience for prostate cancer (Pca) detection.

METHODS

Ninety-three patients with suspected Pca were enrolled. For b2000 a two-dimensional spatially-selective RF pulse using an echo-planar transmit trajectory was applied, and the field of view (FOV) was reduced to one-third. All three readers (Reader A: 7, B 4 and C <1 years of experience in prostate MRI) independently evaluated b2000 with regard to the presence of suspicious lesions that displayed increased signal. The results were compared to histopathology obtained by real-time MR/ultrasound fusion and systematic biopsy.

RESULTS

In 62 patients Pca was confirmed. One significant Pca (Gleason score (GS) 7b) was missed by Reader C. Overall, sensitivity/specificity/positive predictive value/negative predictive value were 90/71/86/79% for Reader A, 87/84/92/76% for Reader B and 85/74/87/72% for Reader C, respectively. Detection rates for significant Pca (GS >7a) were 100/100/94% for Readers A/B/C, respectively. Inter-reader agreement was generally good (Kappa A/B: 0.8; A/C: 0.82; B/C: 0.74).

CONCLUSION

B2000 in combination with a T2w could be useful to detect clinically significant Pca.

KEY POINTS

• Significant prostate cancer using zoomed ultra-high b-value DWI was detected. • Diagnostic performance among readers with different degrees of experience was good. • mp- MRI of the prostate using a comprehensive non-contrast protocol is clinically feasible.

Cost consideration in utilization of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer

The screening, evaluation and management of prostate cancer changed significantly in the last decade. The recommendations regarding prostate cancer screening continue to evolve with new revelations about existing data sets and longer followup of landmark trials. Robotics has gained the vast majority of the marketplace for surgically managed prostate cancer in rapid fashion. The need for intervention in low risk prostate cancer has been closely examined and more men are being expectantly managed than ever before. Amidst all these changes, prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has emerged as a disruptive technology. Through the use of dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion weighted series, prostate tumors that were previously not visible have become identifiable and quantifiable. The ability of MRI to improve staging and identification of clinically significant disease has resulted in increased utilization for different aspects of prostate cancer care. The best studied use is in men with a prior negative transrectal ultrasound guided (TRUS) prostate biopsy and the performance characteristics in this role match well with the clinical question raised. The role for MRI in initial biopsy, in pre-surgical planning before prostatectomy and in men on active surveillance is less well defined. A primary concern in the use of MRI is that of cost. MRI units are expensive, both in initial outlay and ongoing use. The availability of MRI varies widely between countries and even within regions of the same country. Different healthcare models have different approaches for allocating the use of expensive resources, including MRI, in times when they are scarce. Prostate MRI can be used at multiple points in the management algorithm of prostate cancer and each implies different cost concerns. In this review we present an overview of current research in cost and cost efficacy for the use of MRI in the management of prostate cancer. By examining what is known and highlighting areas of ongoing research we hope to provide the reader with a solid foundation for understanding these complex, ever-changing issues.

Cost-effectiveness of MR Imaging-guided Strategies for Detection of Prostate Cancer in Biopsy-Naive Men

Purpose To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of multiparametric diagnostic magnetic resonance (MR) imaging examination followed by MR imaging-guided biopsy strategies in the detection of prostate cancer in biopsy-naive men presenting with clinical suspicion of cancer for the first time. Materials and Methods A decision-analysis model was created for biopsy-naive men who had been recommended for prostate biopsy on the basis of abnormal digital rectal examination results or elevated prostate-specific antigen levels (age groups: 41-50 years, 51-60 years, and 61-70 years). The following three major strategies were evaluated: (a) standard transrectal ultrasonography (US)-guided biopsy; (b) diagnostic MR imaging followed by MR imaging-targeted biopsy, with no biopsy performed if MR imaging findings were negative; and (c) diagnostic MR imaging followed by MR imaging-targeted biopsy, with a standard biopsy performed when MR imaging findings were negative. The following three MR imaging-guided biopsy strategies were further evaluated in each MR imaging category: (a) biopsy with cognitive guidance, (b) biopsy with MR imaging/US fusion guidance, and (c) in-gantry MR imaging-guided biopsy. Model parameters were derived from the literature. The primary outcome measure was net health benefit (NHB), which was measured as quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained or lost by investing resources in a new strategy compared with a standard strategy at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $50 000 per QALY gained. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed by using Monte Carlo simulations. Results Noncontrast MR imaging followed by cognitively guided MR biopsy (no standard biopsy if MR imaging findings were negative) was the most cost-effective approach, yielding an additional NHB of 0.198 QALY compared with the standard biopsy approach. Noncontrast MR imaging followed by in-gantry MR imaging-guided biopsy (no standard biopsy if MR imaging findings were negative) led to the highest NHB gain of 0.251 additional QALY compared with the standard biopsy strategy. All MR imaging strategies were cost-effective in 94.05% of Monte Carlo simulations. Analysis by age groups yielded similar results. Conclusion MR imaging-guided strategies for the detection of prostate cancer were cost-effective compared with the standard biopsy strategy in a decision-analysis model. ^© RSNA, 2017 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

The PICTURE study: diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric MRI in men requiring a repeat prostate biopsy

BACKGROUND

Transrectal prostate biopsy has limited diagnostic accuracy. Prostate Imaging Compared to Transperineal Ultrasound-guided biopsy for significant prostate cancer Risk Evaluation (PICTURE) was a paired-cohort confirmatory study designed to assess diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in men requiring a repeat biopsy.

METHODS

All underwent 3 T mpMRI and transperineal template prostate mapping biopsies (TTPM biopsies). Multiparametric MRI was reported using Likert scores and radiologists were blinded to initial biopsies. Men were blinded to mpMRI results. Clinically significant prostate cancer was defined as Gleason ⩾4+3 and/or cancer core length ⩾6 mm.

RESULTS

Two hundred and forty-nine had both tests with mean (s.d.) age was 62 (7) years, median (IQR) PSA 6.8 ng ml (4.98-9.50), median (IQR) number of previous biopsies 1 (1-2) and mean (s.d.) gland size 37 ml (15.5). On TTPM biopsies, 103 (41%) had clinically significant prostate cancer. Two hundred and fourteen (86%) had a positive prostate mpMRI using Likert score ⩾3; sensitivity was 97.1% (95% confidence interval (CI): 92-99), specificity 21.9% (15.5-29.5), negative predictive value (NPV) 91.4% (76.9-98.1) and positive predictive value (PPV) 46.7% (35.2-47.8). One hundred and twenty-nine (51.8%) had a positive mpMRI using Likert score ⩾4; sensitivity was 80.6% (71.6-87.7), specificity 68.5% (60.3-75.9), NPV 83.3% (75.4-89.5) and PPV 64.3% (55.4-72.6).

CONCLUSIONS

In men advised to have a repeat prostate biopsy, prostate mpMRI could be used to safely avoid a repeat biopsy with high sensitivity for clinically significant cancers. However, such a strategy can miss some significant cancers and overdiagnose insignificant cancers depending on the mpMRI score threshold used to define which men should be biopsied.

The role of MRI in prostate cancer diagnosis and management

Multiparametric MRI of the prostate demonstrates strong potential to address many limitations of traditional prostate cancer diagnosis and management strategies. Recent evidence supports roles for prostate MRI in prebiopsy risk stratification, guidance of targeted biopsy and preoperative disease staging. Prostate MRI may also assist the planning and follow-up of investigational partial gland ablative therapies. This article reviews the impact of prostate MRI on such diagnostic and therapeutic paradigms in contemporary prostate cancer management.