Identification of pathologically insignificant prostate cancer is not accurate in unscreened men

Combination of MRI prostate and 18F-DCFPyl PSMA PET/CT detects all clinically significant prostate cancers in treatment-naive patients: An international multicentre retrospective study

INTRODUCTION

Clinical and biochemical assessment and biopsies can miss clinically significant prostate cancers (csPCa) in up to 20% of patients and diagnose clinically insignificant tumours leading to overtreatment. This retrospective study analyses the accuracy of ¹⁸ F-DCFPyL PET/CT in detecting csPCa as a primary diagnostic tool and directly compares it with mpMRI prostate in treatment-naive patients. The two modalities are then correlated to determine whether they are better in combination, than either alone.

METHODS

This is a retrospective dual-institution study of patients who underwent contemporaneous MRI and PSMA-PET between January 2017 and March 2020 with histologic confirmation. The images were re-reviewed and concordance between modalities assessed. Results were compared with histopathology to determine the ability of MRI and PSMA-PET to detect csPCA.

RESULTS

MRI and PSMA-PET detected the same index lesion in 90.8% of cases with a kappa of 0.82. PET detected an additional 6.2% of index lesions which were MRI occult. MRI detected an additional 3.1% which were PET occult. No additional csPCa was identified on pathology which was not seen on imaging. The sensitivity of PSMA-PET in detecting csPCa is 96.7% and that of MRI is 93.4% with no statistically significant difference between the two (P = 0.232). Both modalities detected all four cases of non-csPCa with these being considered false positives.

CONCLUSION

Both mpMRI and 18F-DCFPyL-PSMA-PET/CT have high sensitivity for detecting csPCa with high agreement between modalities. There were no synchronous csPCa lesions detected on pathology that were not detected on imaging too.

Circulating miRNAs as Potential Biomarkers in Prostate Cancer Patients Undergoing Radiotherapy

Introduction

Disease recurrence is a major concern in patients with localized prostate cancer (PCa) following treatment with radiotherapy (RT), and few studies have evaluated the clinical relevance of microRNAs (miRNAs) prior and post-RT.

Purpose

We aimed to investigate the significance of miRNAs in the outcomes of prostate cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy and to identify the related pathways through bioinformatics analysis.

Materials and Methods

The expression levels of miR-21, miR-106b, miR-141 and miR-375 involved in the response to radiotherapy were assessed by RT-qPCR in the serum of PCa patients (n=56) prior- and post-RT.

Results

Low expression levels of miR-106b prior-RT were associated with extracapsular extension and seminal vesicles invasion by the tumor (p=0.031 and 0.044, respectively). In the high-risk subgroup (n=47), post-RT expression levels of miR-21 were higher in patients with biochemical relapse (BR) compared to non-relapse (p=0.043). Also, in the salvage treatment subgroup (post-operative BR; n=20), post-RT expression levels of miR-21 and miR-106b were higher in patients with BR compared to non-relapse (p=0.043 and p=0.032, respectively). In the whole group of patients, high expression levels of miR-21 prior-RT and of miR-106b post-RT were associated with significantly shorter overall survival (OS; p=0.049 and p=0.050, respectively). No associations were observed among miR-141 and miR-375 expression levels with clinicopathological features or treatment outcome. Bioinformatics analysis revealed significant enrichment in DNA damage response pathways.

Conclusion

Circulating miRNAs prior or post-RT may hold prognostic implications in patients with PCa.

Management of patients who opt for radical prostatectomy during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic: an international accelerated consensus statement

OBJECTIVE

Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic caused delays in definitive treatment of patients with prostate cancer. Beyond the immediate delay a backlog for future patients is expected. The objective of this work is to develop guidance on criteria for prioritisation of surgery and reconfiguring management pathways for patients with non-metastatic prostate cancer who opt for surgical treatment. A second aim was to identify the infection prevention and control (IPC) measures to achieve a low likelihood of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hazard if radical prostatectomy (RP) was to be carried out during the outbreak and whilst the disease is endemic.

METHODS

We conducted an accelerated consensus process and systematic review of the evidence on COVID-19 and reviewed international guidance on prostate cancer. These were presented to an international prostate cancer expert panel (n = 34) through an online meeting. The consensus process underwent three rounds of survey in total. Additions to the second- and third-round surveys were formulated based on the answers and comments from the previous rounds. The Consensus opinion was defined as ≥80% agreement and this was used to reconfigure the prostate cancer pathways.

RESULTS

Evidence on the delayed management of patients with prostate cancer is scarce. There was 100% agreement that prostate cancer pathways should be reconfigured and measures developed to prevent nosocomial COVID-19 for patients treated surgically. Consensus was reached on prioritisation criteria of patients for surgery and management pathways for those who have delayed treatment. IPC measures to achieve a low likelihood of nosocomial COVID-19 were coined as 'COVID-19 cold' sites.

CONCLUSION

Reconfiguring management pathways for patients with prostate cancer is recommended if significant delay (>3-6 months) in surgical management is unavoidable. The mapped pathways provide guidance for such patients. The IPC processes proposed provide a framework for providing RP within an environment with low COVID-19 risk during the outbreak or when the disease remains endemic. The broader concepts could be adapted to other indications beyond prostate cancer surgery.

A non-randomized prospective study on the diagnostic performance of perineal prostatic biopsy, directed via diffusion nuclear resonance, in patients with suspected prostate cancer and previous negative transrectal prostate biopsy

BACKGROUND

A definition of the best strategy is necessary to optimize the follow-up of patients with previous negative transrectal guided ultrasound biopsy (TRUS-GB) and the persistence of raised prostate-specific antigen (PSA).The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prostate cancer (PCa) diagnostic rate of targeted transperineal ultrasound guided biopsy (TPUS-GB) with cognitive multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) registration with concurrent systematic biopsy in patients with previous negative systematic TRUS-GB and persistently elevated PSA levels.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this prospective study conducted at the University Infanta Sofia Hospital from April 2016 to November 2017, patients with one previous negative systematic TRUS-GB and persistently high PSA levels were referred for mpMRI prostate scans. All patients underwent systematic TPUS-GB and those patients with suspicious findings on mpMRI scans, Pirads 3 and 4-5, underwent a subsequent cognitive guidance mpMRI-TPUS-GB.

RESULTS

In total, 71 patients were included in this study. Suspicious findings on mpMRI scans prior to TPUS-GB were found in 50 patients (70.4%). 16 patients were diagnosed with prostate cancer (22.5%), of whom 14 (87.5%) had a mpMRI scan with Pirads 3 or Pirads 4-5. Patients with Pirads 3, 4 or 5 showed negative results in almost all cores taken by concurrent systematic TPUS-GB.

CONCLUSIONS

Cognitive mpMRI-TPUS fusion biopsy is a useful tool to diagnose PCa in patients with previous negative prostate biopsy. The samples obtained from the suspicious areas in the mpMRI detect more cases of intermediate and high risk PCa compared to the samples obtained at random or from non-suspicious areas.

The predictive value of the prostate health index vs. multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer diagnosis in prostate biopsy

PURPOSE

To compare the ability of Prostate Health Index (PHI) to diagnose csPCa, with that of total PSA, PSA density (PSAD) and the multiparametric magnetic resonance (mpMRI) of the prostate.

METHODS

We analysed a group of 395 men planned for a prostate biopsy who underwent a mpMRI of the prostate evaluated using the PIRADS v1 criteria. All patients had their PHI measured before prostate biopsy. In patients with an mpMRI suspicious lesions, an mpMRI/ultrasound software fusion-guided biopsy was performed first, with 12 core systematic biopsy performed in all patients. A ROC analysis was performed for PCa detection for total PSA, PSAD, PIRADS score and PHI; with an AUC curve calculated for all criteria and a combination of PIRADS score and PHI. Subsequent sub-analyses included patients undergoing first and repeat biopsy.

RESULTS

The AUC for predicting the presence of csPCa in all patients was 59.5 for total PSA, 69.7 for PHI, 64.9 for PSAD and 62.5 for PIRADS. In biopsy naive patients it was 61.6 for total PSA, 68.9 for PHI, 64.6 for PSAD and 63.1 for PIRADS. In patients with previous negative biopsy the AUC for total PSA, PHI, PSAD and PIRADS was 55.4, 71.2, 64.4 and 69.3, respectively. Adding of PHI to PIRADS increased significantly (p = 0.007) the accuracy for prediction of csPCa.

CONCLUSION

Prostate Health Index could serve as a tool in predicting csPCa. When compared to the mpMRI, it shows comparable results. The PHI cannot, however, help us guide prostate biopsies in any way, and its main use may, therefore, be in pre-MRI or pre-biopsy triage.

Active monitoring, radical prostatectomy and radical radiotherapy in PSA-detected clinically localised prostate cancer: the ProtecT three-arm RCT

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer is the most common cancer among men in the UK. Prostate-specific antigen testing followed by biopsy leads to overdetection, overtreatment as well as undertreatment of the disease. Evidence of treatment effectiveness has lacked because of the paucity of randomised controlled trials comparing conventional treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of conventional treatments for localised prostate cancer (active monitoring, radical prostatectomy and radical radiotherapy) in men aged 50-69 years.

DESIGN

A prospective, multicentre prostate-specific antigen testing programme followed by a randomised trial of treatment, with a comprehensive cohort follow-up.

SETTING

Prostate-specific antigen testing in primary care and treatment in nine urology departments in the UK.

PARTICIPANTS

Between 2001 and 2009, 228,966 men aged 50-69 years received an invitation to attend an appointment for information about the Prostate testing for cancer and Treatment (ProtecT) study and a prostate-specific antigen test; 82,429 men were tested, 2664 were diagnosed with localised prostate cancer, 1643 agreed to randomisation to active monitoring (n = 545), radical prostatectomy (n = 553) or radical radiotherapy (n = 545) and 997 chose a treatment.

INTERVENTIONS

The interventions were active monitoring, radical prostatectomy and radical radiotherapy.

TRIAL PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE

Definite or probable disease-specific mortality at the 10-year median follow-up in randomised participants.

SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Overall mortality, metastases, disease progression, treatment complications, resource utilisation and patient-reported outcomes.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences between the groups for 17 prostate cancer-specific (p = 0.48) and 169 all-cause (p = 0.87) deaths. Eight men died of prostate cancer in the active monitoring group (1.5 per 1000 person-years, 95% confidence interval 0.7 to 3.0); five died of prostate cancer in the radical prostatectomy group (0.9 per 1000 person-years, 95% confidence interval 0.4 to 2.2 per 1000 person years) and four died of prostate cancer in the radical radiotherapy group (0.7 per 1000 person-years, 95% confidence interval 0.3 to 2.0 per 1000 person years). More men developed metastases in the active monitoring group than in the radical prostatectomy and radical radiotherapy groups: active monitoring, n = 33 (6.3 per 1000 person-years, 95% confidence interval 4.5 to 8.8); radical prostatectomy, n = 13 (2.4 per 1000 person-years, 95% confidence interval 1.4 to 4.2 per 1000 person years); and radical radiotherapy, n = 16 (3.0 per 1000 person-years, 95% confidence interval 1.9 to 4.9 per 1000 person-years; p = 0.004). There were higher rates of disease progression in the active monitoring group than in the radical prostatectomy and radical radiotherapy groups: active monitoring (n = 112; 22.9 per 1000 person-years, 95% confidence interval 19.0 to 27.5 per 1000 person years); radical prostatectomy (n = 46; 8.9 per 1000 person-years, 95% confidence interval 6.7 to 11.9 per 1000 person-years); and radical radiotherapy (n = 46; 9.0 per 1000 person-years, 95% confidence interval 6.7 to 12.0 per 1000 person years; p < 0.001). Radical prostatectomy had the greatest impact on sexual function/urinary continence and remained worse than radical radiotherapy and active monitoring. Radical radiotherapy's impact on sexual function was greatest at 6 months, but recovered somewhat in the majority of participants. Sexual and urinary function gradually declined in the active monitoring group. Bowel function was worse with radical radiotherapy at 6 months, but it recovered with the exception of bloody stools. Urinary voiding and nocturia worsened in the radical radiotherapy group at 6 months but recovered. Condition-specific quality-of-life effects mirrored functional changes. No differences in anxiety/depression or generic or cancer-related quality of life were found. At the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year, the probabilities that each arm was the most cost-effective option were 58% (radical radiotherapy), 32% (active monitoring) and 10% (radical prostatectomy).

LIMITATIONS

A single prostate-specific antigen test and transrectal ultrasound biopsies were used. There were very few non-white men in the trial. The majority of men had low- and intermediate-risk disease. Longer follow-up is needed.

CONCLUSIONS

At a median follow-up point of 10 years, prostate cancer-specific mortality was low, irrespective of the assigned treatment. Radical prostatectomy and radical radiotherapy reduced disease progression and metastases, but with side effects. Further work is needed to follow up participants at a median of 15 years.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN20141297.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 37. See the National Institute for Health Research Journals Library website for further project information.

Location and Grade of Prostate Cancer Diagnosed by Transperineal Template-guided Mapping Biopsy After Negative Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Biopsy

OBJECTIVES

To determine the location and grade of prostate cancer diagnosed by transperineal template-guided mapping (TTMB) after negative transrectal ultrasound-guided (TRUS) biopsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This analysis consisted of 1118 consecutive patients who underwent TTMB from January 2005 to August 2015. Eight hundred thirty-five underwent TTMB after at least 1 negative TRUS biopsy and 283 underwent TTMB as the first biopsy procedure. The study population was divided into cohorts based on the number of prior TRUS biopsy sessions (0, 1, 2, and ≥3). No patient underwent multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. Differences in location and cancer grade detected on TTMB were evaluated as a function of the number of prior TRUS biopsies.

RESULTS

Of the 1118 patients, 679 were diagnosed with prostate cancer. This included 208, 325, 104, and 42 patients who underwent 0, 1, 2, and ≥3 prior TRUS biopsies. The incidence of cancer detection on TTMB decreased as the number of prior TRUS biopsies increased (73.5% vs. 62.4% vs. 51.7% vs. 37.2%, P<0.001); however, it became increasingly likely that TTMB would detect anterior prostate only as the number of prior TRUS biopsies increased (P=0.007). Moreover, the incidence of high grade cancer (Gleason score ≥7) in the anterior gland increased with the number of previous TRUS biopsies.

CONCLUSIONS

TTMB detected prostate cancer in over half of the patients with one or more negative TRUS biopsies. The majority of TTMB detected cancers were Gleason score ≥7. As the number of prior TRUS biopsies increased, there was a commensurate increase in the proportion of high-grade, anterior only disease.

The Value of an Extensive Transrectal Repeat Biopsy with Anterior Sampling in Men on Active Surveillance for Low-risk Prostate Cancer: A Comparison from the Randomised Study of Active Monitoring in Sweden (SAMS)

BACKGROUND

A systematic repeat biopsy is recommended for men starting on active surveillance for prostate cancer, but the optimal number and distribution of cores are unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate an extensive repeat transrectal biopsy with anterior sampling in men starting on active surveillance.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Randomised multicentre trial. From 2012 to 2016, 340 Swedish men, aged 40-75yr, with recently diagnosed low-volume Gleason grade group 1 prostate cancer were included.

INTERVENTION

Either an extensive transrectal biopsy with anterior sampling (median 19 cores) or a standard transrectal biopsy (median 12 cores).

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Primary outcome measure: Gleason grade group ≥2 cancer.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

Cancer in anteriorly directed biopsy cores and postbiopsy infection. Nonparametric statistical tests were applied.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Gleason grade group ≥2 cancer was detected in 16% of 156 men who had an extensive biopsy and in 10% of 164 men who had a standard biopsy, a 5.7% difference (95% confidence interval [CI]-0.2% to 13%, p=0.09). There was a strong linear association between prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density and cancer in the anteriorly directed biopsy cores. The odds ratios for cancer in the anteriorly directed cores were for any cancer 2.2 (95% CI 1.3-3.9, p=0.004) and for Gleason grade group ≥2 cancer 2.3 (95% CI 1.2-4.4, p=0.015) per 0.1-ng/ml/cm³ increments. Postbiopsy infections were equally common in the two groups. A limitation is that magnetic resonance imaging was not used.

CONCLUSIONS

The trial did not support general use of the extensive transrectal repeat biopsy template, but cancer in the anteriorly directed cores was common, particularly in men with high PSA density. The higher the PSA density, the stronger the reason to include anterior sampling at a systematic repeat biopsy.

PATIENT SUMMARY

This trial compared two different templates for transrectal prostate biopsy in men starting on active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer. Cancer was often found in the front part of the prostate, which is not sampled on a standard prostate biopsy.

Standardized Magnetic Resonance Imaging Reporting Using the Prostate Cancer Radiological Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation Criteria and Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion with Transperineal Saturation Biopsy to Select Men on Active Surveillance

BACKGROUND

Contemporary selection criteria for men with prostate cancer (PC) suitable for active surveillance (AS) are unsatisfactory, leading to high disqualification rates based on tumor misclassification. Conventional biopsy protocols are based on standard 12-core transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) biopsy.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the value of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/TRUS fusion biopsy over 4-yr follow-up in men on AS for low-risk PC.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Between 2010 and 2018, a total of 273 men were included. Of them, 157 men with initial 12-core TRUS biopsy and 116 with initial MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy were followed by systematic and targeted transperineal MRI/TRUS fusion biopsies based on Prostate Cancer Research International Active Surveillance criteria. MRI from follow-up MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy was assessed using the Prostate Cancer Radiological Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation (PRECISE) scoring system.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

AS-disqualification rates for patients on AS initially diagnosed by either 12-core TRUS biopsy or by MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy were compared using Kaplan-Meier estimates, log-rank tests, and regression analyses. We also analyzed the influence of negative primary MRI and PRECISE scoring to predict AS disqualification using Kaplan-Meier estimates, log-rank tests, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Of men diagnosed by 12-core TRUS biopsy, 59% were disqualified from AS based on the results of subsequent MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy. In the initial MRI fusion biopsy cohort, upgrading occurred significantly less frequently (19%, p<0.001). ROC curve analyses demonstrated good discrimination for the PRECISE score with an area under the curve of 0.83. No men with a PRECISE score of 1 or 2 (demonstrating absence or downgrading of lesions in follow-up MRI) were disqualified from AS. In our cohort, a negative baseline MRI scan was not a predictor of nondisqualification from AS. Limitations include transperineal approach and extended systematic biopsies used with MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy, which may not be representative of other centers.

CONCLUSIONS

MRI/TRUS fusion biopsies allow a reliable risk classification for patients who are candidates for AS. The application of the PRECISE scoring system demonstrated good discrimination.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In this study, we investigated the value of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and MRI/transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) fusion biopsies for the assessment of active surveillance (AS) reliability using the Prostate Cancer Radiological Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation criteria. Standard TRUS biopsies lead to significant underestimation of prostate cancer. In contrast, MRI/TRUS fusion biopsies allowed for a more reliable risk classification. For appropriate inclusion into AS, men should receive either an initial or a confirmatory MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy.

Accuracy of Transperineal Targeted Prostate Biopsies, Visual Estimation and Image Fusion in Men Needing Repeat Biopsy in the PICTURE Trial

PURPOSE

We evaluated the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer using magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsies and compared visual estimation to image fusion targeting in patients requiring repeat prostate biopsies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The prospective, ethics committee approved PICTURE trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01492270) enrolled 249 consecutive patients from January 11, 2012 to January 29, 2014. Men underwent multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and were blinded to the results. All underwent transperineal template prostate mapping biopsies. In 200 men with a lesion this was preceded by visual estimation and image fusion targeted biopsies. As the primary study end point clinically significant prostate cancer was defined as Gleason 4 + 3 or greater and/or any grade of cancer with a length of 6 mm or greater. Other definitions of clinically significant prostate cancer were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Mean ± SD patient age was 62.6 ± 7 years, median prostate specific antigen was 7.17 ng/ml (IQR 5.25-10.09), mean primary lesion size was 0.37 ± 1.52 cc with a mean of 4.3 ± 2.3 targeted cores per lesion on visual estimation and image fusion combined, and a mean of 48.7 ± 12.3 transperineal template prostate mapping biopsy cores. Transperineal template prostate mapping biopsies detected 97 clinically significant prostate cancers (48.5%) and 85 insignificant cancers (42.5%). Overall multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsies detected 81 clinically significant prostate cancers (40.5%) and 63 insignificant cancers (31.5%). In the 18 cases (9%) of clinically significant prostate cancer on magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsies were benign or clinically insignificant on transperineal template prostate mapping biopsy. Clinically significant prostate cancer was detected in 34 cases (17%) on transperineal template prostate mapping biopsy but not on magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsies and approximately half was present in nontargeted areas. Clinically significant prostate cancer was found on visual estimation and image fusion in 53 (31.3%) and 48 (28.4%) of the 169 patients (McNemar test p = 0.5322). Visual estimation missed 23 clinically significant prostate cancers (13.6%) detected by image fusion. Image fusion missed 18 clinically significant prostate cancers (10.8%) detected by visual estimation.

CONCLUSIONS

Magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsies are accurate for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer and reducing the over diagnosis of insignificant cancers. To maximize detection visual estimation as well as image fusion targeted biopsies are required.

Development and validation of a novel risk score for the detection of insignificant prostate cancer in unscreened patient cohorts

Background

Active surveillance is recommended for insignificant prostate cancer (PCa). Tools exist to identify suitable candidates using clinical variables. We aimed to develop and validate a novel risk score (NRS) predicting which patients are harbouring insignificant PCa.

Methods

We used prospectively collected data from 8040 consecutive unscreened patients who underwent radical prostatectomy between 2006 and 2016. Of these, data from 2799 patients with Gleason 3 + 3 on biopsy were used to develop a multivariate model predicting the presence of insignificant PC at radical prostatectomy (ERSPC updated definition³: Gleason 3 + 3 only, index tumour volume < 1.3 cm³ and total tumour volume < 2.5 cm³). This was used to develop a novel risk score (NRS) which was validated in an equivalent independent cohort (n = 441). We compared the accuracy of existing predictive tools and the NRS in these cohorts.

Results

The NRS (incorporating PSA, prostate volume, age, clinical T Stage, percent and number of positive biopsy cores) outperformed pre-existing predictive tools in derivation and validation cohorts (AUC 0.755 and 0.76, respectively). Selection bias due to analysis of a surgical cohort is acknowledged.

Conclusions

The advantage of the NRS is that it can be tailored to patient characteristics and may prove to be valuable tool in clinical decision-making.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Patient experience after transperineal template prostate biopsy compared to prior transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy

Introduction

Transperineal template prostate biopsy (TTPB) is reported to have higher cancer detection and lower complication rate compared to transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy (TRUSPB).

However, there is no report of the same patient's experience with both types of biopsy.

To compare the patient reported experience in the same cohort of patients who underwent both TRUSPB and TTPB, using validated questionnaires.

Material and methods

We retrospectively utilised the Patient Reported Outcome Methods (PROM) tool validated for TRUSPB and the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) questionnaire to collect longitudinal data at follow-up in the same cohort of patients who underwent both TTPB and TRUSPB between January 2015 and February 2016.

RESULTS

Out of 44 TTPB performed during the period, 35 patients had undergone both TRUSPB and TTPB. Patient reported pain post biopsy was significantly higher with TRUSPB (86% vs. 61%; p = 0.01). Post-biopsy urinary retention rates were significantly higher in the TTPB group (16.7% vs. 5.7%; p = 0.05, t test). Furthermore, the incidence of patient reported sexual dysfunction rates based on the IIEF-5 was significantly higher in the TTPB group (p = 0.001, t test).

Conclusions

Although overall TTPB was better tolerated in this cohort of patients with lower risk of health care contact, patients reported higher incidence of urinary retention and sexual dysfunction after TTPB compared to TRUSPB. Thus, patients should be adequately informed about potential risks with each biopsy as they may have significant impact on quality of life.

Comparison of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System versions 1 and 2 for the Detection of Peripheral Zone Gleason Score 3 + 4 = 7 Cancers

OBJECTIVE

The objective of our study was to compare Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 1 (PI-RADSv1) and Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADSv2) for the detection of peripheral zone (PZ) Gleason score 3 + 4 = 7 cancers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty-seven consecutive patients with 52 PZ Gleason score 3 + 4 = 7 cancers that were 0.5 cm³ or larger underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) and 3-T MRI between 2012 and 2015. Two blinded radiologists (readers 1 and 2) retrospectively assigned PI-RADSv1 sequence (T2-weighted imaging, DWI, dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI [DCE-MRI]) and sum scores and PI-RADSv2 assessment categories. A third blinded radiologist (reader 3) measured apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) ratio (ADC of tumor / ADC of normal PZ) using RP-MRI maps. Sensitivity, false-positive rate, and overall accuracy were compared using McNemar test. Pearson correlation was performed.

RESULTS

Using PI-RADSv1, reader 1 detected 86.5% (45/52) of the cancers and reader 2, 76.9% (40/52) of the cancers. Using PI-RADSv2, reader 1 detected 78.9% (41/52) and reader 2, 67.3% (35/52). Reader 1 detected 7.7% (4/52) and reader 2 detected 9.6% (5/52) more tumors using PI-RADSv1 due to T2-weighted imaging score ≥ 4 or DCE-MRI score ≥ 3. Sensitivity was higher for PI-RADSv1 (p = 0.01 and 0.03, readers 1 and 2). False-positive rates were higher with PI-RADSv1 than with PI-RADSv2 (1.8% vs 0.9% for reader 1; 3.6% vs 1.8% for reader 2) without significant differences in false-positive rate (p = 0.41 and 0.25) or overall accuracy (p = 0.06 and 0.23). PI-RADSv1 sum scores correlated strongly with PI-RADSv2 categories (B = 0.78-0.93, p < 0.0001). The mean ADC ratio was 0.61 ± 0.14 mm²/s with no difference between visible and nonvisible tumors (p = 0.06-0.5). Interobserver agreement was moderate for PI-RADSv2 (κ = 0.41) and ranged from slight to substantial for PI-RADSv1 (T2-weighted imaging, κ = 0.32; DWI, κ = 0.52; DCE-MRI, κ = 0.13).

CONCLUSION

There was no difference in overall detection of cancers comparing PI-RADSv1 and PI-RADSv2; however, PI-RADSv1 sequence scores on T2-weighted imaging and DCE-MRI detected approximately 10% more tumors that were otherwise underestimated on DWI and using PI-RADSv2 decision-tree rules.

Accuracy of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis

The goals of this meta-analysis were to assess the effectiveness of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) in patients with prostate carcinoma (PCa) and to explore the risk profiles with the highest benefit. Systematic electronic searched were conducted in database. We used patient-based and biopsy-based pooled weighted estimates of the sensitivity, specificity, and a summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve for assessing the diagnostic performance of DCE. We performed direct and indirect comparisons of DCE and other methods of imaging. A total of 26 articles met the inclusion criteria for the analysis. DCE-MRI pooled sensitivity was 0.53 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.67), with a specificity of 0.88 (95% CI 0.83 to 0.92) on whole gland. The peripheral zone pooled sensitivity was 0.70 (95% CI 0.46 to 0.86), with a specificity of 0.88 (95% CI 0.76 to 0.94). Compared with T2-weighted imaging (T2WI), DCE was statistically superior to T2. In conclusion, DCE had relatively high specificity in detecting PCa but relatively low sensitivity as a complementary functional method. DCE-MRI might help clinicians exclude cases of normal tissue and serve as an adjunct to conventional imaging when seeking to identify tumor foci in patients with PCa.

[Multiparametric MRI and MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy in patients with prior negative prostate biopsy]

BACKGROUND

Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) plays an increasingly important role in prostate cancer (PCa) diagnostics and is recommended in men with previously negative TRUS biopsy. The optimal biopsy method after mpMRI is under discussion.

OBJECTIVE

Prospective, PIRADS- and START-conform analysis of the relevance of mpMRI and MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy in patients with prior negative TRUS biopsy and comparison of the detection rates of fusion-targeted biopsies (tB) and systematic transperineal saturation biopsies (sB).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between 10/2012 and 09/2015, 287 patients with prior negative TRUS biopsy underwent mpMRI and software-assisted, rigid MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy. In addition to and strictly separated from sB (median cores n = 24), tB (median cores per patient n = 4, per lesion n = 3) were performed in case of suspicious MRI lesions (PIRADS ≥ 2). Both biopsy methods were compared by using McNemar's test.

RESULTS

Of the 287 patients, 148 (52 %) had positive biopsies. Of these, 108/287 (38 %) had significant PCa (Gleason Score [GS] = 3 + 3 and PSA ≥ 10 ng/ml or GS ≥ 3 + 4) and again 43/287 (15 %) had a GS ≥ 4 + 3 PCa. sB failed to diagnose 8/148 PCa (5.4 %) and 6/108 significant PCa (5.5 %), whereas tB failed to diagnose 48 (32.4 %) PCa (p < 0.0001) and 22 (20.4 %) significant PCa (p = 0.0046). Of the PCa missed by tB, 11  had a GS ≥ 3 + 4 and 5 of these a GS = 4 + 3. On a per patient basis, MRI failed to detect 5 significant PCa, whereby 17 of the significant PCa were missed by fusion-targeted cores alone.

CONCLUSIONS

In men with unsuspicious MRI (PIRADS < 3), there is a 11 % risk of significant PCa. In case of suspicious MRI lesions, the combination of both biopsy approaches offers maximum tumor detection.

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.

Transperineal prostate biopsies for diagnosis of prostate cancer are well tolerated: a prospective study using patient-reported outcome measures

We aimed to determine short-term patient-reported outcomes in men having general anesthetic transperineal (TP) prostate biopsies. A prospective cohort study was performed in men having a diagnostic TP biopsy. This was done using a validated and adapted questionnaire immediately post-biopsy and at follow-up of between 7 and 14 days across three tertiary referral hospitals with a response rate of 51.6%. Immediately after biopsy 43/201 (21.4%) of men felt light-headed, syncopal, or suffered syncope. Fifty-three percent of men felt discomfort after biopsy (with 95% scoring <5 in a 0-10 scale). Twelve out of 196 men (6.1%) felt pain immediately after the procedure. Despite a high incidence of symptoms (e.g., up to 75% had some hematuria, 47% suffered some pain), it was not a moderate or serious problem for most, apart from hemoejaculate which 31 men suffered. Eleven men needed catheterization (5.5%). There were no inpatient admissions due to complications (hematuria, sepsis). On repeat questioning at a later time point, only 25/199 (12.6%) of men said repeat biopsy would be a significant problem despite a significant and marked reduction in erectile function after the procedure. From this study, we conclude that TP biopsy is well tolerated with similar side effect profiles and attitudes of men to repeat biopsy to men having TRUS biopsies. These data allow informed counseling of men prior to TP biopsy and a benchmark for tolerability with local anesthetic TP biopsies being developed for clinical use.

[Value of MRI/ultrasound fusion in primary biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer]

BACKGROUND

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) plays an emerging role in prostate cancer diagnosis. We compared the cancer detection rates of targeted biopsy (tB) of suspicious lesions in mpMRI versus systematic transperineal saturation biopsy (sB) in men with primary suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa).

METHODS

A total of 437 consecutive primary biopsy patients, who underwent transperineal systematic and fusion-guided biopsy between 2012 and 2014, were enrolled. mpMRI was evaluated based on PI-RADS. Analysis of biopsy specimen was performed following START criteria.

RESULTS

Of the 437 men, 334 harbored 426 MR lesions. Overall, 274 PCa and 203 significant PCa (Gleason score (GS) ≥ 3 + 4, GS = 3 + 3 and PSA values ≥ 10 ng/ml) were detected. There were 52 (26 %) significant PCa exclusively found by sB, whereas only 18 (9 %) were identified by tB (p < 0.001). Of 80 high-grade PCa with GS ≥ 4 + 3, 70 were diagnosed by sB, and 60 by tB (p = 0.007). In addition, 54 % of all insignificant PCa (GS < 7, PSA < 10 ng/ml) were detected by sB alone (p < 0.001). AUC of mpMRI was 0.76-0.78.

CONCLUSION

The combination of tB + sB detects PCa most accurately. Ongoing prospective (multicenter) studies are evaluating the status of the 12 core TRUS-guided random biopsy.

Optimizing safety and accuracy of prostate biopsy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The objective of this article is to examine the safety of prostate biopsy and discuss the emerging role of MRI-ultrasound fusion technology in improving diagnostic accuracy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Men undergoing prostate biopsy frequently experience minor complications, including hematospermia, hematuria, and infection. Quinolone-resistant bacteria are a growing concern; thus, transperineal access or modification of antibiotic prophylaxis based on local antibiograms is now used to avoid infectious complications.Multiparametric MRI allows visualization of many prostate cancers, and by fusing MRI with real-time ultrasound, a biopsy needle can be directed by a urologist into suspicious regions of interest. Using this new method, detection of clinically significant prostate cancer has increased and the incidence of falsely negative biopsies has decreased.

SUMMARY

Prostate biopsy is generally a safe procedure, and with attention to local patterns of antibiotic resistance, infectious complications can be minimized. MRI-ultrasound fusion has significantly improved the accuracy of prostate biopsy, allowing tracking and targeting not previously possible.

Magnetic Resonance and Ultrasound Image Fusion Supported Transperineal Prostate Biopsy Using the Ginsburg Protocol: Technique, Learning Points, and Biopsy Results

BACKGROUND

Prostate biopsy supported by transperineal image fusion has recently been developed as a new method to the improve accuracy of prostate cancer detection.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the Ginsburg protocol for transperineal prostate biopsy supported by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) image fusion, provide learning points for its application, and report biopsy results. The article is supplemented by a Surgery in Motion video.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This single-centre retrospective outcome study included 534 patients from March 2012 to October 2015. A total of 107 had no previous prostate biopsy, 295 had benign TRUS-guided biopsies, and 159 were on active surveillance for low-risk cancer.

SURGICAL PROCEDURE

A Likert scale reported mpMRI for suspicion of cancer from 1 (no suspicion) to 5 (cancer highly likely). Transperineal biopsies were obtained under general anaesthesia using BiopSee fusion software (Medcom, Darmstadt, Germany). All patients had systematic biopsies, two cores from each of 12 anatomic sectors. Likert 3-5 lesions were targeted with a further two cores per lesion.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Any cancer and Gleason score 7-10 cancer on biopsy were noted. Descriptive statistics and positive predictive values (PPVs) and negative predictive values (NPVs) were calculated.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The detection rate of Gleason score 7-10 cancer was similar across clinical groups. Likert scale 3-5 MRI lesions were reported in 378 (71%) of the patients. Cancer was detected in 249 (66%) and Gleason score 7-10 cancer was noted in 157 (42%) of these patients. PPV for detecting 7-10 cancer was 0.15 for Likert score 3, 0.43 for score 4, and 0.63 for score 5. NPV of Likert 1-2 findings was 0.87 for Gleason score 7-10 and 0.97 for Gleason score ≥4+3=7 cancer. Limitations include lack of data on complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Transperineal prostate biopsy supported by MRI/TRUS image fusion using the Ginsburg protocol yielded high detection rates of Gleason score 7-10 cancer. Because the NPV for excluding Gleason score 7-10 cancer was very high, prostate biopsies may not be needed for all men with elevated prostate-specific antigen values and nonsuspicious mpMRI.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We present our technique to sample (biopsy) the prostate by the transperineal route (the area between the scrotum and the anus) to detect prostate cancer using a fusion of magnetic resonance and ultrasound images to guide the sampling.

The concordance between the volume hotspot and the grade hotspot: a 3-D reconstructive model using the pathology outputs from the PROMIS trial

OBJECTIVES

The rationale for directing targeted biopsy towards the centre of lesions has been questioned in light of prostate cancer grade heterogeneity. In this study, we assess the assumption that the maximum cancer Gleason grade (Gleason grade hotspot) lies within the maximum dimension (volume hotspot) of a prostate cancer lesion.

METHODS

3-D histopathological models were reconstructed using the outputs of the 5-mm transperineal mapping (TPM) biopsies used as the reference test in the pilot phase of Prostate Mri Imaging Study (PROMIS), a paired validating cohort study investigating the performance of multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) against transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) biopsies. The prostate was fully sampled with 5 mm intervals; each core was separately labelled, inked and orientated in space to register 3-D cancer lesions location. The data from the histopathology results were used to create a 3-D interpolated reconstruction of each lesion and identify the spatial coordinates of the largest dimension (volume hot spot) and highest Gleason grade (Gleason grade hotspot) and assess their concordance.

RESULTS

Ninety-four men, with median age 62 years (interquartile range, IQR= 58-68) and median PSA 6.5 ng ml(-1) (4.6-8.8), had a median of 80 (I69-89) cores each with a median of 4.5 positive cores (0-12). In the primary analysis, the prevalence of homogeneous lesions was 148 (76%; 95% confidence interval (CI) ±6.0%). In all, 184 (94±3.2%) lesions showed concordant hotspots and 11/47 (23±12.1%) of heterogeneous lesions showed discordant hotspots. The median 3-D distance between discordant hotspots was 12.8 mm (9.9-15.5). These figures remained stable on secondary analyses using alternative reconstructive assumptions. Limitations include a certain degree of error within reconstructed models.

CONCLUSIONS

Guiding one biopsy needle to the maximum cancer diameter would lead to correct Gleason grade attribution in 94% of all lesions and 79% of heterogeneous ones if a true hit was obtained. Further correlation of histological lesions, their MRI appearance and the detectability of these hotspots on MRI will be undertaken once PROMIS results are released.

The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the PROGENSA® prostate cancer antigen 3 assay and the Prostate Health Index in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: a systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

There is no single definitive test to identify prostate cancer in men. Biopsies are commonly used to obtain samples of prostate tissue for histopathological examination. However, this approach frequently misses cases of cancer, meaning that repeat biopsies may be necessary to obtain a diagnosis. The PROGENSA(®) prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) assay (Hologic Gen-Probe, Marlborough, MA, USA) and the Prostate Health Index (phi; Beckman Coulter Inc., Brea, CA, USA) are two new tests (a urine test and a blood test, respectively) that are designed to be used to help clinicians decide whether or not to recommend a repeat biopsy.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the PCA3 assay and the phi in the diagnosis of prostate cancer.

DATA SOURCES

Multiple publication databases and trial registers were searched in May 2014 (from 2000 to May 2014), including MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, ISI Web of Science, Medion, Aggressive Research Intelligence Facility database, ClinicalTrials.gov, International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Register and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform.

REVIEW METHODS

The assessment of clinical effectiveness involved three separate systematic reviews, namely reviews of the analytical validity, the clinical validity of these tests and the clinical utility of these tests. The assessment of cost-effectiveness comprised a systematic review of full economic evaluations and the development of a de novo economic model.

SETTING

The perspective of the evaluation was the NHS in England and Wales.

PARTICIPANTS

Men suspected of having prostate cancer for whom the results of an initial prostate biopsy were negative or equivocal.

INTERVENTIONS

The use of the PCA3 score or phi in combination with existing tests (including histopathology results, prostate-specific antigen level and digital rectal examination), multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and clinical judgement.

RESULTS

In addition to documents published by the manufacturers, six studies were identified for inclusion in the analytical validity review. The review identified issues concerning the precision of the PCA3 assay measurements. It also highlighted issues relating to the storage requirements and stability of samples intended for analysis using the phi assay. Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria for the clinical validity review. These studies reported results for 10 different clinical comparisons. There was insufficient evidence to enable the identification of appropriate test threshold values for use in a clinical setting. In addition, the implications of adding either the PCA3 assay or the phi to clinical assessment were not clear. Furthermore, the addition of the PCA3 assay or the phi to clinical assessment plus magnetic resonance imaging was not found to improve discrimination. No published papers met the inclusion criteria for either the clinical utility review or the cost-effectiveness review. The results from the cost-effectiveness analyses indicated that using either the PCA3 assay or the phi in the NHS was not cost-effective.

LIMITATIONS

The main limitations of the systematic review of clinical validity are that the review conclusions are over-reliant on findings from one study, the descriptions of clinical assessment vary widely within reviewed studies and many of the reported results for the clinical validity outcomes do not include either standard errors or confidence intervals.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical benefit of using the PCA3 assay or the phi in combination with existing tests, scans and clinical judgement has not yet been confirmed. The results from the cost-effectiveness analyses indicate that the use of these tests in the NHS would not be cost-effective.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014009595.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

The current and future role of magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer detection and management

Purpose

Accurate detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (PC) and correct risk attribution are essential to individually counsel men with PC. Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) facilitates correct localization of index lesions within the prostate and MRI-targeted prostate biopsy (TPB) helps to avoid the shortcomings of conventional biopsy such as false-negative results or underdiagnosis of aggressive PC. In this review we summarize the different sequences of mpMRI, characterize the possibilities of incorporating MRI in the biopsy workflow and outline the performance of targeted and systematic cores in significant cancer detection. Furthermore, we outline the potential of MRI in patients undergoing active surveillance (AS) and in the pre-operative setting.

Materials and methods

An electronic MEDLINE/PubMed search up to February 2015 was performed. English language articles were reviewed for inclusion ability and data were extracted, analyzed and summarized.

Results

Targeted biopsies significantly outperform conventional systematic biopsies in the detection of significant PC and are not inferior when compared to transperineal saturation biopsies. MpMRI can detect index lesions in app. 90% of cases as compared to prostatectomy specimen. The diagnostic performance of biparametric MRI (T2w + DWI) is not inferior to mpMRI, offering options to diminish cost- and time-consumption. Since app 10% of significant lesions are still MRI-invisible, systematic cores seem to be necessary. In-bore biopsy and MRI/TRUS-fusion-guided biopsy tend to be superior techniques compared to cognitive fusion. In AS, mpMRI avoids underdetection of significant PC and confirms low-risk disease accurately. In higher-risk disease, pre-surgical MRI can change the clinically-based surgical plan in up to a third of cases.

Conclusions

mpMRI and targeted biopsies are able to detect significant PC accurately and mitigate insignificant PC detection. As long as the negative predictive value (NPV) is still imperfect, systematic cores should not be omitted for optimal staging of disease. The potential to correctly classify aggressiveness of disease in AS patients and to guide and plan prostatectomy is evolving.

The challenging landscape of medical device approval in localized prostate cancer

Findings of research using modern multiparametric MRI have provided clinicians with reliable targets for guiding prostate biopsy sampling and directing targeted therapy, often termed focal therapy, to specific areas of the prostate. This emerging shift in treatment strategy from a whole-gland approach to a lesion-specific or region-specific approach requires novel medical devices. The rules regulating the approval and clinical use of such new devices often differ between the USA and Europe, and these differences can affect the treatments that patients receive. Current regulatory pathways for approval of various image-guided biopsy and focal therapy devices intended to be used in patients with prostate cancer are discussed in detail. Finally, we offer some perspective on the current status of research in the field, and propose a potential roadmap towards the establishment of timely, safe and standardized criteria for optimal evaluation of novel image-guided devices for treatment of patients with localized prostate cancer.

The Prevalence of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer According to Commonly Used Histological Thresholds in Men Undergoing Template Prostate Mapping Biopsies

PURPOSE

Transrectal prostate biopsies are inaccurate and, thus, the prevalence of clinically significant prostate cancer in men undergoing biopsy is unknown. We determined the ability of different histological thresholds to denote clinically significant cancer in men undergoing a more accurate biopsy, that of transperineal template prostate mapping.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this multicenter, cross-sectional cohort of men who underwent template prostate mapping biopsies between May 2006 and January 2012, 4 different thresholds of significance combining tumor grade and burden were used to measure the consequent variation with respect to the prevalence of clinically significant disease.

RESULTS

Of 1,203 men 17% (199) had no previous biopsy, 38% (455) had a prior negative transrectal ultrasound biopsy, 24% (289) were on active surveillance and 21% (260) were seeking risk stratification. Mean patient age was 63.5 years (SD 7.6) and median prostate specific antigen was 7.4 ng/ml (IQR 5.3-10.5). Overall 35% of the patients (424) had no cancer detected. The prevalence of clinically significant cancer varied between 14% and 83% according to the histological threshold used, in particular between 30% and 51% among men who had no previous biopsy, between 14% and 27% among men who had a prior negative biopsy, between 36% and 74% among men on active surveillance, and between 47% and 83% among men seeking risk stratification.

CONCLUSIONS

According to template prostate mapping biopsy between 1 in 2 and 1 in 3 men have prostate cancer that is histologically defined as clinically significant. This suggests that the commonly used thresholds may be set too low.

Visually directed vs. software-based targeted biopsy compared to transperineal template mapping biopsy in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer

OBJECTIVES

Targeted biopsy based on cognitive or software magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to transrectal ultrasound registration seems to increase the detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer as compared with standard biopsy. However, these strategies have not been directly compared against an accurate test yet. The aim of this study was to obtain pilot data on the diagnostic ability of visually directed targeted biopsy vs. software-based targeted biopsy, considering transperineal template mapping (TPM) biopsy as the reference test.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Prospective paired cohort study included 50 consecutive men undergoing TPM with one or more visible targets detected on preoperative multiparametric MRI. Targets were contoured on the Biojet software. Patients initially underwent software-based targeted biopsies, then visually directed targeted biopsies, and finally systematic TPM. The detection rate of clinically significant disease (Gleason score ≥3+4 and/or maximum cancer core length ≥4mm) of one strategy against another was compared by 3×3 contingency tables. Secondary analyses were performed using a less stringent threshold of significance (Gleason score ≥4+3 and/or maximum cancer core length ≥6mm).

RESULTS

Median age was 68 (interquartile range: 63-73); median prostate-specific antigen level was 7.9ng/mL (6.4-10.2). A total of 79 targets were detected with a mean of 1.6 targets per patient. Of these, 27 (34%), 28 (35%), and 24 (31%) were scored 3, 4, and 5, respectively. At a patient level, the detection rate was 32 (64%), 34 (68%), and 38 (76%) for visually directed targeted, software-based biopsy, and TPM, respectively. Combining the 2 targeted strategies would have led to detection rate of 39 (78%). At a patient level and at a target level, software-based targeted biopsy found more clinically significant diseases than did visually directed targeted biopsy, although this was not statistically significant (22% vs. 14%, P = 0.48; 51.9% vs. 44.3%, P = 0.24). Secondary analysis showed similar results. Based on these findings, a paired cohort study enrolling at least 257 men would verify whether this difference is statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

The diagnostic ability of software-based targeted biopsy and visually directed targeted biopsy seems almost comparable, although utility and efficiency both seem to be slightly in favor of the software-based strategy. Ongoing trials are sufficiently powered to prove or disprove these findings.

Transperineal template prostate-mapping biopsies: an evaluation of different protocols in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether modified transperineal template prostate-mapping (TTPM) biopsy protocols, altering the template or the biopsy density, have sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV) equal to full 5-mm TTPM.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis of an institutional registry including treatment-naïve men undergoing 5-mm TTPM biopsy analysed in a 20-zone fashion. The value of three modified strategies was assessed by comparing the information provided by selected zones against full 5-mm TTPM. Strategy 1, did not consider the findings of anterior areas; strategies 2 and 3 simulated a reduced biopsy density by excluding intervening zones. A bootstrapping technique was used to calculate reliable estimates of sensitivity and NPV of these three strategies for the detection of clinically significant disease (maximum cancer core length ≥4 mm and/or Gleason score ≥3 + 4).

RESULTS

In all, 391 men with a median (interquartile range, IQR) age of 62 (58-67) years were included. The median (IQR) PSA level and PSA density were 6.9 (4.8-10) ng/mL and 0.17 (IQR 0.12-0.25) ng/mL/mL, respectively. A median (IQR) of 6 (2-9) cores out of 48 (33-63) taken per man were positive for prostate cancer. No cancer was detected in 67 men (17%), whilst low-, intermediate- and high-risk disease was identified in 78 (20%), 80 (21%), and 166 (42%), respectively. Strategy 1, 2 and 3 had sensitivities of 78% [95% confidence interval (CI) 73-84%], 85% (95% CI 80-90%) and 84% (95% CI 79-89%), respectively. The NPVs of the three strategies were 73% (95% CI 67-80%), 80% (95% CI 74-86%) and 79% (95% CI 72-84%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Altering the template or decreasing sampling density has a substantial negative impact on the ability of TTPM biopsy to exclude clinically significant disease. This should be considered when modified TTPM biopsy strategies are used to select men for tissue-preserving approaches, and when modified TTPM are used to validate new diagnostic tests.

Epidermal growth factor receptor immunohistochemistry: new opportunities in metastatic colorectal cancer

The treatment of cancer is becoming more precise, targeting specific oncogenic drivers with targeted molecular therapies. The epidermal growth factor receptor has been found to be over-expressed in a multitude of solid tumours. Immunohistochemistry is widely used in the fields of diagnostic and personalised medicine to localise and visualise disease specific proteins. To date the clinical utility of epidermal growth factor receptor immunohistochemistry in determining monoclonal antibody efficacy has remained somewhat inconclusive. The lack of an agreed reproducible scoring criteria for epidermal growth factor receptor immunohistochemistry has, in various clinical trials yielded conflicting results as to the use of epidermal growth factor receptor immunohistochemistry assay as a companion diagnostic. This has resulted in this test being removed from the licence for the drug panitumumab and not performed in clinical practice for cetuximab. In this review we explore the reasons behind this with a particular emphasis on colorectal cancer, and to suggest a way of resolving the situation through improving the precision of epidermal growth factor receptor immunohistochemistry with quantitative image analysis of digitised images complemented with companion molecular morphological techniques such as in situ hybridisation and section based gene mutation analysis.

Development, validation and evaluation of an instrument for active monitoring of men with clinically localised prostate cancer: systematic review, cohort studies and qualitative study

Background

Active surveillance [(AS), sometimes called active monitoring (AM)],is a National Institute for Health and Care Excellence-recommended management option for men with clinically localised prostate cancer (PCa). It aims to target radical treatment only to those who would benefit most. Little consensus exists nationally or internationally about safe and effective protocols for AM/AS or triggers that indicate if or when men should move to radical treatment.

Objective

The aims of this project were to review how prostate-specific antigen (PSA) has been used in AM/AS programmes; to develop and test the validity of a new model for predicting future PSA levels; to develop an instrument, based on PSA, that would be acceptable and effective for men and clinicians to use in clinical practice; and to design a robust study to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the instrument.

Methods

A systematic review was conducted to investigate how PSA is currently used to monitor men in worldwide AM/AS studies. A model for PSA change with age was developed using Prostate testing for cancer and Treatment (ProtecT) data and validated using data from two PSA-era cohorts and two pre-PSA-era cohorts. The model was used to derive 95% PSA reference ranges (PSARRs) across ages. These reference ranges were used to predict the onset of metastases or death from PCa in one of the pre-PSA-era cohorts. PSARRs were incorporated into an active monitoring system (AMS) and demonstrated to 18 clinicians and 20 men with PCa from four NHS trusts. Qualitative interviews investigated patients’ and clinicians’ views about current AM/AS protocols and the acceptability of the AMS within current practice.

Results

The systematic review found that the most commonly used triggers for clinical review of PCa were PSA doubling time (PSADT) < 3 years or PSA velocity (PSAv) > 1 ng/ml/year. The model for PSA change (developed using ProtecT study data) predicted PSA values in AM/AS cohorts within 2 ng/ml of observed PSA in up to 79% of men. Comparing the three PSA markers, there was no clear optimal approach to alerting men to worsening cancer. The PSARR and PSADT markers improved the modelc-statistic for predicting death from PCa by 0.11 (21%) and 0.13 (25%), respectively, compared with using diagnostic information alone [PSA, age, tumour stage (T-stage)]. Interviews revealed variation in clinical practice regarding eligibility and follow-up protocols. Patients and clinicians perceive current AM/AS practice to be framed by uncertainty, ranging from uncertainty about selection of eligible AM/AS candidates to uncertainty about optimum follow-up protocols and thresholds for clinical review/radical treatment. Patients and clinicians generally responded positively to the AMS. The impact of the AMS on clinicians’ decision-making was limited by a lack of data linking AMS values to long-term outcomes and by current clinical practice, which viewed PSA measures as one of several tools guiding clinical decisions in AM/AS. Patients reported that they would look to clinicians, rather than to a tool, to direct decision-making.

Limitations

The quantitative findings were severely hampered by a lack of clinical outcomes or events (such as metastases). The qualitative findings were limited through reliance on participants’ reports of practices and recollections of events rather than observations of actual interactions.

Conclusions

Patients and clinicians found that the instrument provided additional, potentially helpful, information but were uncertain about the current usefulness of the risk model we developed for routine management. Comparison of the model with other monitoring strategies will require clinical outcomes from ongoing AM/AS studies.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Heterogeneity in D'Amico classification-based low-risk prostate cancer: Differences in upgrading and upstaging according to active surveillance eligibility

BACKGROUND

To date, no study has examined clinical, pathological, and surgical characteristics of D׳Amico low-risk patients according to active surveillance (AS) eligibility.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We relied on patients with low-risk prostate cancer, who were classified based on the D׳Amico classification, treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) between 2008 and 2013 at the Martini-Clinic Prostate Cancer Center. We assessed differences in clinical, pathological, and surgical characteristics in D׳Amico low-risk patients according to AS eligibility (prostate-specific antigen [PSA]≤ 10 ng/ml, Gleason score ≤ 3 + 3, ≤ 2 positive cores,≤5 0% tumor content per core, and ≤ cT1-2a). Multivariable logistic regression analyses targeted 2 end points: (1) presence of either intermediate- or high-risk characteristics (Gleason score ≥ 3+4 or ≥ pT3 or pN1) or (2) exclusive presence of high-risk characteristics (Gleason score ≥ 4+4 or ≥ pT3 or pN1) at RP.

RESULTS

Of 1,331 patients low-risk prostate cancer classified based on the D׳Amico classification, 825 (62%) men were eligible for AS. AS candidates were less frequently either upgraded (55% vs. 78%, P<0.001) or upstaged (8% vs. 15%, P<0.001). Similarly, at final pathology, AS candidates less frequently harbored either intermediate- or high-risk (56% vs. 78%, P<0.001), or exclusive high-risk characteristics (9% vs. 16%, P<0.001). Tumor involvement per core (>50%) (most powerful), number of positive cores, PSA values, and age were independent predictors for either intermediate- or high-risk characteristics at RP. Tumor involvement per core and PSA values were independent predictors for exclusive high-risk characteristics at RP.

CONCLUSIONS

D׳Amico low-risk patients did not have a homogeneous histology at RP. Especially, non-AS candidates were at a higher risk of either upgrading or upstaging at final pathology. Tumor involvement greater than 50% per core was the most powerful indicator of adverse pathology. Therefore, D'Amico low-risk criteria are not safe enough to identify AS candidates.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging Targeted Biopsy Improves Selection of Patients Considered for Active Surveillance for Clinically Low Risk Prostate Cancer Based on Systematic Biopsies

PURPOSE

Current selection criteria for active surveillance based on systematic biopsy underestimate prostate cancer volume and grade. We investigated the role of additional magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy in reclassifying patients eligible for active surveillance based on systematic biopsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a study at 2 institutions in a total of 281 men with increased prostate specific antigen. All men met certain criteria, including 1) prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging, 12-core transrectal systematic biopsy and 2 additional magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsies of lesions suspicious for cancer during the same sequence as systematic biopsy, and 2) eligibility for active surveillance based on systematic biopsy results. Criteria for active surveillance were prostate specific antigen less than 10 ng/ml, no Gleason grade 4/5, 5 mm or less involvement of any biopsy core and 2 or fewer positive systematic biopsy cores. Patient characteristics were compared between reclassified and nonreclassified groups based on magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy results.

RESULTS

On magnetic resonance imaging 58% of the 281 patients had suspicious lesions. Magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy was positive for cancer in 81 of 163 patients (50%). Of 281 patients 28 (10%) were reclassified by magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy as ineligible for active surveillance based on Gleason score in 8, cancer length in 20 and Gleason score plus cancer length in 9. Suspicious areas on magnetic resonance imaging were in the anterior part of the prostate in 15 of the 28 men (54%). Reclassified patients had a smaller prostate volume (37 vs 52 cc) and were older (66.5 vs 63 years) than those who were not reclassified (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy reclassified 10% of patients who were eligible for active surveillance based on systematic biopsy. Its incorporation into the active surveillance eligibility criteria may decrease the risk of reclassification to higher stages during followup.