MRI-Targeted, Systematic, and Combined Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis

Which protocol for prostate biopsies in patients with a positive MRI? Interest of systematic biopsies by sectors

BACKGROUND

Current prostate biopsy (PBx) protocol for prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis is to perform systematic biopsies (SBx) combined with targeted biopsies (TBx) in case of positive MRI (i.e. PI-RADS ≥ 3). To assess the utility of performing SBx in combination with TBx, we determined the added value of SBx brought to the diagnosis of PCa according to their sextant location and MRI target characteristics.

METHODS

In our local prospectively collected database, we conducted a single-center retrospective study including all patients with a suspicion of PCa, who underwent transrectal ultrasound-guided (TRUS) prostate biopsies (PBx) with a prior MRI and a single lesion classified as PI-RADS ≥ 3. We have characterized the SBx according to their location on MRI: same sextant (S-SBx), adjacent sextant (A-SBx), ipsilateral side (I-SBx) and contralateral side (C-SBx). The added value of SBx and TBx was defined as any upgrading to significant PCa (csPCa) (ISUP ≥2).

RESULTS

371 patients were included in the study. The added value of SBx was 10% overall. Regarding the lesion location and the SBx sextant, the added value of SBx was: 5.1% for S-SBx, 5.4% for A-SBx, 4.9% for I-SBx and 1.9% for C-SBx. The overall added value of SBx was 6.8% for PI-RADS 3 lesions, 14% for PI-RADS 4 lesions and 6.7% for PI-RADS 5 lesions (p = 0.063). The added value of SBx for contralateral side was 1.9% (2/103), 3.1% (5/163) and 0% (0/105) for PI-RADS 3, PI-RADS 4 and PI-RADS 5 lesions, respectively (p = 0,4). The added value of SBx was lower when the number of TBx was higher (OR 0.57; CI 95% 0.37-0.85; p = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that the utility of performing SBx in the contralateral lobe toward the MRI lesion was very low, supporting that they might be avoided.

Image-guided multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy augmented with a sextant versus an extended template random biopsy: Comparison of cancer detection rates, complication and functional outcomes

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy of a novel fusion template "reduced six-core systemic template and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound (mpMRI/TRUS) fusion targeted biopsy" (TBx+6c), with mpMRI/TRUS fusion-targeted biopsy and 12-core systematic biopsy template (TBx+12c) in the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is an institutional review board approved single-center observational study involving adult men undergoing fusion-targeted biopsies for the diagnosis of PCa. Patients were sorted into cohorts of TBx+6c or TBx+12c based on the systematic biopsy template used. The study's main objective was to determine the cancer detection rate (CDR) for overall PCa and clinically significant PCa (csPCa) and the secondary objectives were to compare complication rates and functional outcome differences between the cohort.

RESULTS

A total of 204 patients met study's inclusion criteria. TBx+6c group had 120 patients, while TBx+12c cohort had 84 patients. The groups had similar baseline characteristics and overall CDR in the TBx+6c cohort was 71.7% versus 79.8%, compared to the TBx+12c (p = 0.18) whereas, the csPCa detection rate in the TBx+6c group was 50.8% versus 54.8% in the TBx+12c group (p = 0.5). TBx+6c cohort had lower overall complication rate of 3% versus 13%, (p = 0.01) and ≥ grade 2 complication rates (1 (1%) vs. 3(4%), p = 0.03) compared to the TBx+12c cohort. There were no differences in IIEF-5 (p = 0.5) or IPSS (p = 0.1) scores at baseline and 2-weeks and 6-weeks post-biopsy.

CONCLUSION

TBx+6c cohort, when compared to the TBx+12c cohort, demonstrated comparable diagnostic performance along with similar functional outcomes and lower complication rates. These results suggest the importance of further exploring the clinical implications of adopting a TBx+6c schema for PCa diagnosis in comparison to the widely used TBx+12c schema through a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

A pictorial essay of PI-RADS pearls and pitfalls: toward less ambiguity and better practice

Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) was designed to standardize the interpretation of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the prostate, aiding in assessing the probability of clinically significant prostate cancer. By providing a structured scoring system, it enables better risk stratification, guiding decisions regarding the need for biopsy and subsequent treatment options. In this article, we explore both the strengths and weaknesses of PI-RADS, offering insights into its updated diagnostic performance and clinical applications, while also addressing potential pitfalls using diverse, representative MRI cases.

External validation of nomograms including MRI features for the prediction of side-specific extraprostatic extension

BACKGROUND

Prediction of side-specific extraprostatic extension (EPE) is crucial in selecting patients for nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy (RP). Multiple nomograms, which include magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) information, are available predict side-specific EPE. It is crucial that the accuracy of these nomograms is assessed with external validation to ensure they can be used in clinical practice to support medical decision-making.

METHODS

Data of prostate cancer (PCa) patients that underwent robot-assisted RP (RARP) from 2017 to 2021 at four European tertiary referral centers were collected retrospectively. Four previously developed nomograms for the prediction of side-specific EPE were identified and externally validated. Discrimination (area under the curve [AUC]), calibration and net benefit of four nomograms were assessed. To assess the strongest predictor among the MRI features included in all nomograms, we evaluated their association with side-specific EPE using multivariate regression analysis and Akaike Information Criterion (AIC).

RESULTS

This study involved 773 patients with a total of 1546 prostate lobes. EPE was found in 338 (22%) lobes. The AUCs of the models predicting EPE ranged from 72.2% (95% CI 69.1-72.3%) (Wibmer) to 75.5% (95% CI 72.5-78.5%) (Nyarangi-Dix). The nomogram with the highest AUC varied across the cohorts. The Soeterik, Nyarangi-Dix, and Martini nomograms demonstrated fair to good calibration for clinically most relevant thresholds between 5 and 30%. In contrast, the Wibmer nomogram showed substantial overestimation of EPE risk for thresholds above 25%. The Nyarangi-Dix nomogram demonstrated a higher net benefit for risk thresholds between 20 and 30% when compared to the other three nomograms. Of all MRI features, the European Society of Urogenital Radiology score and tumor capsule contact length showed the highest AUCs and lowest AIC.

CONCLUSION

The Nyarangi-Dix, Martini and Soeterik nomograms resulted in accurate EPE prediction and are therefore suitable to support medical decision-making.

Can the Briganti 2019 nomogram be modified to predict lymph node metastasis risk in patients with prostate cancer detected with in-bore biopsy?

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to modify the Briganti 2019 nomogram and to test whether it is valid for patients who were diagnosed with prostate cancer through in-bore prostate biopsies.

METHODS

Data for 204 patients with positive multiparametric prostate MRI and prostate cancer identified either by mpMRI-cognitive/software fusion or in-bore biopsy and who underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and extended pelvic lymph node dissection between 2012 and 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. The Briganti 2019 nomogram was applied to the mpMRI-cognitive/software fusion biopsy group (142 patients) in the original form, and then, two modifications were tested for the targeted component. Original and modified scores were compared. These modifications were adapted for the in-bore biopsy group (62 patients). The final histopathologic stage was regarded as the gold standard.

RESULTS

Nodal metastases were identified in 18/142 (12.6%) of mpMRI-cognitive/software fusion biopsy patients and 8/62 (12.9%) of the in-bore biopsy patients. In the mpMRI-cognitive/software fusion biopsy group, tumor size/core size (%) of targeted biopsy cores and positive core percentage on systematic biopsy were significant parameters for lymph node metastasis based on univariate logistic regression analyses (p < 0.05). With the modifications of these parameters for the in-bore biopsy group, V1 modification of the Briganti 2019 nomogram provided 100% sensitivity and 31.5% specificity (AUC:0.627), while V2 modification provided 75% sensitivity and 46.3% specificity (AUC:0.645).

CONCLUSIONS

Briganti 2019 nomogram may be modified by utilizing tumor size/core size (%) for targeted biopsy cores instead of positive core percentage on systematic biopsy or by not taking both parameters into consideration to detect node metastasis risk of patients diagnosed with in-bore biopsies.

The additional value of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT SUVmax in predicting ISUP GG ≥ 2 and ISUP GG ≥ 3 prostate cancer in biopsy

BACKGROUND

Prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) increases the detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). Prostate-specific membrane antigen-positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PSMA PET/CT) maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) of the prostate may offer additional value in predicting the likelihood of csPCa in biopsy.

METHODS

A single-center cohort study involving patients with biopsy-proven PCa who underwent both MRI and PSMA PET/CT between 2020 and 2021. Logistic regression models were developed for International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Grade Group (GG) ≥ 2 and GG ≥ 3 using noninvasive prebiopsy parameters: age, (log-)prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density, PI-RADS 5 lesion presence, extraprostatic extension (EPE) on MRI, and SUVmax of the prostate. Models with and without SUVmax were compared using Likelihood ratio tests and area under the curve (AUC). DeLong's test was used to compare the AUCs.

RESULTS

The study included 386 patients, with 262 (68%) having ISUP GG ≥ 2 and 180 (47%) having ISUP GG ≥ 3. Including SUVmax significantly improved both models' goodness of fit (p < 0.001). The GG ≥ 2 model had a higher AUC with SUVmax 89.16% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 86.06%-92.26%) than without 87.34% (95% CI: 83.93%-90.76%) (p = 0.026). Similarly, the GG ≥ 3 model had a higher AUC with SUVmax 82.51% (95% CI: 78.41%-86.6%) than without 79.33% (95% CI: 74.84%-83.83%) (p = 0.003). The SUVmax inclusion improved the GG ≥ 3 model's calibration at higher probabilities.

CONCLUSION

SUVmax of the prostate on PSMA PET/CT potentially improves diagnostic accuracy in predicting the likelihood of csPCa in prostate biopsy.

Are systematic prostate biopsy still necessary in biopsy naive men?

PURPOSE

Multiparametric MRI and the transperineal approach have become standard in the diagnostic pathway for suspected prostate cancer. Targeting of MRI lesions is performed at most centers, but the routine use of systematic cores is controversial. We aim to assess the value of obtaining systematic cores in patients undergoing cognitive fusion targeted double-freehand transperineal prostate biopsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent a cognitive fusion, freehand TPB at a single tertiary urology service (Perth, Australia) between November 2020 and November 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were included if they were biopsy naive and had a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer, based on their mpMRI results. Both targeted and systematic cores were taken at the time of their biopsy.

RESULTS

One hundred forty patients suited the selection criteria. Clinically significant cancer was identified in 63% of patients. Of those that had clinically significant cancer, the target lesion identified 91% of the disease, missing 9% of patients whom the target biopsy detected non-clinically significant cancer but was identified in the systematic cores. Higher PI-RADS category patients were also found to be associated with an increasing likelihood of identifying clinically significant cancer within the target.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with PI-RADS 3 and higher, the target biopsy can miss up to 9% of clinically significant cancer. Systematic cores can add value as they can also change management by identifying a high-risk disease where only intermediate cancer was identified in the target. A combination of targeted and systematic cores is still required to detect cancer.

Overview of Radiation Therapy in the Management of Localized and Metastatic Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The goal is to describe the evolution of radiation therapy (RT) utilization in the management of localized and metastatic prostate cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

Long term data for a variety of hypofractionated definitive RT dose-fractionation schemes has matured, allowing patients and providers many standard-of-care options to choose from. Post-prostatectomy, adjuvant RT has largely been replaced by an early salvage approach. Multiparametric MRI and PSMA PET have enabled increasingly targeted RT delivery to the prostate and oligometastatic tumors. Areas of active investigation include determining the value of proton beam therapy and perirectal spacers, and optimally incorporate genomic tumor profiling and next generation hormonal therapies with RT in the curative setting. The use of radiation therapy to treat prostate cancer is rapidly evolving. In the coming years, there will be continued improvements in a variety of areas to enhance the value of RT in multidisciplinary prostate cancer management.

Unveiling potential: urinary exosomal mRNAs as non-invasive biomarkers for early prostate cancer diagnosis

BACKGROUND

This study investigated the use of urinary exosomal mRNA as a potential biomarker for the early detection of prostate cancer (PCa).

METHODS

Next-generation sequencing was utilized to analyze exosomal RNA from 10 individuals with confirmed PCa and 10 individuals without cancer. Subsequent validation through qRT-PCR in a larger sample of 43 PCa patients and 92 healthy controls revealed distinct mRNA signatures associated with PCa.

RESULTS

Notably, mRNAs for RAB5B, WWP1, HIST2H2BF, ZFY, MARK2, PASK, RBM10, and NRSN2 showed promise as diagnostic markers, with AUC values between 0.799 and 0.906 and significance p values. Combining RAB5B and WWP1 in an exoRNA diagnostic model outperformed traditional PSA tests, achieving an AUC of 0.923, 81.4% sensitivity, and 89.1% specificity.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings highlight the potential of urinary exosomal mRNA profiling, particularly focusing on RAB5B and WWP1, as a valuable strategy for improving the early detection of PCa.

Lower urinary tract symptoms in elderly men: Considerations for prostate cancer testing

PURPOSE

Both lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and prostate cancer (PCa) are common in elderly men. While LUTS are generally due to a benign etiology, they may provoke an evaluation with prostate-specific antigen (PSA), which can lead to a cascade of further testing and possible overdiagnosis in patients with competing risks. There is limited patient and provider understanding of the relationship between LUTS and PCa risk, and a lack of clarity in how to evaluate these men to balance appropriate diagnosis of aggressive PCa with avoidance of overdiagnosis.

METHODS

A literature review was performed using keywords to query the electronic database PubMed. All articles published before November 2023 were screened by title and abstract for articles relevant to our subject.

RESULTS

Epidemiological studies suggest that LUTS and PCa are largely independent in elderly men. The best available tools to assess PCa risk include PSA permutations, novel biomarkers, and imaging, but there are limitations in older men based on lack of validation in the elderly and unclear applicability of traditional definitions of "clinically significant" disease. We present a three-tiered approach to evaluating these patients.

CONCLUSION

Elderly men commonly have LUTS as well as a high likelihood of indolent PCa. A systematic and shared decision-making-based approach can help to balance objectives of appropriate detection of phenotypically dangerous disease and avoidance of over-testing and overdiagnosis.

Target Volume Optimization for Localized Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE

To provide a comprehensive review of the means by which to optimize target volume definition for the purposes of treatment planning for patients with intact prostate cancer with a specific emphasis on focal boost volume definition.

METHODS

Here we conduct a narrative review of the available literature summarizing the current state of knowledge on optimizing target volume definition for the treatment of localized prostate cancer.

RESULTS

Historically, the treatment of prostate cancer included a uniform prescription dose administered to the entire prostate with or without coverage of all or part of the seminal vesicles. The development of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and positron emission tomography (PET) using prostate-specific radiotracers has ushered in an era in which radiation oncologists are able to localize and focally dose-escalate high-risk volumes in the prostate gland. Recent phase 3 data has demonstrated that incorporating focal dose escalation to high-risk subvolumes of the prostate improves biochemical control without significantly increasing toxicity. Still, several fundamental questions remain regarding the optimal target volume definition and prescription strategy to implement this technique. Given the remaining uncertainty, a knowledge of the pathological correlates of radiographic findings and the anatomic patterns of tumor spread may help inform clinical judgement for the definition of clinical target volumes.

CONCLUSION

Advanced imaging has the ability to improve outcomes for patients with prostate cancer in multiple ways, including by enabling focal dose escalation to high-risk subvolumes. However, many questions remain regarding the optimal target volume definition and prescription strategy to implement this practice, and key knowledge gaps remain. A detailed understanding of the pathological correlates of radiographic findings and the patterns of local tumor spread may help inform clinical judgement for target volume definition given the current state of uncertainty.

Predictors of Contralateral Disease in Men With Unilateral Lesions on Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate predictors of contralateral clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in men with biopsy-proven unilateral lesions on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

METHODS

We retrospectively identified men with no prior diagnosis of PCa with unilateral biopsy-confirmed csPCa within PI-RADS 2-5 lesions within our institutional biopsy database. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify clinical predictors of contralateral disease.

RESULTS

Four hundred ninety men met study inclusion criteria, of which 385 men (78.6%) had no contralateral csPCa and 105 men (21.4%) had contralateral csPCa (Fig. 1). Prior negative biopsy (OR 0.34 [0.14, 0.75], P = .012), prostate-specific antigen density (OR 18.8 [2.77, 249], P = .017), and tumor location in the transverse plane ("Posterior": OR 1.93 [1.02, 3.87], P = .048; "Throughout Transverse Plane": OR 6.56 [2.26, 19.6], P < .001) were significantly associated with contralateral csPCa in multivariate logistic regression models. However, there appear to be no attributes within the MRI-targeted tumor that reliably predict contralateral csPCa (Table 2).

CONCLUSION

Approximately 20% of men with unilateral MRI findings and csPCa on targeted biopsy were found to have contralateral csPCa on systematic biopsy (SB). Prior negative biopsy was associated with a decreased odds of contralateral csPCa. Prostate-specific antigen density and tumor in the posterior aspect of or throughout the transverse plane were associated with increased odds of contralateral csPCA. Consideration of these clinical factors may afford an opportunity to only use SB in cases in which the odds of contralateral csPCa are high.

Targeted biopsy of the prostate

Diagnostic multiparametric MRI of the prostate has steadily evolved over the last three decades and can now reliably depict the dominant tumor in most men with prostate cancer. In response, several methods of targeted biopsy to direct tissue sampling of suspected tumor foci seen at multiparametric MRI have been developed and successfully tested in recent years, including software-assisted MRI-ultrasound (US) fusion biopsy and direct MRI-guided in-bore biopsy. These advances are leading to a sea change in the approach to prostate cancer diagnosis, with the traditional approach of blind systematic biopsy increasingly being replaced by MRI directed targeted biopsy. This review aims to describe the current status of targeted biopsy, with an emphasis on the relative accuracy of different techniques. The results of several critical large multicenter trials are presented, while unanswered questions that require more research are highlighted.

Is MRI ready to replace biopsy during active surveillance?

Active surveillance (AS) is a conservative management option recommended for patients diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) and selected cases with intermediate-risk PCa. The adoption of prostate MRI in the primary diagnostic setting has sparked interest in its application during AS. This review aims to examine the role and performance of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) across the entire AS pathway, from initial stratification to follow-up, also relative to the utilization of the Prostate Cancer Radiological Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation (PRECISE) criteria. Given the high negative predictive value of mpMRI in detecting clinically significant PCa (csPCa), robust evidence supports its use in patient selection and risk stratification at the time of diagnosis or confirmatory biopsy. However, conflicting results have been observed when using MRI in evaluating disease progression during follow-up. Key areas requiring clarification include addressing the clinical significance of MRI-negative csPCa, optimizing MRI quality, determining the role of biparametric MRI (bpMRI) or mpMRI protocols, and integrating artificial intelligence (AI) for improved performance. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: MRI plays an essential role in the selection, stratification, and follow up of patients in active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer. However, owing to existing limitations, it cannot fully replace biopsies in the context of AS. KEY POINTS: Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) has become a crucial tool in active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer (PCa). Conflicting results have been observed regarding multiparametric MRI efficacy in assessing disease progression. Standardizing MRI-guided protocols will be critical in addressing current limitations in active surveillance for prostate cancer.

Transrectal versus transperineal prostate biopsy for cancer detection in patients with gray-zone prostate-specific antigen: a multicenter, real-world study

Knowledge about the effect of different prostate biopsy approaches on the prostate cancer detection rate (CDR) in patients with gray-zone prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is limited. We performed this study to compare the CDR among patients who underwent different biopsy approaches and had rising PSA levels in the gray zone. Two hundred and twenty-two patients who underwent transrectal prostate biopsy (TRB) and 216 patients who underwent transperineal prostate biopsy (TPB) between June 2016 and September 2022 were reviewed in this study. In addition, 110 patients who received additional targeted biopsies following the systematic TPB were identified. Clinical parameters, including age, PSA derivative, prostate volume (PV), and needle core count, were recorded. The data were fitted via propensity score matching (PSM), adjusting for potential confounders. TPB outperformed TRB in terms of the CDR (49.6% vs 28.3%, P = 0.001). The clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection rate was not significantly different between TPB and TRB (78.6% vs 68.8%, P = 0.306). In stratified analysis, TPB outperformed TRB in CDR when the age of patients was 65-75 years (59.0% vs 22.0%, P < 0.001), when PV was 25.00-50.00 ml (63.2% vs 28.3%, P < 0.001), and when needle core count was no more than 12 (58.5% vs 31.5%, P = 0.005). The CDR ( P = 0.712) and detection rate of csPCa ( P = 0.993) did not significantly differ among the systematic, targeted, and combined biopsies. TPB outperformed TRB in CDR for patients with gray-zone PSA. Moreover, performing target biopsy after systematic TPB provided no additional benefits in CDR.

Transperineal Versus Transrectal Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted and Systematic Prostate Biopsy to Prevent Infectious Complications: The PREVENT Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The transrectal biopsy approach is traditionally used to detect prostate cancer. An alternative transperineal approach is historically performed under general anesthesia, but recent advances enable transperineal biopsy to be performed under local anesthesia. We sought to compare infectious complications of transperineal biopsy without antibiotic prophylaxis versus transrectal biopsy with targeted prophylaxis.

METHODS

We assigned biopsy-naïve participants to undergo transperineal biopsy without antibiotic prophylaxis versus transrectal biopsy with targeted prophylaxis (rectal culture screening for fluoroquinolone-resistant bacteria and antibiotic targeting to culture and sensitivity results) through a multicenter, randomized trial. The primary outcome was post-biopsy infection captured by a prospective medical review and patient report on a 7-d survey. The secondary outcomes included cancer detection, noninfectious complications, and a numerical rating scale (0-10) for biopsy-related pain and discomfort during and 7-d after biopsy.

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

A total of 658 participants were randomized, with zero transperineal versus four (1.4%) transrectal biopsy infections (difference -1.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI] -3.2%, 0.3%; p = 0.059). The rates of other complications were very low and similar. Importantly, detection of clinically significant cancer was similar (53% transperineal vs 50% transrectal, adjusted difference 2.0%; 95% CI -6.0, 10). Participants in the transperineal arm experienced worse periprocedural pain (0.6 adjusted difference [0-10 scale], 95% CI 0.2, 0.9), but the effect was small and resolved by 7-d.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Office-based transperineal biopsy is tolerable, does not compromise cancer detection, and did not result in infectious complications. Transrectal biopsy with targeted prophylaxis achieved similar infection rates, but requires rectal cultures and careful attention to antibiotic selection and administration. Consideration of these factors and antibiotic stewardship should guide clinical decision-making.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In this multicenter randomized trial, we compare prostate biopsy infectious complications for the transperineal versus transrectal approach. The absence of infectious complications with transperineal biopsy without the use of preventative antibiotics is noteworthy, but not significantly different from transrectal biopsy with targeted antibiotic prophylaxis.

Artificial intelligence and radiologists in prostate cancer detection on MRI (PI-CAI): an international, paired, non-inferiority, confirmatory study

BACKGROUND

Artificial intelligence (AI) systems can potentially aid the diagnostic pathway of prostate cancer by alleviating the increasing workload, preventing overdiagnosis, and reducing the dependence on experienced radiologists. We aimed to investigate the performance of AI systems at detecting clinically significant prostate cancer on MRI in comparison with radiologists using the Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System version 2.1 (PI-RADS 2.1) and the standard of care in multidisciplinary routine practice at scale.

METHODS

In this international, paired, non-inferiority, confirmatory study, we trained and externally validated an AI system (developed within an international consortium) for detecting Gleason grade group 2 or greater cancers using a retrospective cohort of 10 207 MRI examinations from 9129 patients. Of these examinations, 9207 cases from three centres (11 sites) based in the Netherlands were used for training and tuning, and 1000 cases from four centres (12 sites) based in the Netherlands and Norway were used for testing. In parallel, we facilitated a multireader, multicase observer study with 62 radiologists (45 centres in 20 countries; median 7 [IQR 5-10] years of experience in reading prostate MRI) using PI-RADS (2.1) on 400 paired MRI examinations from the testing cohort. Primary endpoints were the sensitivity, specificity, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of the AI system in comparison with that of all readers using PI-RADS (2.1) and in comparison with that of the historical radiology readings made during multidisciplinary routine practice (ie, the standard of care with the aid of patient history and peer consultation). Histopathology and at least 3 years (median 5 [IQR 4-6] years) of follow-up were used to establish the reference standard. The statistical analysis plan was prespecified with a primary hypothesis of non-inferiority (considering a margin of 0·05) and a secondary hypothesis of superiority towards the AI system, if non-inferiority was confirmed. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05489341.

FINDINGS

Of the 10 207 examinations included from Jan 1, 2012, through Dec 31, 2021, 2440 cases had histologically confirmed Gleason grade group 2 or greater prostate cancer. In the subset of 400 testing cases in which the AI system was compared with the radiologists participating in the reader study, the AI system showed a statistically superior and non-inferior AUROC of 0·91 (95% CI 0·87-0·94; p<0·0001), in comparison to the pool of 62 radiologists with an AUROC of 0·86 (0·83-0·89), with a lower boundary of the two-sided 95% Wald CI for the difference in AUROC of 0·02. At the mean PI-RADS 3 or greater operating point of all readers, the AI system detected 6·8% more cases with Gleason grade group 2 or greater cancers at the same specificity (57·7%, 95% CI 51·6-63·3), or 50·4% fewer false-positive results and 20·0% fewer cases with Gleason grade group 1 cancers at the same sensitivity (89·4%, 95% CI 85·3-92·9). In all 1000 testing cases where the AI system was compared with the radiology readings made during multidisciplinary practice, non-inferiority was not confirmed, as the AI system showed lower specificity (68·9% [95% CI 65·3-72·4] vs 69·0% [65·5-72·5]) at the same sensitivity (96·1%, 94·0-98·2) as the PI-RADS 3 or greater operating point. The lower boundary of the two-sided 95% Wald CI for the difference in specificity (-0·04) was greater than the non-inferiority margin (-0·05) and a p value below the significance threshold was reached (p<0·001).

INTERPRETATION

An AI system was superior to radiologists using PI-RADS (2.1), on average, at detecting clinically significant prostate cancer and comparable to the standard of care. Such a system shows the potential to be a supportive tool within a primary diagnostic setting, with several associated benefits for patients and radiologists. Prospective validation is needed to test clinical applicability of this system.

FUNDING

Health~Holland and EU Horizon 2020.

Lifetime Health and Economic Outcomes of Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging as First-Line Screening for Prostate Cancer : A Decision Model Analysis

BACKGROUND

Contemporary prostate cancer (PCa) screening uses first-line prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing, possibly followed by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) for men with elevated PSA levels. First-line biparametric MRI (bpMRI) screening has been proposed as an alternative.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of first-line bpMRI versus PSA-based screening.

DESIGN

Decision analysis using a microsimulation model.

DATA SOURCES

Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database; randomized trials.

TARGET POPULATION

U.S. men aged 55 years with no prior screening or PCa diagnosis.

TIME HORIZON

Lifetime.

PERSPECTIVE

U.S. health care system.

INTERVENTION

Biennial screening to age 69 years using first-line PSA testing (test-positive threshold, 4 µg/L) with or without second-line mpMRI or first-line bpMRI (test-positive threshold, PI-RADS [Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System] 3 to 5 or 4 to 5), followed by biopsy guided by MRI or MRI plus transrectal ultrasonography.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Screening tests, biopsies, diagnoses, overdiagnoses, treatments, PCa deaths, quality-adjusted and unadjusted life-years saved, and costs.

RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS

For 1000 men, first-line bpMRI versus first-line PSA testing prevented 2 to 3 PCa deaths and added 10 to 30 life-years (4 to 11 days per person) but increased the number of biopsies by 1506 to 4174 and the number of overdiagnoses by 38 to 124 depending on the biopsy imaging scheme. At conventional cost-effectiveness thresholds, first-line PSA testing with mpMRI followed by either biopsy approach for PI-RADS 4 to 5 produced the greatest net monetary benefits.

RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

First-line PSA testing remained more cost-effective even if bpMRI was free, all men with low-risk PCa underwent surveillance, or screening was quadrennial.

LIMITATION

Performance of first-line bpMRI was based on second-line mpMRI data.

CONCLUSION

Decision analysis suggests that comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of PCa screening are driven by false-positive results and overdiagnoses, favoring first-line PSA testing with mpMRI over first-line bpMRI.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Cancer Institute.

MRI-guided in-bore biopsy of the prostate - defining the optimal number of cores needed

BACKGROUND

Numerous studies have shown that magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsy approaches are superior to traditional systematic transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy (TRUS-Bx). The optimal number of biopsy cores to be obtained per lesion identified on multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) images, however, remains a matter of debate. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incremental value of additional biopsy cores in an MRI-targeted "in-bore"-biopsy (MRI-Bx) setting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Two hundred and forty-five patients, who underwent MRI-Bx between June 2014 and September 2021, were included in this retrospective single-center analysis. All lesions were biopsied with at least five biopsy cores and cumulative detection rates for any cancer (PCa) as well as detection rates of clinically significant cancers (csPCa) were calculated for each sequentially labeled biopsy core. The cumulative per-core detection rates are presented as whole numbers and as proportion of the maximum detection rate reached, when all biopsy cores were considered. CsPCa was defined as Gleason Score (GS) ≥ 7 (3 + 4).

RESULTS

One hundred and thirty-two of 245 Patients (53.9%) were diagnosed with prostate cancer and csPCa was found in 64 (26.1%) patients. The first biopsy core revealed csPCa/ PCa in 76.6% (49/64)/ 81.8% (108/132) of cases. The second, third and fourth core found csPCa/ PCa not detected by previous cores in 10.9% (7/64)/ 8.3% (11/132), 7.8% (5/64)/ 5.3% (7/132) and 3.1% (2/64)/ 3% (4/132) of cases, respectively. Obtaining one or more cores beyond the fourth biopsy core resulted in an increase in detection rate of 1.6% (1/64)/ 1.5% (2/132).

CONCLUSION

We found that obtaining five cores per lesion maximized detection rates. If, however, future research should establish a clear link between the incidence of serious complications and the number of biopsy cores obtained, a three-core biopsy might suffice as our results suggest that about 95% of all csPCa are detected by the first three cores.

Evolution of European prostate cancer screening protocols and summary of ongoing trials

Population-based organised repeated screening for prostate cancer has been found to reduce disease-specific mortality, but with substantial overdiagnosis leading to overtreatment. Although only very few countries have implemented a screening programme on a national level, individual prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing is common. This opportunistic testing may have little favourable impact, while stressing the side-effects. The classic early detection protocols as were state-of-the-art in the 1990s applied a PSA and digital rectal examination threshold for sextant systematic prostate biopsy, with a fixed interval for re-testing, and limited indication for expectant management. In the three decades since these trials were started, different important improvements have become available in the cascade of screening, indication for biopsy, and treatment. The main developed aspects include: better identification of individuals at risk (using early/baseline PSA, family history, and/or genetic profile), individualised re-testing interval, optimised and individualised starting and stopping age, with gradual invitation at a fixed age rather than invitation of a wider range of age groups, risk stratification for biopsy (using PSA density, risk calculator, magnetic resonance imaging, serum and urine biomarkers, or combinations/sequences), targeted biopsy, transperineal biopsy approach, active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer, and improved staging of disease. All these developments are suggested to decrease the side-effects of screening, while at least maintaining the advantages, but Level 1 evidence is lacking. The knowledge gained and new developments on early detection are being tested in different prospective screening trials throughout Europe. In addition, the European Union-funded PRostate cancer Awareness and Initiative for Screening in the European Union (PRAISE-U) project will compare and evaluate different screening pilots throughout Europe. Implementation and sustainability will also be addressed. Modern screening approaches may reduce the burden of the second most frequent cause of cancer-related death in European males, while minimising side-effects. Also, less efficacious opportunistic early detection may be indirectly reduced.

Predictors of Gleason Grading Group Upgrading in Low-Risk Prostate Cancer Patients From Transperineal Biopsy After Radical Prostatectomy

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

To investigate the predictors of Gleason Grading Group (GGG) upgrading in low-risk prostate cancer (Gleason score=3 + 3) from transperineal biopsy after radical prostatectomy (RP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The clinical data of 160 patients who underwent transperineal biopsy and RP from January 2017 to December 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. First, univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis were used to obtain independent predictors of postoperative GGG upgrading. Then receiver operating characteristic curve was used to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of predictors. Finally, Linear-by-Linear Association test was used to analyze the risk trends of patients in different predictor groups in the postoperative GGG.

RESULTS

In this study, there were 81 cases (50.6%) in the GGG concordance group and 79 cases (49.4%) in the GGG upgrading group. Univariate analysis showed age, free/total prostate-specific antigen (f/tPSA), proportion of positive biopsies, positive target of magnetic-resonance imaging (MRI) and positive target of contrast-enhanced ultrasound had significant effects on GGG upgrading (all P < .05). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, age (odds ratio [OR]=1.066, 95%CI=1.007-1.127, P = .027), f/tPSA (OR=0.001, 95%CI=0-0.146, P = .001) and positive target of MRI (OR=3.005, 95%CI=1.353-76.674, P = .007) were independent predictors. The prediction model (area under curve=0.751 P < .001) had higher predictive efficacy than all independent predictors. The proportion of patients in exposed group of different GGG increased with the level of GGG, but decreased in nonexposed group, and the linear trend was significantly different (all P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Age, f/tPSA, and positive target of MRI were independent predictors of postoperative GGG upgrading. The predictive model constructed had the best diagnostic efficacy.

Evaluation of blood and urine based biomarkers for detection of clinically-significant prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Recognizing the limitations of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening and the morbidity of prostate biopsies, several blood- and urine-based biomarkers have been proposed for pre-biopsy risk stratification. These assays aim to reduce the frequency of unnecessary biopsies (i.e., negative or Grade Group 1 [GG1]) while maintaining highly sensitive detection of clinically significant cancer (GG ≥ 2) prostate cancer.

METHODS

We reviewed the literature describing the use of currently available blood- and urine-based biomarkers for detection of GG ≥ 2 cancer, including the Prostate Health Index (PHI), 4Kscore, MyProstateScore (MPS), SelectMDx, ExoDx Prostate Intelliscore (EPI), and IsoPSA. To facilitate clinical application, we focused on the use of biomarkers as a post-PSA secondary test prior to biopsy, as proposed in clinical guidelines. Our outcomes included test performance measures-sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value (PPV)-as well as clinical outcomes resulting from biomarker use (i.e., unnecessary biopsies avoided, GG ≥ 2 cancers missed).

RESULTS

Contemporary validation data (2015-2023) reveal that currently available biomarkers provide ~15-50% specificity at a sensitivity of 90-95% for GG ≥ 2 PCa. Clinically, this indicates that secondary use of biomarker testing in men with elevated PSA could allow for avoidance of up to 15-50% of unnecessary prostate biopsies, while preserving detection of 90-95% of GG ≥ 2 cancers that would be detected under the traditional "biopsy all" approach.

CONCLUSIONS

The contemporary literature further supports the proposed role of post-PSA biomarker testing to reduce the use of invasive biopsy while maintaining highly sensitive detection of GG ≥ 2 cancer. Questions remain regarding the optimal application of biomarkers in combination or in sequence with mpMRI.

Predictive Value of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Risk Group Stratification of Prostate Adenocarcinoma

Purpose

The aim of this study was to further assess the clinical utility of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MP-MRI) in prostate cancer (PC) staging following 2023 clinical guideline changes, both as an independent predictor of high-stage (>T3a) or high-risk PC and when combined with patient characteristics.

Methods and Materials

The present study was a retrospective review of 171 patients from 2008 to 2018 who underwent MP-MRI before radical prostatectomy at a single institution. The accuracy of clinical staging was compared between conventional staging and MP-MRI-based clinical staging. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were compared, and receiver operating characteristic curves were generated. Linear regression analyses were used to calculate concordance (C-statistic).

Results

Of the 171 patients, final pathology revealed 95 (55.6%) with T2 disease, 62 (36.3%) with T3a disease, and 14 (8.2%) with T3b disease. Compared with conventional staging, MP-MRI-based staging demonstrated significantly increased accuracy in identifying T3a disease, intermediate risk, and high/very-high-risk PC. When combined with clinical characteristics, MP-MRI-based staging improved the area under the curve from 0.753 to 0.808 (P = .0175), compared with conventional staging.

Conclusions

MP-MRI improved the identification of T3a PC, intermediate-risk PC, and high- or very-high-risk PC. Further, when combined with clinical characteristics, MP-MRI-based staging significantly improved risk stratification, compared with conventional staging. These findings represent further evidence to support the integration of MP-MRI into prostate adenocarcinoma clinical staging guidelines.

Deep Learning-Based T2-Weighted MR Image Quality Assessment and Its Impact on Prostate Cancer Detection Rates

BACKGROUND

Image quality evaluation of prostate MRI is important for successful implementation of MRI into localized prostate cancer diagnosis.

PURPOSE

To examine the impact of image quality on prostate cancer detection using an in-house previously developed artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm.

STUDY TYPE

Retrospective.

SUBJECTS

615 consecutive patients (median age 67 [interquartile range [IQR]: 61-71] years) with elevated serum PSA (median PSA 6.6 [IQR: 4.6-9.8] ng/mL) prior to prostate biopsy.

FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE

3.0T/T2-weighted turbo-spin-echo MRI, high b-value echo-planar diffusion-weighted imaging, and gradient recalled echo dynamic contrast-enhanced.

ASSESSMENTS

Scans were prospectively evaluated during clinical readout using PI-RADSv2.1 by one genitourinary radiologist with 17 years of experience. For each patient, T2-weighted images (T2WIs) were classified as high-quality or low-quality based on evaluation of both general distortions (eg, motion, distortion, noise, and aliasing) and perceptual distortions (eg, obscured delineation of prostatic capsule, prostatic zones, and excess rectal gas) by a previously developed in-house AI algorithm. Patients with PI-RADS category 1 underwent 12-core ultrasound-guided systematic biopsy while those with PI-RADS category 2-5 underwent combined systematic and targeted biopsies. Patient-level cancer detection rates (CDRs) were calculated for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa, International Society of Urological Pathology Grade Group ≥2) by each biopsy method and compared between high- and low-quality images in each PI-RADS category.

STATISTICAL TESTS

Fisher's exact test. Bootstrap 95% confidence intervals (CI). A P value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

385 (63%) T2WIs were classified as high-quality and 230 (37%) as low-quality by AI. Targeted biopsy with high-quality T2WIs resulted in significantly higher clinically significant CDR than low-quality images for PI-RADS category 4 lesions (52% [95% CI: 43-61] vs. 32% [95% CI: 22-42]). For combined biopsy, there was no significant difference in patient-level CDRs for PI-RADS 4 between high- and low-quality T2WIs (56% [95% CI: 47-64] vs. 44% [95% CI: 34-55]; P = 0.09).

DATA CONCLUSION

Higher quality T2WIs were associated with better targeted biopsy clinically significant cancer detection performance for PI-RADS 4 lesions. Combined biopsy might be needed when T2WI is lower quality.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 1.

Learning curve for fusion magnetic resonance imaging targeted prostate biopsy and three-dimensional transrectal ultrasonography segmentation

OBJECTIVE

To report the learning curve of multiple operators for fusion magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) targeted biopsy and to determine the number of cases needed to achieve proficiency.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All adult males who underwent fusion MRI targeted biopsy between February 2012 and July 2021 for clinically suspected prostate cancer (PCa) in a single centre were included. Fusion transrectal MRI targeted biopsy was performed under local anaesthesia using the Koelis platform. Learning curves for segmentation of transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) images and the overall MRI targeted biopsy procedure were estimated with locally weighted scatterplot smoothing by computing each operator's timestamps for consecutive procedures. Non-risk-adjusted cumulative sum (CUSUM) methods were used to create learning curves for clinically significant (i.e., International Society of Urological Pathology grade ≥ 2) PCa detection.

RESULTS

Overall, 1721 patients underwent MRI targeted biopsy in our centre during the study period. The median (interquartile range) times for TRUS segmentation and for the MRI targeted biopsy procedure were 4.5 (3.5, 6.0) min and 13.2 (10.6, 16.9) min, respectively. Among the 14 operators with experience of more than 50 cases, a plateau was reached after 40 cases for TRUS segmentation time and 50 cases for overall MRI targeted biopsy procedure time. CUSUM analysis showed that the learning curve for clinically significant PCa detection required 25 to 45 procedures to achieve clinical proficiency. Pain scores ranged between 0 and 1 for 84% of patients, and a plateau phase was reached after 20 to 100 cases.

CONCLUSIONS

A minimum of 50 cases of MRI targeted biopsy are necessary to achieve clinical and technical proficiency and to reach reproducibility in terms of timing, clinically significant PCa detection, and pain.

Comparison of procedural anxiety and pain associated with conventional transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsy to magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy: a prospective cohort trial

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis relies on biopsies, with transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) biopsies being common. Fusion biopsy (FB) offers improved diagnostic accuracy, but the pain and anxiety experienced by patients during biopsies is often overlooked. This study aims to compare pain and anxiety levels between standard TRUS-guided biopsy (STB) and systematic plus MRI/US fusion biopsy (STB + FB).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study involved adult men undergoing biopsies, receiving identical peri-procedural care, including 2% lidocaine jelly in the rectum and subsequent 1% lidocaine injections (10cc per side) into the prostate-seminal vesicle junction and prostatic apical areas bilaterally. The biopsy technique was chosen based on clinical and imaging findings. Pre- and post-biopsy anxiety levels were assessed using the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) questionnaire, categorized as mild (20-37), moderate (38-44), or severe (45-80). Post-biopsy pain was evaluated on a numerical rating scale, ranging from 0 to 10.

RESULTS

Of the 165 patients, 99 underwent STB, and 66 underwent STB + FB. No significant differences were observed in age, race, prostate-specific antigen, prostate volume, or prior biopsies between the groups. The STB + FB group had more biopsy cores taken (16.2 vs. 12, p = 0.001) and a longer procedure time (23 vs. 10 min, p = 0.001). STB biopsy patients experienced lower post-procedural anxiety compared to STB + FB, with a mean difference of -7 (p = 0.001, d = 0.92). In the STB + FB group, 89% experienced severe post-procedural anxiety compared to 59% in STB (p = 0.002). There was no significant difference in post-procedural pain (p = 0.7). Patients with prior biopsies had significantly higher STAI(S) anxiety scores (p = 0.005), and the number of prior biopsies correlated with anxiety severity (p = 0.04) in STB + FB group.

CONCLUSION

In summary, STB + FB group demonstrated higher post-procedural anxiety levels than the STB group, with no difference in pain levels. Additionally, patients with a history of repeat biopsies were more likely to exhibit higher STAI(S) anxiety scores.

Nonsurgical Interventions to Prevent Disease Progression in Prostate Cancer Patients on Active Surveillance: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

CONTEXT

Active surveillance (AS) is a standard of care for patients with low-risk and selected intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa). Nevertheless, there is a lack of summary evidence on how to impact disease trajectory during AS.

OBJECTIVE

To assess which interventions prevent PCa progression effectively during AS.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We queried PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases to identify studies examining the impact of interventions aimed at slowing disease progression during AS. The primary endpoint was PCa progression, the definition of which must have included pathological upgrading. The secondary endpoint included treatment toxicities.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

We identified 22 studies, six randomized controlled trials and 16 observational studies, which analyzed the association between different interventions and PCa progression during AS. The interventions considered in the studies included 5-alpha reductase inhibitors (5-ARIs), statins, diet, exercise, chlormadinone, fexapotide triflutate (FT), enzalutamide, coffee, vitamin D3, and PROSTVAC. We found that administration of 5-ARIs was associated with improved progression-free survival (PFS; hazard ratio: 0.59; 95% confidence interval 0.48-0.72), with no increased toxicity signals. Therapies such as vitamin D3, chlormadinone, FT, and enzalutamide have shown some efficacy. However, these anticancer drugs have been associated with treatment-related adverse events in up to 88% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of 5-ARIs in PCa patients on AS is associated with longer PFS. However, for the other interventions, it is difficult to draw clear conclusions based on the weak available evidence.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Patients with prostate cancer managed with active surveillance (AS) who are treated with 5-alpha reductase inhibitors have a lower risk of disease progression, with minimal adverse events. Other interventions require more studies to determine their efficacy and safety profile in men on AS.

Development and Validation of an 18-Gene Urine Test for High-Grade Prostate Cancer

Importance

Benefits of prostate cancer (PCa) screening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) alone are largely offset by excess negative biopsies and overdetection of indolent cancers resulting from the poor specificity of PSA for high-grade PCa (ie, grade group [GG] 2 or greater).

Objective

To develop a multiplex urinary panel for high-grade PCa and validate its external performance relative to current guideline-endorsed biomarkers.

Design, Setting, and Participants

RNA sequencing analysis of 58 724 genes identified 54 markers of PCa, including 17 markers uniquely overexpressed by high-grade cancers. Gene expression and clinical factors were modeled in a new urinary test for high-grade PCa (MyProstateScore 2.0 [MPS2]). Optimal models were developed in parallel without prostate volume (MPS2) and with prostate volume (MPS2+). The locked models underwent blinded external validation in a prospective National Cancer Institute trial cohort. Data were collected from January 2008 to December 2020, and data were analyzed from November 2022 to November 2023.

Exposure

Protocolized blood and urine collection and transrectal ultrasound-guided systematic prostate biopsy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Multiple biomarker tests were assessed in the validation cohort, including serum PSA alone, the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator, and the Prostate Health Index (PHI) as well as derived multiplex 2-gene and 3-gene models, the original 2-gene MPS test, and the 18-gene MPS2 models. Under a testing approach with 95% sensitivity for PCa of GG 2 or greater, measures of diagnostic accuracy and clinical consequences of testing were calculated. Cancers of GG 3 or greater were assessed secondarily.

Results

Of 761 men included in the development cohort, the median (IQR) age was 63 (58-68) years, and the median (IQR) PSA level was 5.6 (4.6-7.2) ng/mL; of 743 men included in the validation cohort, the median (IQR) age was 62 (57-68) years, and the median (IQR) PSA level was 5.6 (4.1-8.0) ng/mL. In the validation cohort, 151 (20.3%) had high-grade PCa on biopsy. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve values were 0.60 using PSA alone, 0.66 using the risk calculator, 0.77 using PHI, 0.76 using the derived multiplex 2-gene model, 0.72 using the derived multiplex 3-gene model, and 0.74 using the original MPS model compared with 0.81 using the MPS2 model and 0.82 using the MPS2+ model. At 95% sensitivity, the MPS2 model would have reduced unnecessary biopsies performed in the initial biopsy population (range for other tests, 15% to 30%; range for MPS2, 35% to 42%) and repeat biopsy population (range for other tests, 9% to 21%; range for MPS2, 46% to 51%). Across pertinent subgroups, the MPS2 models had negative predictive values of 95% to 99% for cancers of GG 2 or greater and of 99% for cancers of GG 3 or greater.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, a new 18-gene PCa test had higher diagnostic accuracy for high-grade PCa relative to existing biomarker tests. Clinically, use of this test would have meaningfully reduced unnecessary biopsies performed while maintaining highly sensitive detection of high-grade cancers. These data support use of this new PCa biomarker test in patients with elevated PSA levels to reduce the potential harms of PCa screening while preserving its long-term benefits.

Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Prostate Cancer Care: A Path to Enhanced Efficiency and Outcomes

The landscape of prostate cancer care has rapidly evolved. We have transitioned from the use of conventional imaging, radical surgeries, and single-agent androgen deprivation therapy to an era of advanced imaging, precision diagnostics, genomics, and targeted treatment options. Concurrently, the emergence of large language models (LLMs) has dramatically transformed the paradigm for artificial intelligence (AI). This convergence of advancements in prostate cancer management and AI provides a compelling rationale to comprehensively review the current state of AI applications in prostate cancer care. Here, we review the advancements in AI-driven applications across the continuum of the journey of a patient with prostate cancer from early interception to survivorship care. We subsequently discuss the role of AI in prostate cancer drug discovery, clinical trials, and clinical practice guidelines. In the localized disease setting, deep learning models demonstrated impressive performance in detecting and grading prostate cancer using imaging and pathology data. For biochemically recurrent diseases, machine learning approaches are being tested for improved risk stratification and treatment decisions. In advanced prostate cancer, deep learning can potentially improve prognostication and assist in clinical decision making. Furthermore, LLMs are poised to revolutionize information summarization and extraction, clinical trial design and operations, drug development, evidence synthesis, and clinical practice guidelines. Synergistic integration of multimodal data integration and human-AI integration are emerging as a key strategy to unlock the full potential of AI in prostate cancer care.

Histopathological concordance between prostate biopsies and radical prostatectomy specimens-implications of transrectal and transperineal biopsy approaches

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the histopathological concordance rates between prostate biopsies and radical prostatectomy specimens according to the applied biopsy approach (transrectal or transperineal).

METHODS

We studied patients who had been newly diagnosed with clinically significant prostate cancer and who underwent a radical prostatectomy between 2018 and 2022. Patients were included if they underwent a prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging and if they had not been previously treated for prostate cancer. Histopathological grading on prostate biopsies was compared with that on radical prostatectomy specimens. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the effect of the applied biopsy approach on histopathological concordance. Additional analyses were performed to assess the effect of the applied biopsy approach on American Urological Association risk group migration, defined as any change in risk group after radical prostatectomy.

RESULTS

In total, 1058 men were studied, of whom 49.3% (522/1058) and 50.7% (536/1058) underwent transrectal and transperineal prostate biopsies, respectively. Histopathological disconcordance was observed in 37.8% (400/1058) of men while American Urological Association risk group migration was observed in 30.2% (320/1058) of men. A transperineal biopsy approach was found to be independently associated with higher histopathological concordance rates (OR 1.33 [95% CI 1.01-1.75], p = 0.04) and less American Urological Association risk group migration (OR 0.70 [95% CI 0.52-0.93], p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a transperineal biopsy approach improved histopathological concordance rates compared to the use of a transrectal biopsy approach. A transperineal biopsy approach may provide more accurate risk stratification for clinical decision-making. Despite recent improvements, histopathologic concordance remains suboptimal and should be considered before initiating management.

Value of cognitive fusion targeted and standard systematic transrectal prostate biopsy for prostate cancer diagnosis

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study was to compare the accuracies of cognitive fusion-guided targeted biopsy (TB), systematic biopsy (SB), and combined TB+SB for the detection of prostate cancer (PCa) and clinically significant PCa (csPCa) in males with lesions detected by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). We conducted a retrospective analysis of individuals who underwent prostate biopsy at Peking University People's Hospital (Beijing, China), with an emphasis on patients with both transrectal TB and SB. The main objective was to determine the precisions of SB, TB, and TB+SB for diagnosing PCa and csPCa. We also evaluated the detection rates of TB, SB, TB+ipsilateral-SB (ipsi-SB), TB+contralateral-SB (contra-SB), and TB+SB for PCa and csPCa in patients with unilateral MRI lesions. We compared the diagnostic yields of the various biopsy schemes using the McNemar's test. A total of 180 patients were enrolled. The rates of PCa detection using TB, SB, and TB+SB were 52.8%, 62.2%, and 66.7%, respectively, and the corresponding rates for csPCa were 46.1%, 56.7%, and 58.3%, respectively. Among patients with unilateral MRI lesions, the PCa detection rates for TB, SB, TB+ipsi-SB, TB+contra-SB, and TB+SB were 53.3%, 64.8%, 65.6%, 61.5%, and 68.0%, respectively. TB+ipsi-SB detected 96.4% of PCa and 95.9% of csPCa cases. These findings suggest that the combination of TB+SB has better diagnostic accuracy compared with SB or TB alone. For patients with unilateral MRI lesions, the combination of TB+ipsi-SB may be suitable in clinical settings.

Targeted biopsy added to systematic biopsy improves cancer detection in prostate cancer screening

BACKGROUND

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/ultrasound targeted biopsy has frequently been used together with a 12-core systematic biopsy for prostate cancer screening in the past few years. However, the efficacy of targeted biopsy compared to systematic biopsy, as well as its clinical-histologic correlation, has been assessed by a limited number of studies and is further investigated in this study.

DESIGN

We collected 960 cases with both targeted and systematic prostate biopsies from 04/2019 to 04/2022 (Table 1). We compared cancer detection rates between targeted and systematic prostate biopsies in different grade groups. Correlations with the size of prostate lesions, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, and Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) scale were also analyzed for each of these biopsy methods.

RESULTS

Among the 960 men who underwent targeted biopsy with systematic biopsy, prostatic adenocarcinoma was diagnosed in 652 (67.9%) cases. 489 (50.9%) cases were diagnosed by targeted biopsy and 576 (60.0%) cases were diagnosed by systematic biopsy. In the 384 cases diagnosed negative by systematic biopsy, targeted biopsy identified cancer in 76 (8%) cases. Systematic biopsy was able to detect 163 cancer cases that were missed by targeted biopsy. Systematic biopsy detected more grade group 1 cancers compared to targeted biopsy. However, for higher grade cancers, the differences between the cancer detection rates of targeted biopsy and systematic biopsy became negligible. Targeted biopsy upgraded the grade group categorized by systematic biopsy in several cases (3.8%, 7.0%, 2.6%, 1.1% and 0.9% in Grade Groups 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 respectively). Targeted biopsy was more likely to detect cancer in larger lesions (13.17 mm VS 11.41 mm, P=0.0056) and for higher PI-RADS scales (4.19 VS 3.68, P<0.0001). The cancers detected by targeted biopsy also had higher PSA levels (10.38 ng/ml VS 6.39 ng/ml, P=0.0026).

CONCLUSION

Targeted biopsy with systematic biopsy improved cancer detection rate compared to systematic biopsy alone. Targeted biopsy is not more sensitive for grade groups 1, 4, or 5 cancers but is as sensitive as systematic biopsy for detecting grade group 2 and 3 cancers. Targeted biopsy is more effective at detecting cancers when patients have larger lesions, higher PI-RADS scales, and higher PSA levels.

Autonomous Tumor Signature Extraction Applied to Spatially Registered Bi-Parametric MRI to Predict Prostate Tumor Aggressiveness: A Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

Accurate, reliable, non-invasive assessment of patients diagnosed with prostate cancer is essential for proper disease management. Quantitative assessment of multi-parametric MRI, such as through artificial intelligence or spectral/statistical approaches, can provide a non-invasive objective determination of the prostate tumor aggressiveness without side effects or potential poor sampling from needle biopsy or overdiagnosis from prostate serum antigen measurements. To simplify and expedite prostate tumor evaluation, this study examined the efficacy of autonomously extracting tumor spectral signatures for spectral/statistical algorithms for spatially registered bi-parametric MRI.

METHODS

Spatially registered hypercubes were digitally constructed by resizing, translating, and cropping from the image sequences (Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (ADC), High B-value, T2) from 42 consecutive patients in the bi-parametric MRI PI-CAI dataset. Prostate cancer blobs exceeded a threshold applied to the registered set from normalizing the registered set into an image that maximizes High B-value, but minimizes the ADC and T2 images, appearing "green" in the color composite. Clinically significant blobs were selected based on size, average normalized green value, sliding window statistics within a blob, and position within the hypercube. The center of mass and maximized sliding window statistics within the blobs identified voxels associated with tumor signatures. We used correlation coefficients (R) and p-values, to evaluate the linear regression fits of the z-score and SCR (with processed covariance matrix) to tumor aggressiveness, as well as Area Under the Curves (AUC) for Receiver Operator Curves (ROC) from logistic probability fits to clinically significant prostate cancer.

RESULTS

The highest R (R > 0.45), AUC (>0.90), and lowest p-values (<0.01) were achieved using z-score and modified registration applied to the covariance matrix and tumor signatures selected from the "greenest" parts from the selected blob.

CONCLUSIONS

The first autonomous tumor signature applied to spatially registered bi-parametric MRI shows promise for determining prostate tumor aggressiveness.

The Impact of Omitting Contralateral Systematic Biopsy on the Surgical Planning of Patients with a Unilateral Suspicious Lesion on Magnetic Resonance Imaging Undergoing Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer

Background and objective

A combined approach of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsy (TBx) and bilateral systematic biopsy (SBx) is advised in patients who have an increased risk of prostate cancer (PCa). The diagnostic gain of SBx in detecting PCa for treatment planning of patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is unknown. This study aims to determine the impact of omitting contralateral SBx on the surgical planning of patients undergoing RARP in terms of nerve-sparing surgery (NSS) and extended pelvic lymph node dissection (ePLND).

Methods

Case files from 80 men with biopsy-proven PCa were studied. All men had a unilateral suspicious lesion on MRI, and underwent TBx and bilateral SBx. Case files were presented to five urologists for the surgical planning of RARP. Each case file was presented randomly using two different sets of information: (1) results of TBx + bilateral SBx, and (2) results of TBx + ipsilateral SBx. The urologists assessed whether they would perform NSS and/or ePLND.

Key findings and limitations

A change in the surgical plan concerning NSS on the contralateral side was observed in 9.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.4-12.2) of cases. Additionally, the indication for ePLND changed in 5.3% (95% CI 3.3-7.9) of cases. Interobserver agreement based on Fleiss' kappa changed from 0.44 to 0.15 for the indication of NSS and from 0.84 to 0.83 for the indication of ePLND.

Conclusions and clinical implications

In our series, the diagnostic information obtained from contralateral SBx has limited impact on the surgical planning of patients with a unilateral suspicious lesion on MRI scheduled to undergo RARP.

Patient summary

In patients with one-sided prostate cancer on magnetic resonance imaging, omitting biopsies on the other side rarely changed the surgical plan with respect to nerve-sparing surgery and the indication to perform extended lymph node dissection.

Evaluation of a Cascaded Deep Learning-based Algorithm for Prostate Lesion Detection at Biparametric MRI

Background Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) improves prostate cancer (PCa) detection compared with systematic biopsy, but its interpretation is prone to interreader variation, which results in performance inconsistency. Artificial intelligence (AI) models can assist in mpMRI interpretation, but large training data sets and extensive model testing are required. Purpose To evaluate a biparametric MRI AI algorithm for intraprostatic lesion detection and segmentation and to compare its performance with radiologist readings and biopsy results. Materials and Methods This secondary analysis of a prospective registry included consecutive patients with suspected or known PCa who underwent mpMRI, US-guided systematic biopsy, or combined systematic and MRI/US fusion-guided biopsy between April 2019 and September 2022. All lesions were prospectively evaluated using Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2.1. The lesion- and participant-level performance of a previously developed cascaded deep learning algorithm was compared with histopathologic outcomes and radiologist readings using sensitivity, positive predictive value (PPV), and Dice similarity coefficient (DSC). Results A total of 658 male participants (median age, 67 years [IQR, 61-71 years]) with 1029 MRI-visible lesions were included. At histopathologic analysis, 45% (294 of 658) of participants had lesions of International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade group (GG) 2 or higher. The algorithm identified 96% (282 of 294; 95% CI: 94%, 98%) of all participants with clinically significant PCa, whereas the radiologist identified 98% (287 of 294; 95% CI: 96%, 99%; P = .23). The algorithm identified 84% (103 of 122), 96% (152 of 159), 96% (47 of 49), 95% (38 of 40), and 98% (45 of 46) of participants with ISUP GG 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 lesions, respectively. In the lesion-level analysis using radiologist ground truth, the detection sensitivity was 55% (569 of 1029; 95% CI: 52%, 58%), and the PPV was 57% (535 of 934; 95% CI: 54%, 61%). The mean number of false-positive lesions per participant was 0.61 (range, 0-3). The lesion segmentation DSC was 0.29. Conclusion The AI algorithm detected cancer-suspicious lesions on biparametric MRI scans with a performance comparable to that of an experienced radiologist. Moreover, the algorithm reliably predicted clinically significant lesions at histopathologic examination. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03354416 © RSNA, 2024 Supplemental material is available for this article.

Automated prostate gland segmentation in challenging clinical cases: comparison of three artificial intelligence methods

OBJECTIVE

Automated methods for prostate segmentation on MRI are typically developed under ideal scanning and anatomical conditions. This study evaluates three different prostate segmentation AI algorithms in a challenging population of patients with prior treatments, variable anatomic characteristics, complex clinical history, or atypical MRI acquisition parameters.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A single institution retrospective database was queried for the following conditions at prostate MRI: prior prostate-specific oncologic treatment, transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), abdominal perineal resection (APR), hip prosthesis (HP), diversity of prostate volumes (large ≥ 150 cc, small ≤ 25 cc), whole gland tumor burden, magnet strength, noted poor quality, and various scanners (outside/vendors). Final inclusion criteria required availability of axial T2-weighted (T2W) sequence and corresponding prostate organ segmentation from an expert radiologist. Three previously developed algorithms were evaluated: (1) deep learning (DL)-based model, (2) commercially available shape-based model, and (3) federated DL-based model. Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC) was calculated compared to expert. DSC by model and scan factors were evaluated with Wilcox signed-rank test and linear mixed effects (LMER) model.

RESULTS

683 scans (651 patients) met inclusion criteria (mean prostate volume 60.1 cc [9.05-329 cc]). Overall DSC scores for models 1, 2, and 3 were 0.916 (0.707-0.971), 0.873 (0-0.997), and 0.894 (0.025-0.961), respectively, with DL-based models demonstrating significantly higher performance (p < 0.01). In sub-group analysis by factors, Model 1 outperformed Model 2 (all p < 0.05) and Model 3 (all p < 0.001). Performance of all models was negatively impacted by prostate volume and poor signal quality (p < 0.01). Shape-based factors influenced DL models (p < 0.001) while signal factors influenced all (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Factors affecting anatomical and signal conditions of the prostate gland can adversely impact both DL and non-deep learning-based segmentation models.

Added value of randomised biopsy to multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy of the prostate in a contemporary cohort

OBJECTIVE

To assess the added value of concurrent systematic randomised ultrasonography-guided biopsy (SBx) to multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-targeted biopsy and the additional rate of overdiagnosis of clinically insignificant prostate cancer (ciPCa) by SBx in a large contemporary, real-world cohort.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 1552 patients with positive mpMRI and consecutive mpMRI-targeted biopsy and SBx were enrolled. Added value and the rate of overdiagnosis by SBx was evaluated.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

added value of SBx, defined as detection rate of clinically significant PCa (csPCa; International Society of Urological Pathology [ISUP] Grade ≥2) by SBx, while mpMRI-targeted biopsy was negative or showed ciPCa (ISUP Grade 1).

SECONDARY OUTCOME

rate of overdiagnosis by SBx, defined as detection of ciPCa in patients with negative mpMRI-targeted biopsy and PSA level of <10 ng/mL.

RESULTS

Detection rate of csPCa by mpMRI-targeted biopsy and/or SBx was 753/1552 (49%). Added value of SBx was 145/944 (15%). Rate of overdiagnosis by SBx was 146/656 (22%). Added value of SBx did not change when comparing patients with previous prostate biopsy and biopsy naïve patients. In multivariable analysis, a Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) 4 index lesion (odds ratio [OR] 3.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.66-6.78; P = 0.001), a PI-RADS 5 index lesion (OR 2.89, 95% CI 1.39-6.46; P = 0.006) and age (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.03-1.08; P < 0.001) were independently associated with added value of SBx.

CONCLUSIONS

In our real-world analysis, we saw a significant impact on added value and added rate of overdiagnosis by SBx. Subgroup analysis showed no significant decrease of added value in any evaluated risk group. Therefore, we do not endorse omitting concurrent SBx to mpMRI-guided biopsy of the prostate.

Association of extended core sampling with delayed intervention and pathologic outcomes for active surveillance patients A population-based analysis

INTRODUCTION

Combined systematic plus targeted biopsy sampling improves detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa). Our objective was to evaluate whether extended core sampling at initial biopsy in active surveillance (AS) patients is associated with subsequent AS discontinuation and pathologic outcomes.

METHODS

National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) low- and favorable-intermediate-risk (FIR) AS patients diagnosed between 2010 and 2015 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Prostate with Watchful Waiting database. Prostate biopsy sampling was operationalized as: standard (10-12 cores), extended (13-20 cores), or super-extended (21+ cores). Sensitivity analyses using differing cutoffs was performed. Outcomes included delayed definitive intervention (radical prostatectomy [RP]/radiotherapy) and pathologic upgrading and/or downgrading in delayed RP patients. Multivariable logistic regression modelling adjusted for sociodemographic/oncologic variables was performed.

RESULTS

This cohort included 42 459 patients (low-risk: 28 411; FIR:14 048); 25-29% and 3-5% of patients underwent extended and super-extended core sampling, respectively, at diagnosis. Extended core sampling was associated with decreased odds of definitive intervention in low (odds ratio [OR] 0.89, p=0.003) and grade group 2 (GG2) FIR (OR 0.83, p=0.002) patients. Super-extended sampling was associated with decreased odds of definitive intervention in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) 10-20 FIR patients (OR 0.65, p=0.02). Super-extended sampling was associated with decreased odds of upgrading to ≥GG2 disease in low-risk (OR 0.45, p=0.032) and to ≥GG3 disease in GG2 FIR patients (OR 0.67, p=0.044).

CONCLUSIONS

This population-based analysis demonstrates that extended/super-extended sampling at diagnosis is associated with significantly decreased odds of AS discontinuation and pathologic upgrading in low/FIR AS patients. This highlights the significance of extended tissue sampling at initial biopsy to appropriately risk-stratify AS patients and minimize AS discontinuation rates.

Diagnostic Utility of Artificial Intelligence-assisted Transperineal Biopsy Planning in Prostate Cancer Suspected Men: A Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Accurate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) reporting is essential for transperineal prostate biopsy (TPB) planning. Although approved computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) tools may assist urologists in this task, evidence of improved clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection is lacking. Therefore, we aimed to document the diagnostic utility of using Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) and CAD for biopsy planning compared with PI-RADS alone.

METHODS

A total of 262 consecutive men scheduled for TPB at our referral centre were analysed. Reported PI-RADS lesions and an US Food and Drug Administration-cleared CAD tool were used for TPB planning. PI-RADS and CAD lesions were targeted on TPB, while four (interquartile range: 2-5) systematic biopsies were taken. The outcomes were the (1) proportion of csPCa (grade group ≥2) and (2) number of targeted lesions and false-positive rate. Performance was tested using free-response receiver operating characteristic curves and the exact Fisher-Yates test.

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

Overall, csPCa was detected in 56% (146/262) of men, with sensitivity of 92% and 97% (p = 0.007) for PI-RADS- and CAD-directed TPB, respectively. In 4% (10/262), csPCa was detected solely by CAD-directed biopsies; in 8% (22/262), additional csPCa lesions were detected. However, the number of targeted lesions increased by 54% (518 vs 336) and the false-positive rate doubled (0.66 vs 1.39; p = 0.009). Limitations include biopsies only for men at clinical/radiological suspicion and no multidisciplinary review of MRI before biopsy.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

The tested CAD tool for TPB planning improves csPCa detection at the cost of an increased number of lesions sampled and false positives. This may enable more personalised biopsy planning depending on urological and patient preferences.

PATIENT SUMMARY

The computer-aided diagnosis tool tested for transperineal prostate biopsy planning improves the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer at the cost of an increased number of lesions sampled and false positives. This may enable more personalised biopsy planning depending on urological and patient preferences.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

A novel biopsy scheme for prostate cancer: targeted and regional systematic biopsy

PURPOSE

To explore a novel biopsy scheme for prostate cancer (PCa), and test the detection rate and pathological agreement of standard systematic (SB) + targeted (TB) biopsy and novel biopsy scheme.

METHODS

Positive needles were collected from 194 patients who underwent SB + TB (STB) followed by radical prostatectomy (RP). Our novel biopsy scheme, targeted and regional systematic biopsy (TrSB) was defined as TB + regional SB (4 SB-needles closest to the TB-needles). The McNemar test was utilized to compare the detection rate performance for clinical significant PCa (csPCa) and clinical insignificant PCa (ciPCa). Moreover, the accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were investigated. The agreement between the different biopsy schemes grade group (GG) and RP GG were assessed. The concordance between the biopsy and the RP GG was evaluated using weighted κ coefficient analyses.

RESULTS

In this study, the overall detection rate for csPCa was 83.5% (162 of 194) when SB and TB were combined. TrSB showed better NPV than TB (97.0% vs. 74.4%). Comparing to STB, the TB-detection rate of csPCa had a significant difference (p < 0.01), while TrSB showed no significant difference (p > 0.999). For ciPCa, the overall detection rate was 16.5% (32 of 194). TrSB showed better PPV (96.6% vs. 83.3%) and NPV (97.6% vs. 92.9%) than TB. Comparing to STB, the detection rate of both schemes showed no significant difference (p = 0.077 and p = 0.375). All three schemes GG showed poor agreement with RP GG (TB: 43.3%, TrSB: 46.4%, STB: 45.9%). Using weighted κ, all three schemes showed no difference (TB: 0.48, TrSB: 0.51, STB: 0.51). In our subgroup analysis (PI-RADS = 4/5, n = 154), all three schemes almost showed no difference (Weighted κ: TB-0.50, TrSB-0.51, STB-0.50).

CONCLUSION

Our novel biopsy scheme TrSB (TB + 4 closest SB needles) may reduce 8 cores of biopsy compared with STB (standard SB + TB), which also showed better csPCa detection rate than TB only, but the same as STB. The pathological agreement between three different biopsy schemes (TB/TrSB/STB) GG and RP GG showed no difference.

MRI-Ultrasound Fused Approach for Prostate Biopsy-How It Is Performed

The use of MRI-ultrasound image fusion targeted biopsy of the prostate in the face of an elevated serum PSA is now recommended by multiple societies, and results in improved detection of clinically significant cancer and, potentially, decreased detection of indolent disease. This combines the excellent sensitivity of MRI for clinically significant prostate cancer and the real-time biopsy guidance and confirmation of ultrasound. Both transperineal and transrectal approaches can be implemented using cognitive fusion, mechanical fusion with an articulated arm and electromagnetic registration, or pure software registration. The performance has been shown comparable to in-bore MRI biopsy performance. However, a number of factors influence the performance of this technique, including the quality and interpretation of the MRI, the approach used for biopsy, and experience of the practitioner, with most studies showing comparable performance of MRI-ultrasound fusion to in-bore targeted biopsy. Future improvements including artificial intelligence promise to refine the performance of all approaches.

Prostate cancer detection and complications of MRI-targeted prostate biopsy using cognitive registration, software-assisted image fusion or in-bore guidance: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies

BACKGROUND

Three primary strategies for MRI-targeted biopsies (TB) are available: Cognitive TB (COG-TB), MRI-US Fusion TB (FUS-TB), and In Bore TB (IB-TB). Despite nearly a decade of practice, a consensus on the preferred approach is lacking, with previous studies showing comparable PCa detection rates among the three methods.

METHODS

We conducted a search of PubMed, EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases from 2014 to 2023, to identify studies comparing at least two of the three methods and reporting clinically significant PCa (csPCa) detection rates. The primary and secondary outcomes were to compare the csPCa and insignificant prostate cancer (iPCa, ISUP GG 1) detection rates between TB techniques. The tertiary outcome was to compare the complication rate between TB techniques. Detection rates were pooled using random-effect models. Planned sensitivity analyses included subgroup analysis according to the definition of csPCa and positive MRI, previous biopsy status, biopsy route, prostate volume, and lesion characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of twenty studies, involving 4928 patients, were included in the quantitative synthesis. The meta-analysis unveiled comparable csPCa detection rates among COG-TB (0.37), FUS-TB (0.39), and IB-TB (0.47). iPCa detection rate was also similar between TB techniques (COG-TB: 0.12, FUS-TB: 0.17, IB-TB: 0.18). All preplanned sensitivity analyses were conducted and did not show any statistically significant difference in the detection of csPCa between TB methods. Complication rates, however, were infrequently reported, and when available, no statistically significant differences were observed among the techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

This unique study, exclusively focusing on comparative research, indicates no significant differences in csPCa and iPCa detection rates between COG-TB, FUS-TB, and IB-TB. Decisions between these techniques may extend beyond diagnostic accuracy, considering factors such as resource availability and operator preferences. Well-designed prospective studies are warranted to refine our understanding of the optimal approach for TB in diverse clinical scenarios.