ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Pretreatment Detection, Surveillance, and Staging of Prostate Cancer: 2022 Update

Prostate cancer is second leading cause of death from malignancy after lung cancer in American men. The primary goal during pretreatment evaluation of prostate cancer is disease detection, localization, establishing disease extent (both local and distant), and evaluating aggressiveness, which are the driving factors of patient outcomes such as recurrence and survival. Prostate cancer is typically diagnosed after the recognizing elevated serum prostate-specific antigen level or abnormal digital rectal examination. Tissue diagnosis is obtained by transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy or MRI-targeted biopsy, commonly with multiparametric MRI without or with intravenous contrast, which has recently been established as standard of care for detecting, localizing, and assessing local extent of prostate cancer. Although bone scintigraphy and CT are still typically used to detect bone and nodal metastases in patients with intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer, novel advanced imaging modalities including prostatespecific membrane antigen PET/CT and whole-body MRI are being more frequently utilized for this purpose with improved detection rates. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

Use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: a scoping review on the benefits and harm of mpMRI in different biopsy scenarios

BACKGROUND

There is uncertainty on how multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) and MRI-targeted biopsy (MRI-TB) can be best used to manage low-risk prostate cancer patients on Active Surveillance (AS). We performed a scoping review to evaluate the benefits and harm associated with four different biopsy scenarios in which mpMRI can be implemented in AS.

METHODS

Medline, Embase and Cochrane Library databases (1 January 2013-18 September 2020) were searched. Included studies were on men with low-risk prostate cancer enrolled in AS, who had mpMRI ± MRI-TB and standard prostate biopsy (systematic transrectal ultrasound or transperineal saturation biopsy), at confirmatory or follow-up biopsy. Primary outcomes were the number of Gleason score upgrades and biopsies avoided.

RESULTS

Eight confirmatory biopsy studies and three follow-up biopsy studies were included. Compared to the benchmark of using standard biopsy (SB) for all men, the addition of MRI-TB increased the detection of Gleason score upgrades at both confirmatory (6/8 studies) and follow-up biopsy (3/3 studies), with increments of 1.7-11.8 upgrades per 100 men. 6/7 studies suggested that the use of a positive mpMRI to triage men for MRI-TB or SB alone would detect fewer Gleason score upgrades than benchmark at confirmatory biopsy, but the combination of MRI-TB and SB would detect more upgrades than the benchmark. For follow-up biopsy, the evidence on mpMRI triage biopsy scenarios was inconclusive due to the small number of included studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of MRI-TB to benchmark (SB for all men) maximises the detection of Gleason score upgrades at confirmatory and follow-up biopsy. When the use of mpMRI to triage men for a biopsy is desired, the combination of MRI-TB and SB should be considered for men with positive mpMRI at confirmatory biopsy. The evidence on mpMRI triage scenarios was inconclusive in the follow-up biopsy setting.

MRI-targeted prostate biopsy: the next step forward!

Aim

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

The role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the selection and follow-up of patients undergoing active surveillance for prostate cancer. An European Section of Uro-Technology (ESUT) review

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, active surveillance (AS) has gained popularity as a safe and reasonable option for patients with low-risk, clinically localized prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the latest information regarding the use of mpMRI in the setting of active surveillance (AS) for the management of prostate cancer (PCa).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A PubMed-based, English literature search was conducted through February 2020. We selected the most relevant original articles, meta-analyses and systematic reviews that could provide important information.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The great importance of mpMRI of the prostate in the setting of PCa diagnosis is its ability to visualize primarily high-grade cancerous lesions potentially missed on systematic biopsies. In several studies, mpMRI has shown an improved performance over clinically based models for identifying candidates which will benefit the most from AS. Although data on prostate mpMRI during follow-up of men under AS is sparse, it holds the probability to improve significantly AS programs by a more precise selection of optimal candidates, a more accurate identification of disease progression and a reduction in number of biopsies. The goal of reassessment of patients undergoing AS is to find the most effective moment to change attitude to active treatment.

CONCLUSION

The value of mpMRI has been recognized due to its high negative predictive value (NPV) for lesion upgrading in low-risk PCa patients. The improvement in imaging detection, and precise diagnosis with mpMRI could reduce misclassifications at initial diagnosis and during follow-up, reducing the number of biopsies.

Advances in the selection of patients with prostate cancer for active surveillance

Early identification and management of prostate cancer completely changed with the discovery of prostate-specific antigen. However, improved detection has also led to overdiagnosis and consequently overtreatment of patients with low-risk disease. Strategies for the management of patients using active surveillance - the monitoring of clinically insignificant disease until intervention is warranted - were developed in response to this issue. The success of this approach is critically dependent on the accurate selection of patients who are predicted to be at the lowest risk of prostate cancer mortality. The Epstein criteria for clinically insignificant prostate cancer were first published in 1994 and have been repeatedly validated for risk-stratification and selection for active surveillance over the past few decades. Current active surveillance programmes use modified criteria with 30-50% of patients receiving treatment at 10 years. Nonetheless, tools for prostate cancer diagnosis have continued to evolve with improvements in biopsy format and targeting, advances in imaging technologies such as multiparametric MRI, and the identification of serum-, tissue- and urine-based biomarkers. These advances have the potential to further improve the identification of men with low-risk disease who can be appropriately managed using active surveillance.

Long Non-Coding RNA (lncRNA) RAMS11 Promotes Metastatis and Cell Growth of Prostate Cancer by CBX4 Complex Binding to Top2α

Introduction

Studies have confirmed that parts of the non-coding genes in the human genome play an important role in the pathogenesis and metastasis of prostate cancer. Among them, long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) are vitally involved in the biological regulation of prostate cancer. In addition, lncRNAs are closely associated with the recurrence, metastasis and prognosis of prostate cancer. However, the molecular pathogenesis of lncRNAs in regulating cell growth and metastasis of prostate cancer remains unclear. Therefore, this study was designed to explore the function and mechanism of lncRNA RAMS11 in cell growth and metastasis of prostate cancer.

Methods

Prostate cancer and para-carcinoma tissue samples were obtained from 42 patients who were diagnosed from March 2013 to September 2014 at Quanzhou First Hospital Affiliated to Fujian Medical University. Microarray experiments and real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) measured the expression of lncRNA. RWPE-2, LNCap, PC3 and DU145 cells were used for an in vitro model.

Results

The expression of lncRNA RAMS11 was up-regulated in prostate cancer tissue samples. LncRNA RAMS11 promoted cell growth and metastasis of prostate cancer cells. Down-regulation of lncRNA RAMS11 attenuated cell growth and metastasis of prostate cancer cells. We also demonstrated that lncRNA RAMS11 bound to CBX4 to activate expression of Top2α. LncRNA RAMS11 promoted tumor growth of prostate cancer in the mouse model. The inhibition of CBX4 attenuated the pro-cancer effects of lncRNA AMS11 in prostate cancer cells, while the activation of Top2α attenuated the anti-cancer effects of si-lncRNA RAMS11 in prostate cancer cells.

Discussion

Our results indicated that lncRNA RAMS11 promoted cell growth and metastasis of prostate cancer by CBX4 complex via binding to Top2α, and might be developed for the treatment of prostate cancer.

[Active surveillance of prostate cancer: treatement-free survival according to restricted or expanded eligibility criteria]

AIM

Overtreatment is an actual problem in low risk localized prostate cancer (PC) management. Active surveillance (AS) is a solution to limit this problem, but eligibility criteria remained discussed. The aim was to assess possibilities of widening selection criteria for patient in AS, studying curative treatment free survival (CTFS) according to restricted or expanded eligibility criteria.

METHODS

We retrospectively studied patients beginning AS between 2008 and 2014, for Gleason 6 localized PC, PSA<15ng/ml,<cT3. The group "strict criteria" was defined:≤cT2a, PSA<10ng/ml, 2≤positive biopsies (PB+), total tumoral length≤3mm, tumoral invading≤50%, PSA density≤0,15ng/ml/cm³. MRI was performed at baseline and during follow-up. Radical treatment was proposed in case of biological, histological or clinical progression. Criteria associated with AS survival were analyzed by Cox regression.

RESULTS

One hundred eighty patients were included (follow-up 46 months). One hundred and eleven patients had "strict" criteria vs. 69 "expanded" criteria. Eighty-two patients (45%) were treated with median time of 18.2 months (CTFS was 71% at 2 years, 52% at 5 years.). The widening of the inclusion criteria was not associated with CTFS (65 vs 54% at 5 years, P=0.13). Factors significatively associated with discontinuation of AS were bilaterality (HR=2.12) and abnormal rectal digital examination cT2 (HR=2,07); MRI target (HR=2,48)) tended towards significance.

CONCLUSION

Our study concludes that curative treatment free survival is similar for patients included with expanded criteria compared with those included with strict criteria. However, high initial cancer volume) is associated with AS discontinuation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Accuracy of MRI-guided Versus Systematic Prostate Biopsy in Patients Under Active Surveillance: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

This meta-analysis focuses on the accuracy of upgrading to clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa) by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy (MRI-TB) versus systematic biopsy (SB). We searched the Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Scopus, and Literatura Latino Americana em Ciências da Saúde databases through January 2020 for comparative, retrospective/prospective, paired-cohort, and randomized clinical trials with paired comparisons. The population consisted of patients with low-risk PCa in active surveillance with at least 1 index lesion on imaging. We evaluated the quality of evidence by using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 score. Group comparisons considered the differences between the area under the curve summary receiver operating characteristic curve in a 2-tailed method. We also compared the positive predictive value of the best single method (MRI-TB or SB) and the referral study test (combined biopsy, a combination of MRI-TB and SB). The meta-analysis included 6 studies enrolling 741 patients. The pooled sensitivity for the 2 groups was 0.79 (95% confidence interval, 0.74-0.83; I² = 75%) and 0.67 (95% confidence interval, 0.63-0.74; I² = 55.4%), respectively. The area under the curve for the MRI-TB and SB groups were 0.99 and 0.92 (P < .001), respectively. The positive predictive value for the MRI-TB and combined biopsy groups were similar. The accumulated evidence suggests better results for MRI-TB compared with SB. Therefore, use of MRI-TB alone may be preferable in patients in active surveillance harboring low-risk PCa.

The factors predicting upgrading of prostate cancer by using International Society for Urological Pathology (ISUP) 2014 Gleason grading system

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the factors to predict Gleason score upgrading (GSU) of patients with prostate cancer who were evaluated by using the International Society for Urological Pathology (ISUP) 2014 Gleason grading system.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between January 2008 and December 2015, we retrospectively investigated patients who had undergone radical prostatectomy and followed up in the uro-oncology outpatient clinic. The pathologic specimens of the patients were evaluated based on the ISUP 2014 classification system. The patients were divided into two groups with or without upgraded Gleason scores. Factors that could be effective in predicting upgrading such as age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), prostate volume, D'Amico risk classification, PSA density, cancer of the prostate risk assessment (CAPRA) scores, biopsy tumor percentage, body mass index, and clinical stage parameters were compared between both groups.

RESULTS

Of the 265 patients who could be evaluated and followed up regularly, Gleason score upgrades were observed in 110 (41.5%) patients. Advanced age (p=0.009), PSA >20 ng/mL (p=0.036), PSA density >0.35 (p=0.005), high CAPRA score (p=0.031), and high biopsy tumor percentage (p=0.009) were discovered to be correlated with Gleason score upgrade in univariate logistic regression analysis. Advanced age alone was a predictor for GSU in multivariate logistic regression analysis (p=0.002). Five-year biochemical recurrence-free survival rate was 86% in the non-GSU group and 55% in the GSU group (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

GSU risk should be taken into consideration in making therapeutic decisions for older patients with prostate cancer, and precautions should be taken against development of aggressive disease.

Pathological upgrading and upstaging at radical prostatectomy in Jamaican men with low-risk prostate cancer

Several studies suggest race-based health disparities in men with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa), with African American males having poorer oncological outcomes. We sought to determine the prevalence and predictors of pathological upgrading and upstaging in Jamaican men with low-risk PCa treated with radical prostatectomy (RP). Data on 141 men who met the National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria for low-risk PCa and underwent RP at a single institution were reviewed. All men had a transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy. Pre-operative clinical and final pathological data were obtained. Data were summarised as means and standard deviations or percentages as appropriate. Bivariate analyses such as independent samples t-tests and chi-square tables were conducted and logistic regression models were estimated to predict upgrading (>Gleason 6) and upstaging (p ≥ T3). The mean age was 59.5 ± 7.8 years with mean prostate specific antigen (PSA) of 6.6 ± 2 ng/mL. A total of 48.3% of men were upgraded and 11.4% were upstaged. Bivariate analyses indicated that PSA (p = 0.008) and percentage positive cores (p = 0.002) were associated with upgrading. PSA (p = 0.042) and percentage positive cores (p = 0.003) were significantly associated with upstaging. The odds of upgrading increased with increased PSA levels (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.05-1.87, p = 0.021) or increased percentage positive cores (OR 8.27, 95% CI 2.19-31.16, p = 0.002). The odds of upstaging increased with increased PSA levels (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.01-1.96, p = 0.046) and with increased percentages positive cores (OR 11.4; 95% CI 2.06-63.09, p = 0.005). Jamaican men with low-risk PCa are at high risk of pathological upgrading and upstaging at RP. These findings should be taken into consideration when discussing treatment options with these patients.

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

CONTEXT

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

OBJECTIVE

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

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

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

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

PATIENT SUMMARY

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

Magnetic resonance imaging-guided targeted biopsy in risk classification among patients on active surveillance: A diagnostic meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess the sensitivity and accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging-guided targeted biopsy (MRI-TB) in patients undergoing active surveillance (AS) procedure.

METHODS

We searched databases to identify relevant studies which compared MRI-TB with systemic biopsy for diagnosing prostate cancer in patients on AS. Outcomes included sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), area under the curve (AUC) and publication bias of AS group, confirmatory biopsy group and follow-up biopsy group.

RESULTS

Fourteen articles involving 1693 patients were included. In AS group, the sensitivity was 0.62 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57-0.68), specificity was 0.89 (95% CI, 0.87-0.90), NLR was 0.43 (0.31-0.60), PLR was 4.90 (3.50-6.86), DOR was 12.75 (7.22-22.51), and AUC was 0.8645. In confirmatory biopsy group, the sensitivity was 0.67 (0.59-0.74), specificity was 0.89 (0.86-0.91), NLR was 0.42 (0.27-0.65), PLR was 4.94 (3.88-6.30), DOR was 14.54 (9.60-22.02), and AUC was 0.8812. In follow-up biopsy group, the sensitivity was 0.35 (0.22-0.51), specificity was 0.88 (0.82-0.92), NLR was 0.76 (0.52-1.11), PLR was 3.06 (1.71-5.50), DOR was 4.41 (2.15-9.03), and AUC was 0.8367.

CONCLUSION

MRI-TB has a moderate-to-high diagnostic accuracy for diagnosing and reclassifying patients on AS with high specificity and AUC value under the SROC curve.

Detection of Individual Prostate Cancer Foci via Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging

BACKGROUND

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) undoubtedly affects the diagnosis and treatment of localized prostate cancer (CaP). However, clinicians need a better understanding of its accuracy and limitations in detecting individual CaP foci to optimize management.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the per-lesion detection rate for CaP foci by mpMRI and identify predictors of tumor detection.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

We carried out a retrospective analysis of a prospectively managed database correlating lesion-specific results from mpMRI co-registered with whole-mount pathology (WMP) prostatectomy specimens from June 2010 to February 2018. Participants include 588 consecutive patients with biopsy-proven CaP undergoing 3-T mpMRI before radical prostatectomy at a single tertiary institution.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

We measured mpMRI sensitivity in detecting individual CaP and clinically significant (any Gleason score ≥7) CaP foci and predictors of tumor detection using multivariate analysis.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The final analysis included 1213 pathologically confirmed tumor foci in 588 patients with primarily intermediate- (75%) or high-risk (12%) CaP. mpMRI detected 45% of all lesions (95% confidence interval [CI] 42-47%), including 65% of clinically significant lesions (95% CI 61-69%) and nearly 80% of high-grade tumors. Some 74% and 31% of missed solitary and multifocal tumors, respectively, were clinically significant. The majority of missed lesions were small (61.1% ≤1cm); 28.3% were between 1 and 2cm, and 10.4% were >2cm. mpMRI missed at least one clinically significant focus in 34% of patients overall, and in 45% of men with multifocal lesions. On multivariate analysis, smaller, low-grade, multifocal, nonindex tumors with lower prostate-specific antigen density were more likely to be missed. Limitations include selection bias in a prostatectomy cohort, lack of specificity data, an imperfect co-registration process, and uncertain clinical significance for undetected lesions.

CONCLUSIONS

mpMRI detects less than half of all and less than two-thirds of clinically significant CaP foci. The moderate per-lesion sensitivity and significant proportion of men with undetected tumor foci demonstrate the current limitations of mpMRI.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate before surgical removal for prostate cancer finds less than half of all individual prostate cancer tumors. Large, solitary, aggressive tumors are more likely to be visualized on imaging.

MRI in active surveillance: a critical review

INTRODUCTION

Recent technological advancements and the introduction of modern anatomical and functional sequences have led to a growing role for multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in the detection, risk assessment and monitoring of early prostate cancer. This includes men who have been diagnosed with lower-risk prostate cancer and are looking at the option of active surveillance (AS). The purpose of this paper is to review the recent evidence supporting the use of mpMRI at different time points in AS, as well as to discuss some of its potential pitfalls.

METHODS

A combination of electronic and manual searching methods were used to identify recent, important papers investigating the role of mpMRI in AS.

RESULTS

The high negative predictive value of mpMRI can be exploited for the selection of AS candidates. In addition, mpMRI can be efficiently used to detect higher risk disease in patients already on surveillance.

CONCLUSION

Although there is an ongoing debate regarding the precise nature of its optimal implementation, mpMRI is a promising risk stratification tool and should be considered for men on AS.

Which scores need a core? An evaluation of MR-targeted biopsy yield by PIRADS score across different biopsy indications

INTRODUCTION

Magnetic resonance imaging is being widely adopted in the clinical management of prostate cancer. The correlation of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) to the presence of cancer has been established but studies have primarily evaluated this in a single clinical setting. This study aims to characterize the correlation of PIRADS score to the diagnosis of cancer on fusion biopsy among men who are undergoing primary biopsy, those who have had a previous negative biopsy or men on active surveillance.

MATERIALS & METHODS

A consecutive sample of men undergoing US-MR biopsy at a single academic institution from 2014 to 2017 were included in this retrospective study. Men were stratified into groups according to their clinical history: biopsy-naïve, previous negative transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) biopsy or on active surveillance. The correlation of PIRADS score to the diagnosis of any and clinically significant cancer (Gleason score ≥ 3 + 4) was determined.

RESULTS

A total of 255 patients with 365 discrete lesions were analyzed. PIRADS score 1-2, 3, 4 and 5 yielded any prostate cancer in 7.7, 29.7, 42.3 and 82.4% of the cases, respectively, across all indications while clinically significant cancer was found in 0, 8.9, 21.4 and 62.7%, respectively. The area under the receiver operative curves for the diagnosis of any and significant cancer was 0.69 (95%CI: 0.64-0.74) and 0.74 (95%CI: 0.69-0.79) respectively. Men who have had a previous negative biopsy had lower detection rates for any prostate cancer for PIRADS 3 and 4 lesions compared to those that were biopsy-naïve or on active surveillance.

CONCLUSION

Cancer detection rates are significantly associated with PIRADS score. Biopsy yields differ across biopsy indications which should be considered when selecting a PIRADS score threshold for biopsy. Biopsy of PIRADS 3 lesions could potentially be avoided in men who have previously undergone a negative TRUS biopsy.

Progression and treatment rates using an active surveillance protocol incorporating image-guided baseline biopsies and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging monitoring for men with favourable-risk prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE

To assess early outcomes since the introduction of an active surveillance (AS) protocol incorporating multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-guided baseline biopsies and image-based surveillance.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A new AS protocol mandating image-guided baseline biopsies, annual mpMRI and 3-monthly prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing, but which retained protocol re-biopsies, was tested. Pathological progression, treatment conversion and triggers for non-protocol biopsy were recorded prospectively.

RESULTS

Data from 157 men enrolled in the AS protocol (median age 64 years, PSA 6.8 ng/mL, follow-up 39 months) were interrogated. A total of 12 men (7.6%) left the AS programme by choice. Of the 145 men who remained, 104 had re-biopsies either triggered by a rise in PSA level, change in mpMRI findings or by protocol. Overall, 23 men (15.9%) experienced disease progression; pathological changes were observed in 20 men and changes in imaging results were observed in three men. Of these 23 men, 17 switched to treatment, giving a conversion rate of 11.7% (<4% per year). Of the 20 men with pathological progression, this was detected in four of them after a PSA increase triggered a re-biopsy, while in 10 men progression was detected after an mpMRI change. Progression was detected in six men, however, solely after a protocol re-biopsy without prior PSA or mpMRI changes. Using PSA and mpMRI changes alone to detect progression was found to have a sensitivity and specificity of 70.0% and 81.7%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our AS protocol, with thorough baseline assessment and imaging-based surveillance, showed low rates of progression and treatment conversion. Changes in mpMRI findings were the principle trigger for detecting progression by imaging alone or pathologically; however, per protocol re-biopsy still detected a significant number of pathological progressions without mpMRI or PSA changes.

Is magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy a useful addition to systematic confirmatory biopsy in men on active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review and meta-analyse evidence regarding the additional value of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and MRI-targeted biopsies to confirmatory systematic biopsies in identifying high-grade prostate cancer in men with low-risk disease on transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) biopsy, as active surveillance (AS) of prostate cancer is recommended for men with Gleason 3 + 3 on standard TRUS-guided biopsy. Confirmatory assessment can include repeat standard TRUS-guided biopsy, and/or MRI with targeted biopsy when indicated.

METHODS

A systematic review of the Embase, Medline, Web-of-science, Google scholar, and Cochrane library was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Identified reports were critically appraised according to the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS)-2 criteria. Studies reporting men with Gleason 3 + 3 prostate cancer who had chosen AS based on transrectal systematic biopsy findings and had undergone MRI with systematic ± targeted biopsy at confirmatory assessment were included. The primary outcome was detection of any Gleason pattern ≥4.

RESULTS

Included reports (six) of men on AS (n = 1 159) showed cancer upgrading (Gleason ≥3 + 4) in 27% (95% confidence interval [CI] 22-34%) using a combined approach of MRI-targeted biopsies and confirmatory systematic biopsies. MRI-targeted biopsies alone would have missed cancer upgrading in 10% (95% CI 8-14%) and standard biopsies alone would have missed cancer upgrading in 7% (95% CI 5-10%). No pathway was more favourable than the other (relative risk [RR] 0.92, 95% CI 0.79-1.06). In all, 35% (95% CI 27-43%) of men with a positive MRI were upgraded, compared to 12% (95% CI 8-18%) of men with a negative MRI being upgraded (RR 2.77, 95% CI 1.76-4.38).

CONCLUSIONS

A pre-biopsy MRI should be performed before confirmatory systematic TRUS-guided biopsies in men on AS, together with MRI-targeted biopsies when indicated. A combined approach maximises cancer detection, although other factors within multivariate risk prediction can be used to aid the decision to biopsy in these men.

Multiparametric Magnetic-Resonance to Confirm Eligibility to an Active Surveillance Program for Low-Risk Prostate Cancer: Intermediate Time Results of a Third Referral High Volume Centre Active Surveillance Protocol

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the role of confirmatory multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) of the prostate at the time of Active Surveillance (AS) enrollment to reduce disease misclassification.

MATERIALS

From 2012 to 2016, 383 patients with low-risk disease respecting Prostate Cancer Research International AS criteria underwent confirmatory 1.5-T mpMRI. AS was proposed to patients with Prostate Imaging and Report and Data System (PI-RADS) score ≤3 and no extraprostatic extension (EPE), whereas patients with PI-RADS score ≥4 and/or EPE were treated actively. Kaplan-Meier analyses quantified progression-free survival (PFS) in patients enrolled in the AS program. Logistic regression analyses tested the association between confirmatory mpMRI and clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) at radical prostatectomy (RP). Diagnostic performance of mpMRI was calculated in patients submitted to immediate RP.

RESULTS

PFS rate was 99, 90 and 86% at 1, 2 and 3 years respectively. At multivariable analysis, PI-RADS 3, PI-RADS 4, PI-RADS 5 and EPE increased the probability of having csPCa at immediate RP (PI-RADS 3 [OR] 1.2, p = 0.26; PI-RADS 4 [OR] 5.1, p = 0.02; PI-RADS 5 [OR] 6.7; p = 0.009; EPE [OR] 11.8, p < 0.001). Confirmatory mpMRI showed sensibility, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of 85, 55, 68 and 76% respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

MpMRI at the time of AS enrollment reduces the misclassification rate of csPCa. We suggest to perform target biopsies in patients with PI-RADS score 3 and 4 lesions.

Reduction of MRI-targeted biopsies in men with low-risk prostate cancer on active surveillance by stratifying to PI-RADS and PSA-density, with different thresholds for significant disease

Background

The fear of undergrading prostate cancer (PCa) in men on active surveillance (AS) have led to strict criteria for monitoring, which have resulted in good long-term cancer-specific survival, proving the safety of this approach. Reducing undergrading, MRI-targeted biopsies are increasingly used in men with low-risk disease despite their undefined role yet. The objective of this study is to investigate the rate of upgrading using MRI-targeted biopsies in men with low-risk disease on AS, stratified on the basis of PI-RADS and PSA-density, with the aim to reduce potential unnecessary repeat biopsy procedures.

Methods

A total of 331 men were prospectively enrolled following the MRI-PRIAS protocol. MR imaging was according to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADSv2) guidelines. Suspicious MRI lesions (PI-RADS 3–5) were additionally targeted by MRI-TRUS fusion biopsies. Outcome measure was upgrading to Gleason score (GS) ≥3+4 with MRI-targeted biopsies, stratified for PI-RADS and PSA-density.

Results

In total, 25% (82/331) of men on AS showed upgrading from GS 3+3. Only 3% (11/331) was upgraded to GS ≥8. In 60% (198/331) a suspicious MRI lesion was identified, but in only 41% (82/198) of men upgrading was confirmed. PI-RADS 3, 4 and 5 categorized index lesions, showed upgrading in 30%, 34% and 66% of men, respectively. Stratification to PI-RADS 4–5, instead of PI-RADS 3–5, would have missed a small number of high volume Gleason 4 PCa in PI-RADS 3 category. However, further stratification into PI-RADS 3 lesions and PSA-density <0.15 ng/mL² could result in a safe targeted biopsy reduction of 36% in this category, without missing any upgrades.

Conclusions

Stratification with the combination of PI-RADS and PSA-density may reduce unnecessary additional MRI biopsy testing. Overall, the high rate of detected upgrading in men on AS may result in an unintended tightening of continuing in AS. Since patients, included under current AS criteria showed extremely favorable outcome, there might be no need to further restrict continuing on AS with MRI and targeted biopsies.

MRI in early prostate cancer detection: how to manage indeterminate or equivocal PI-RADS 3 lesions?

This review focuses on indeterminate lesions on prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), assigned as PI-RADS category 3. The prevalence of PI-RADS 3 index lesion in the diagnostic work-up is significant, varying between one in three (32%) to one in five (22%) men, depending on patient cohort of first biopsies, previously negative biopsies, and active surveillance biopsies. A management strategy must be developed for this group of men with an indeterminate suspicion of having clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). Currently available data show that the actual prevalence of csPCa after targeted biopsy in PI-RADS 3 lesions vary between patients groups from one in five (21%) to one in six (16%), depending on previous biopsy status. Although this prevalence is lower in comparison to PI-RADS 4 and PI-RADS 5 lesions, still a considerable proportion of men harbor significant disease. Men with such a PI-RADS 3 lesion should therefore be adequately managed. In general, the clinical approach of using a threshold of PI-RADS ≥4 instead of PI-RADS ≥3 to select MRI for targeted biopsies is not supported by data from our explorative literature search using current definitions of csPCa. A possible adaptation to the threshold of PI-RADS ≥4 in combination with other clinical markers could be considered within an active surveillance protocol, where the balance between the individual risk of missing csPCa and the constant process of repeating prostate biopsies is crucial. In the future, improvements in MR imaging and interpretation, combined with molecular biomarkers and multivariate risk models will all be employed in prostate cancer detection and monitoring. These combinations will aid decision-making in challenging circumstances, such as unclear and diagnostic equivocal results for csPCa at early detection.

Localized prostate cancer and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a retrospective, comparative study between pre- and post-operative Gleason scores

INTRODUCTION

To compare the pre- and post-operative Gleason scores (GS) in patients with localized prostate cancer treated with robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A single center, retrospective comparison between pre- and post-operative GS. Age, prostate volume, PSA, number of biopsies, number of positive cores, biopsy GS, cTNM, final pathology GS and pTNM of 286 patients were retrieved. They were divided into risk groups.

RESULTS

A total of 286 patients with a mean age at surgery of 64.64 ± 7.81 y and mean PSA-value of 9.35 ± 8.38 ng/mL. Mean prostate volume was 55.09 ± 24.93 mL, mean number of biopsies was 11.90 ± 4.63. Mean percentage of positive cores was 36.90 ± 22.42%. A GS of <7 was seen in 23.4%, 66.8% had a GS of 7 and 9.7% of >7 in final pathology. Of the total, 38.1% were pre-operative low risk, 58.7% of them had an upgrade in GS on final pathology, 45.1% were in the intermediate risk group, 5.4% showed a downgrade, 64.3% remained stable and 30.2% had an upgrade in GS. Also, 16.8% were high risk patients of which 35.4% had a downgrade, 39.6% remained stable and 25% showed an upgrade of the GS.

CONCLUSIONS

We found a substantial underestimation of the GS in the pre-operative setting when compared to the GS in final pathology.

The performance of PI-RADSv2 and quantitative apparent diffusion coefficient for predicting confirmatory prostate biopsy findings in patients considered for active surveillance of prostate cancer

PURPOSE

To assess the performance of the updated Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADSv2) and the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) for predicting confirmatory biopsy results in patients considered for active surveillance of prostate cancer (PCA).

METHODS

IRB-approved, retrospective study of 371 consecutive men with clinically low-risk PCA (initial biopsy Gleason score ≤6, prostate-specific antigen <10 ng/ml, clinical stage ≤T2a) who underwent 3T-prostate MRI before confirmatory biopsy. Two independent radiologists recorded the PI-RADSv2 scores and measured the corresponding ADC values in each patient. A composite score was generated to assess the performance of combining PI-RADSv2 + ADC.

RESULTS

PCA was upgraded on confirmatory biopsy in 107/371 (29%) patients. Inter-reader agreement was substantial (PI-RADSv2: k = 0.73; 95% CI [0.66-0.80]; ADC: r = 0.74; 95% CI [0.69-0.79]). Accuracies, sensitivities, specificities, positive predicted value and negative predicted value of PI-RADSv2 were 85, 89, 83, 68, 95 and 78, 82, 76, 58, 91% for ADC. PI-RADSv2 accuracy was significantly higher than that of ADC for predicting biopsy upgrade (p = 0.014). The combined PI-RADSv2 + ADC composite score did not perform better than PI-RADSv2 alone. Obviating biopsy in patients with PI-RADSv2 score ≤3 would have missed Gleason Score upgrade in 12/232 (5%) of patients.

CONCLUSION

PI-RADSv2 was superior to ADC measurements for predicting PCA upgrading on confirmatory biopsy.