Magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasonography fusion targeted prostate biopsy finds more significant prostate cancer in biopsy-naïve Japanese men compared with the standard biopsy

Fusion-targeted biopsy significantly improves prostate cancer detection in biopsy-naïve men

OBJECTIVE

The precise diagnosis of prostate cancer (PC) is crucial to avoid underdiagnosis, overdiagnosis, and overtreatment. We aimed to compare clinically significant PC (csPC) detection between MRI/ultrasound fusion-targeted prostate (TBx) compared to systematic biopsy (SBx) in biopsy-naïve Japanese men.

METHODS

We included patients with suspect PC due to elevated PSA level or abnormal digital rectal examination, or both. csPC was defined as International Society Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade group ≥2 (csPC-A) and ISUP grade group ≥3 (csPC-B).

RESULTS

This study included 143 patients. Overall PC detection was 66.4% for SBx and 67.8% for MRI-TBx. MRI-TBx presented a significantly higher rate of csPC detection (csPC-A 67.1% vs. 58.7%, p = 0.04, and csPC-B 49.6% vs. 39.9%, p < 0.001) and significantly lower detection of non-csPC-A (0.6% vs. 6.7%). Importantly, MRI-TBx missed 4.9% (7/143) of csPC-A and only 0.7% (1/143) of csPC-B. On the other hand, SBx alone missed 13.3% (19/143) of csPC-A and 4.2% (6/143) of csPC-B.

CONCLUSION

MRI-TBx significantly outperformed 12-cores SBx for csPC detection and decreased non-csPC detection in biopsy-naive men. Performing MRI-TBx without SBx would have missed some csPC, supporting that MRI-TBx synergizes with SBx to increase csPC detection.

Value of synthetic MRI quantitative parameters in preprocedural evaluation for TRUS/MRI fusion-guided biopsy of the prostate

BACKGROUND

Transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) fusion-guided biopsy has a high clinical application value. However, this technique has some limitations, which limit its use in routine clinical practice. Therefore, the selection of suitable proatate lesions for this technique is worthy of our attention. Synthetic MRI (SyMRI) is capable of quantifying multiple relaxation parameters, which might have potential value in preprocedural evaluation for TRUS/MRI fusion-guided biopsy of the prostate. The aim of our study is to examine the value of SyMRI quantitative parameters in preprocedural evaluation for TRUS/MRI fusion-guided biopsy of the prostate.

METHODS

We prospectively selected 148 lesions in 137 patients who underwent prostate biopsy in our hospital. Next, 2-4 needles of TRUS/MRI fusion-guided biopsy combined with 10 needles of system biopsy (SB) were used as the protocol for prostate biopsy. Before biopsy, the MAGiC sequences of the MRI images of the enrolled patients underwent post-processing, and the longitudinal relaxation time (T1), transverse relaxation time (T2), and proton density (PD) were extracted. The biopsy pathology results were used as a gold standard to compare the differences in SyMRI quantitative parameters between benign and malignant prostate lesions in the peripheral and transitional zones. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted to confirm the optimal SyMRI quantitative parameter for prostate lesion benignancy/malignancy performance, and the cutoff values of these parameters were used for grouping the lesions. The single-needle biopsy prostate cancer (PCa)-positivity rates (number of positive biopsy needles/total biopsy needles) and PCa overall detection rates by TRUS/MRI fusion-guided biopsy and SB were compared in different subgroups.

RESULTS

The T1 and T2 values can determine the benignancy/malignancy of prostate transition lesions(p < 0.01), and the T2 value has a greater diagnostic performance (p = 0.0376). The T2 value can determine the benignancy/malignancy of prostate peripheral lesions. The optimal diagnostic cutoff values for T2 were 77 and 81 ms, respectively. The single-needle PCa positivity rate of TRUS/MRI fusion-guided biopsy was higher than SB for any prostate lesions in different subgroups (p < 0.01). However, only in the subgroup of transition zone lesions with T2 ≤ 77 ms, the PCa overall detection rate of TRUS/MRI fusion-guided biopsy was significantly higher than that of SB (p = 0.031).

CONCLUSION

SyMRI-T2 value can provide a theoretical basis for the selection of suitable lesions for TRUS/MRI fusion-guided biopsy.

MRI/Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion-Guided Targeted Biopsy and Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Systematic Biopsy for Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Purpose

For men suspected of having prostate cancer (PCa), the transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided systematic biopsy (SB) was performed. MRI/TRUS fusion guided-targeted biopsy (MRI-TB) could enhance PCa detection, allowing sampling of sites at higher risk which were not obvious with TRUS alone. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the detection rates of prostate cancer by MRI-TB or MRI-TB plus SB versus SB, mainly for diagnosis of high-risk PCa.

Methods

A literature Search was performed on PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases. We searched from inception of the databases up to January 2021.

Results

A total of 5831 patients from 26 studies were included in the present meta-analysis. Compared to traditional TRUS-guided biopsy, MRI-TB had a significantly higher detection rate of clinically significant PCa (RR=1.27; 95%CI 1.15-1.40; p<0.001) and high-risk PCa (RR=1.41; 95% CI 1.22-1.64; p<0.001), while the detection rate of clinically insignificant PCa was lower (RR=0.65; 95%CI 0.55-0.77; p<0.001). MRI-TB and SB did not significantly differ in the detection of overall prostate cancer (RR=1.04; 95%CI 0.95-1.12; p=0.41). Compared with SB alone, we found that MRI-TB plus SB diagnosed more cases of overall, clinically significant and high-risk PCa (p<0.001).

Conclusion

Compared with systematic protocols, MRI-TB detects more clinically significant and high-risk PCa cases, and fewer clinically insignificant PCa cases. MRI-TB combined with SB enhances PCa detection in contrast with either alone but did not reduce the diagnosis rate of clinically insignificant PCa.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#searchadvanced, CRD42021218475.

Comparison of MRI/US Fusion Targeted Biopsy and Systematic Biopsy in Biopsy-Naïve Prostate Patients with Elevated Prostate-Specific Antigen: A Diagnostic Study

Purpose

This study aimed to compare the detection rate of prostate cancer (PCa) between targeted biopsy and systematic biopsy.

Patients and Methods

A total of 671 patients who underwent both targeted biopsy and systematic biopsy were included in this study. The stratified analysis was conducted based on Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) scores, region of interest load (ROI-load).

Results

There was no statistical difference in the detection rate of PCa patients between systematic biopsy and targeted biopsy (44.41% vs 45.6%, P>0.05), while the detection rate of targeted biopsy in clinically significant PCa (csPCa) patients was slightly higher than that of systematic biopsy (40.83% vs 38.15%, P=0.033). Stratified analysis indicated that targeted biopsy was more advantageous in csPCa patients with PIRADS score ≥ 4 and ROI-load > 5%. The comparison of diagnostic sensitivity of systematic biopsy and targeted biopsy demonstrated that targeted biopsy was more sensitive than systematic biopsy to diagnose PCa (Z=2.110, P=0.035) at ROI-load ≤ 5%. In addition, ROI-load may be a better targeted biopsy indicator than ROI diameter for the diagnosis of PCa (Z=2.168, P=0.030).

Conclusion

MRI/US fusion targeted biopsy may be more suitable for PCa detection than systematic biopsy in patients with low ROI-load.

Transrectal Ultrasound in Prostate Cancer: Current Utilization, Integration with mpMRI, HIFU and Other Emerging Applications

Transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) has been an invaluable tool in the assessment of prostate size, anatomy and aiding in prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis for decades. Emerging techniques warrant an investigation into the efficacy of TRUS, how it compares to new techniques, and options to increase the accuracy of prostate cancer diagnosis. Currently, TRUS is used to guide both transrectal and transperineal biopsy approaches with similar cancer detection rates, but lower rates of infection have been reported with the transperineal approach, while lower rates of urinary retention are often reported with the transrectal approach. Multiparametric MRI has substantial benefits for prostate cancer diagnosis and triage such as lesion location, grading, and can be combined with TRUS to perform fusion biopsies targeting specific lesions. Micro-ultrasound generates higher resolution images that traditional ultrasound and has been shown effective at diagnosing PCa, giving it the potential to become a future standard of care. Finally, high-intensity focused ultrasound focal therapy administered via TRUS has been shown to offer safe and effective short-term oncological control for localized disease with low morbidity, and the precise nature makes it a viable option for salvage and repeat therapy.

A Prospective Study and Single-Center Experience: Effectivity of Fusion Prostate Biopsy in Biopsy-Naïve Patients

Objective

Fusion prostate biopsy (FPB) has become a popular technique in biopsy-naïve patients, though not accepted as a standard approach (yet). In this study, we aimed to present the clinical outcomes of biopsy-naïve patients who underwent FPB.

Material and methods

The study included 400 biopsy-naïve patients aged 45-75 years who had a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of 2-10 ng/ml and were detected with a Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) ≥3 lesion on multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-guided FPB. A combined biopsy (CB) was performed in each patient, in which 2-4 cores were obtained for suspicious lesions by targeted biopsy (TB) and then 12-core standard prostate biopsy (SPB) was conducted in the same session. Cancer detection rates, clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection rates, histological upgrading rates, and false negative rates were determined.

Results

The 400 patients had a mean age of 62.01±7.00 years and a mean PSA value of 6.84±1.87 ng/ml. Overall PCa detection rate was 50% (200/400). The csPCa detection rates for TB, SPB, and CB were 25.0%, 31.8%, and 44.0%, respectively (p<0.001). In PIRADS 3, 4, and 5 lesions, CB had a csPCa detection rate of 29.2%, 54%, and 64.8%, respectively (p<0.001). The ratio of false negativity was significantly higher for TB compared to SPB (43.2% vs. 27.8%, p=0.003), whereas no significant difference was found between these two techniques with regard to upgrading rates although TB had a higher rate (19.6% vs. 13.7%, p=0.144).

Conclusion

FPB, a combined approach involving TB and SPB, was revealed as the most successful technique in biopsy-naïve patients with PSA<10 ng/ml due to its high cancer detection rates and low false negative rates.

Positive Predictive Value of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 for the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

CONTEXT

The variability of the positive predictive value (PPV) represents a significant factor affecting the diagnostic performance of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI).

OBJECTIVE

To analyze published studies reporting mpMRI PPV and the reasons behind the variability of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection rates on targeted biopsies (TBx) according to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2 categories.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A search of PubMed, Cochrane library's Central, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Scopus databases, from January 2015 to June 2020, was conducted. The primary and secondary outcomes were to evaluate the PPV of PI-RADS version 2 in detecting csPCa and any prostate cancer (PCa), respectively. Individual authors' definitions for csPCa and PI-RADS thresholds for positive mpMRI were accepted. Detection rates, used as a surrogate of PPV, were pooled using random-effect models. Preplanned subgroup analyses tested PPV after stratification for PI-RADS scores, previous biopsy status, TBx technique, and number of sampled cores. PPV variation over cancer prevalence was evaluated.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Fifty-six studies, with a total of 16 537 participants, were included in the quantitative synthesis. The PPV of suspicious mpMRI for csPCa was 40% (95% confidence interval 36-43%), with large heterogeneity between studies (I² 94%, p < 0.01). PPV increased according to PCa prevalence. In subgroup analyses, PPVs for csPCa were 13%, 40%, and 69% for, respectively, PI-RADS 3, 4, and 5 (p < 0.001). TBx missed 6%, 6%, and 5% of csPCa in PI-RADS 3, 4, and 5 lesions, respectively. In biopsy-naïve and prior negative biopsy groups, PPVs for csPCa were 42% and 32%, respectively (p = 0.005). Study design, TBx technique, and number of sampled cores did not affect PPV.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis underlines that the PPV of mpMRI is strongly dependent on the disease prevalence, and that the main factors affecting PPV are PI-RADS version 2 scores and prior biopsy status. A substantially low PPV for PI-RADS 3 lesions was reported, while it was still suboptimal in PI-RADS 4 and 5 lesions. Lastly, even if the added value of a systematic biopsy for csPCa is relatively low, this rate can improve patient risk assessment and staging.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Targeted biopsy of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System 3 lesions should be considered carefully in light of additional individual risk assessment corroborating the presence of clinically significant prostate cancer. On the contrary, the positive predictive value of highly suspicious lesions is not high enough to omit systematic prostate sampling.