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

Novel non-MRI imaging techniques for primary diagnosis of prostate cancer: micro-ultrasound, contrast-enhanced ultrasound, elastography, multiparametric ultrasound, and PSMA PET/CT

BACKGROUND

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) provides enhanced diagnostic accuracy in the detection of prostate cancer, but is not devoid of limitations. Given the recent evolution of non-MRI imaging techniques, this critical review of the literature aimed at summarizing the available evidence on ultrasound-based and nuclear medicine imaging technologies in the initial diagnosis of PCa.

METHODS

Three databases (PubMed®, Web of Science™, and Scopus®) were queried for studies examining their diagnostic performance in the primary diagnosis of PCa, weighted against a histological confirmation of PCa diagnosis, using a free-text protocol. Retrospective and prospective studies, both comparative and non-comparative, systematic reviews (SR) and meta-analysis (MA) were included. Based on authors' expert opinion, studies were selected, data extracted, and results qualitatively described.

RESULTS

Micro-ultrasound (micro-US) appears as an appealing diagnostic strategy given its high accuracy in detection of PCa, apparently non-inferior to mpMRI. The use of multiparametric US (mpUS) likely gives an advantage in terms of effectiveness coming from the combination of different modalities, especially when certain modalities are combined. Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET/CT may represent a whole-body, one-step approach for appropriate diagnosis and staging of PCa. The direct relationship between lesions avidity of radiotracers and histopathologic and prognostic features, and its valid diagnostic performance represents appealing characteristics. However, intrinsic limits of each of these techniques exist and further research is needed before definitively considering them reliable tools for accurate PCa diagnosis. Other novel technologies, such as elastography and multiparametric US, currently relies on a limited number of studies, and therefore evidence about them remains preliminary.

CONCLUSION

Evidence on the role of non-MRI imaging options in the primary diagnosis of PCa is steadily building up. This testifies a growing interest towards novel technologies that might allow overcoming some of the limitations of current gold standard MRI imaging.

Long-term outcomes of prostate intensity-modulated radiation therapy incorporating a simultaneous intra-prostatic MRI-directed boost

Purpose/objectives

This retrospective study demonstrates the long-term outcomes of treating prostate cancer using intensity modulated (IMRT) with incorporation of MRI-directed boost.

Materials/methods

From February 2009 to February 2013, 78 men received image-guided IMRT delivering 77.4 Gy in 44 fractions with simultaneously integrated boost to 81-83 Gy to an MRI-identified lesion. Patients with intermediate-risk or high-risk prostate cancer were recommended to receive 6 and 24-36 months of adjuvant hormonal therapy, respectively.

Results

Median follow-up was 113 months (11-147). There were 18 low-risk, 43 intermediate-risk, and 17 high-risk patients per NCCN risk stratification included in this study. Adjuvant hormonal therapy was utilized in 32 patients (41%). The 10-year biochemical control rate for all patients was 77%. The 10-year biochemical control rates for low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk diseases were 94%, 81%, and 88%, respectively (p = 0.35). The 10-year rates of local control, distant control, and survival were 99%, 88%, and 66%, respectively. Of 25 patients who died, only four (5%) died of prostate cancer. On univariate analysis, T-category and pretreatment PSA level were associated with distant failure rate (p = 0.02). There was no grade =3 genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities that persisted at the last follow-up.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated the long-term efficacy of using MRI to define an intra-prostatic lesion for SIB to 81-83Gy while treating the entire prostate gland to 77.4 Gy with IMRT. Our study confirms that modern MRI can be used to locally intensify dose to prostate tumors providing high long-term disease control while maintaining favorable long-term toxicity.

Patient- and tumor-level risk factors for MRI-invisible prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Multiparametric MRI is highly sensitive for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer, but has a 10-20% false negative rate. It is unknown if there are clinical factors that predict MRI invisibility. We sought to identify predictors of MRI-invisible (MRI(-)) disease.

METHODS

Men undergoing MRI/US-fusion targeted + systematic biopsy by two surgeons at our institution from 2015 to 2018 were reviewed. Patient demographics, clinical data, MRI metrics, and biopsy pathology results were obtained by chart review. An MRI(-) tumor was defined as a positive systematic biopsy in a zone without an MRI lesion. Factors associated with presence of MRI(-) tumors were identified using stepwise multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of 194 men included in the analysis, 79 (41%) and 25 (13%) men had GG1+ and GG2+ MRI(-) tumors, respectively. On multivariable analysis, only Black race was associated with presence of GG1+ MRI(-) tumors (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.02-4.96). Black race (OR 3.5, 95% CI 1.24-9.87) and higher PSA density (OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.34-3.20) were associated with presence of GG2+ MRI(-) tumors. In non-Black and Black men, detection of MRI(-) tumors on systematic biopsy upgraded patients from no disease to GG2+ disease 1% and 11% of the time, respectively, and from GG1 to GG2+ disease 42% and 60% of the time, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Black race and PSA density were associated with presence of MRI(-) prostate cancer. Further study on racial differences is warranted based on these results. Surgeons should consider pre-biopsy risk factors before deciding to omit systematic prostate biopsy regardless of mpMRI results.

[68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 in prostate cancer: a comprehensive review

Imaging of the prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) has become an important tool for managing patients with recurrent prostate cancer, and one of the most frequently employed radiopharmaceuticals is [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11. Herein, we summarize the preclinical development and the clinical applications of [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 and present side-by-side comparisons with other radiopharmaceuticals or imaging modalities, in order to assist imagers and clinicians in recommending, performing, and interpreting the results of [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET scans in patients with prostate cancer.

[Multiparametric MRI of the prostate : Important radiological findings for urologists]

CLINICAL/METHODICAL ISSUE

High prevalence of prostate cancer with multifocality and biological heterogeneity. Insufficient conventional urological diagnostics. Discrimination between significant and insignificant cancer needed.

STANDARD DIAGNOSTIC METHODS

Digital rectal examination, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) serum level, systematic transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy.

METHODICAL INNOVATIONS

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) including T2-weighted (T2w), diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI according to the prostate imaging reporting and data system (PIRADS), MR-targeted biopsy, most frequently MR/TRUS image fusion biopsy.

FINDINGS AND PERFORMANCE

Prostate cancer is characterized by low signal intensity on T2w MRI, restricted water diffusion and pronounced and early uptake of contrast enhancement. Sensitivity and specificity according to the current literature are ca. 80% and 90%, respectively.

PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS

In cases of suspected prostate cancer, most accurate are mpMRI according to PIRADS and in cases of positive findings, MRI-targeted biopsy, most frequently as MRI/TRUS image fusion biopsy.

[PET-CT and PET-MRI of the prostate : From 18F-FDG to 68Ga-PSMA]

CLINICAL/METHODICAL ISSUE

In the last few years nuclear medical diagnostics have experienced a unprecedented renaissance in the diagnostics of prostate cancer, due to the availability of hybrid imaging with positron emission tomography computed tomography (PET/CT), PET magnetic resonance imaging (PET/MRI) and single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) CT as well as the development of prostate-specific radiopharmaceuticals.

METHODICAL INNOVATIONS

The use of fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG), which has been successfully implemented for many years in PET diagnostics, is only helpful in dedifferentiated tumors due to the biological characteristics of prostate cancer. New specific radiopharmaceuticals, such as choline-derivatives, which are incorporated into the prostate cancer cell and built into the cell membrane as well as the recently developed highly specific ligands for prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) are revolutionizing prostate cancer imaging and (re-) staging.

PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS

The ⁶⁸ Ga-labeled PSMA ligands for PET-CT and PET-MRI are highly specific tracers for primary diagnostics and detection of metastases of prostate carcinoma. In risk patients, which includes patients with intermediate and high-risk tumors, they have largely replaced choline-based PET-CT, especially in the case of very low PSA values <0.5 ng/ml in the diagnostics of recurrence. The use in the primary diagnostics as PET-MRI, also in combination with multiparametric MRI (mpMRI), is promising with respect to early diagnostics and image fusion-assisted biopsy as well as surgery and irradiation planning.

Cognitive-Targeted versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Guided Prostate Biopsy in Prostate Cancer Detection

Introduction

Purpose of this study is to evaluate the detection rates of prostate cancer (PCa) for cognitive-targeted biopsy (CTB) in comparison with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided biopsy (MRGB) related to prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) score, lesion location and lesion volume. Furthermore, the addition of systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS-GB) to CTB is evaluated.

Materials and Methods

We included all patients with cancer-suspicious lesions on 3-Tesla multiparametric MRI who underwent either CTB and additional TRUS-GB or only MRGB (in-bore) in Haga Teaching Hospital between January 2013 and January 2015.

Results

In total 219 patients were included: 64 CTB + TRUS-GB and 155 MRGB. In 32 (50%) men with CTB was positive for PCa. PI-RADS 3-, 4- and 5-lesions were in 17, 69 and 95% positive, respectively. In 100 men (65%) with MRGB was positive for PCa. Detection rates for PI-RADS 3-, 4- and 5-lesions were 10, 77 and 89%, respectively. CTB missed 4 (11%) low-grade tumors detected by TRUS-GB. In lesions between 0-1.5 ml PCa were significantly more often detected with MRGB than with CTB (69 vs. 39%).

Conclusion

CTB has a high detection rate of PCa in men with cancer-suspicious lesions on MRI. Correction for lesion volume shows that in lesions < 1.5 ml MRGB is more accurate than CTB. The addition of TRUS-GB to CTB can safely be avoided without missing any high grade PCa.

Review of Gallium-68 PSMA PET/CT Imaging in the Management of Prostate Cancer

Over 90% of prostate cancers over-express prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA) and these tumor cells may be accurately targeted for diagnosis by 68Ga-PSMA-positron emission tomography/computed tomography (68Ga-PSMA-PET/CT) imaging. This novel molecular imaging modality appears clinically to have superseded CT, and appears superior to MR imaging, for the detection of metastatic disease. 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT has the ability to reliably stage prostate cancer at presentation and can help inform an optimal treatment approach. Novel diagnostic applications of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT include guiding biopsy to improve sampling accuracy, and guiding surgery and radiotherapy. In addition to facilitating the management of metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), 68Ga-PSMA can select patients who may benefit from targeted systemic radionuclide therapy. 68Ga-PSMA is the diagnostic positron-emitting theranostic pair with the beta emitter Lutetium-177 PSMA (177Lu-PSMA) and alpha-emitter Actinium-225 PSMA (225Ac-PSMA) which can both be used to treat PSMA-avid metastases of prostate cancer in the molecular tumor-targeted approach of theranostic nuclear oncology.

Comparison of intrafascial and non-intrafascial radical prostatectomy for low risk localized prostate cancer

In this meta-analysis study, we compared the oncological and functional outcomes of intrafascial radical prostatectomy (IFRP) with non-intrafascial radical prostatectomy (NIFRP) in the treatment of patients with low risk localized prostate cancer (PCa). Relevant articles were identified by searching PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Ovid, and the ISI Web of Knowledge databases. A total of 2096 patients were included from 7 eligible studies. Results of the pooled data showed that the oncological outcomes including gleason score, positive surgical margin and biochemical free survival rates were similar between the two groups. IFRP was superior to NIFRP with lower postoperative complication rates (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.38, 0.85, p = 0.006), higher continence rates at 3 months post-operation (RR: 1.14; 95% CI, 1.04, 1.26; p = 0.006), and higher potency rates at 6 months (RR: 1.53; 95% CI, 1.07, 2.18; p = 0.02) and 12 months post-operation (RR: 1.38; 95% CI, 1.11, 1.73; p = 0.005). Additionally, there was a tendency towards higher potency rate in patients ≤65 years old compared with patients >65 years old after IFRP. Overall, these findings suggest that IFRP in young patients with low risk localized PCa had less postoperative complications, shortened time to return to continence and improved potency rate without compromising complete tumor control.

[Significance of PSMA imaging in prostate cancer]

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer (PCa) is one of the most common malignancies of men in developed countries. To improve clinical diagnostics of PCa, ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-11 was recently introduced as a new PET tracer. ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-11 is able to specifically bind to the prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA), which is upregulated on the surface of prostate cancer cells in most patients.

OBJECTIVES

To analyse the current significance of ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-11 PET imaging in prostate cancer in relation to staging of men with initial diagnosis, biochemical recurrence and metastatic disease.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis of current literature (PubMed search) regarding ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-11 PET diagnostics in primary staging, in biochemical recurrence and in metastasized disease.

RESULTS

Compared to conventional imaging, ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT reaches a higher sensitivity with an excellent specificity in the clinical diagnosis of primary staging as well as staging for recurrence and advanced, metastasized disease. In biochemical recurrence, ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT shows significantly higher detection rates in comparison to choline PET/CT, especially in patients with low PSA values. In the clinical diagnosis of recurrent disease, therapy concepts were changed in more than a quarter of the patients due to the use of ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT. The significance of staging with ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT in advanced metastasized patients remains uncertain.

CONCLUSIONS

Due to the excellent results of ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-11 PET imaging, even in patients with slightly elevated PSA levels, it will continue to play an important role in clinical diagnostics of prostate cancer and, thus, its clinical utilization will become more widely spread.

The role of different PI-RADS versions in prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance tomography assessment

Background. Standardised Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) guidelines for the assessment of prostate alterations were designed for the assessment of prostate pathology. Published by the ESUR in 2012, PI-RADS v1 was based on the total score of different MRI sequences with subsequent calculation. PI-RADS v2 was published by the American College of Radiology in 2015 and featured different assessment criteria for prostate peripheral and transitory zones.

Aim. To assess the correlations of PI-RADS v1 and PI-RADS v2 with Gleason score values and to define their predictive values of the diagnosis of prostate cancer.

Materials and methods. A retrospective analysis of 66 patients. Prostate specific antigen (PSA) value and the Gleason score (GS) were assessed. One the most malignant focal lesion was selected in the peripheral zone of each lobe of the prostate (91 in total). Statistical analysis was carried out applying SPSS software, v.23, p < 0.05.

Results. Focal lesions assessed by PI-RADS v1 score: 10% – 1, 12% – 2, 41% – 3, 23% – 4, 14% – 5. Assessment applying PI-RADS v.2: 20% – 1, 7.5% – 2, 26%, 29.5%, and 17% were assessed by 3, 4, and 5 scores. Statistically relevant correlation was found only between GS and PI-RADS (p = 0.033).

The positive predictive value of both versions of PI-RADS – 75%, negative predictive value of PI-RADS v1 – 46%, PI-RADS v2 – 43%.

Conclusions. PI-RADS v1 was more statistically relevant in assessing the grade of tumour. Prediction values were similar in both versions

A critical comparison of techniques for MRI-targeted biopsy of the prostate

MRI-targeted biopsy is a promising technique that offers an improved detection of clinically significant prostate cancer over standard non-targeted biopsy. It is established that prostate MRI is of use in both the primary and repeat biopsy setting for the detection of significant prostate cancer. There are three approaches to targeting biopsies to areas of interest seen on prostate MRI. They each rely on the acquisition and reporting of a diagnostic quality multi-parametric MRI scan used to identify areas of interest, and the subsequent use of those diagnostic quality images in combination with real-time images of the prostate during the biopsy procedure. The three techniques are: visual registration of the MRI images with a real-time ultrasound image; software-assisted fusion of the MRI images and the real-time ultrasound images, and in-bore biopsy, which requires registration of a diagnostic quality MRI scan with a real time interventional MRI image. In this paper we compare the three techniques and evaluate those studies where there is a direct comparison of more than one MRI-targeting technique. PubMed was searched from inception to November 2016 using the search terms (cognitive registration OR visual registration OR fusion biopsy OR in-bore biopsy OR targeted biopsy) AND (prostate cancer OR prostate adenocarcinoma OR prostate carcinoma OR prostatic carcinoma OR prostatic adenocarcinoma) AND (MRI OR NMR OR magnetic resonance imaging OR mpMRI OR multiparametric MRI). The initial search included 731 abstracts. Eleven full text papers directly compared two or more techniques of MRI-targeting, and were selected for inclusion. The detection of clinically significant prostate cancer varied from 0% to 93.3% for visual registration, 23.2% to 100% for software-assisted registration and 29% to 80% for in-bore biopsy. Detection rates for clinically significant cancer are dependent on the prevalence of cancer within the population biopsied, which in turn is determined by the selection criteria [biopsy naïve, previous negative biopsy, prostate specific antigen (PSA) selection criteria, presence of a lesion on MRI]. Cancer detection rates varied more between study populations than between biopsy approaches. Currently there is no consensus on which type of MRI-targeted biopsy performs better in a given setting. Although there have been studies supporting each of the three techniques, substantial differences in methodology and reporting the findings make it difficult to reliably compare their outcomes.

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate-a basic tutorial

Prostate cancer is the second most common cause of cancer related death in the United States and the most commonly diagnosed malignancy in men. In general, prostate cancer is slow growing, though there is a broad spectrum of disease that may be indolent, or aggressive and rapidly progressive. Screening for prostate is controversial and complicated by lack of specificity and over diagnosis of clinically insignificant cancer. Imaging has played a role in diagnosis of prostate cancer, primarily through systemic transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided biopsy. While TRUS guided biopsy radically changed prostate cancer diagnosis, it still remains limited by low resolution, poor tissue characterization, relatively low sensitivity and positive predictive value. Advances in multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) have allowed more accurate detection, localization, and staging as well as aiding in the role of active surveillance (AS). The use of mpMRI for the evaluation of prostate cancer has increased dramatically and this trend is likely to continue as the technique is rapidly improving and its applications expand. The purpose of this article is to review the basic principles of mpMRI of the prostate and its clinical applications, which will be reviewed in greater detail in subsequent chapters of this issue.

Diagnosis and Monitoring of Prostatic Lesions: A Comparison of Three Modalities: Multiparametric MRI, Fusion MRI/Transrectal Ultrasound (TRUS), and Traditional TRUS

PURPOSE

 Transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) has been the gold standard of imaging for diagnosing prostate cancer for decades but is plagued by user error and undersampling. We aim to explore imaging modalities that are now being used in combination or alone for screening, diagnosis, and/or active surveillance of prostate cancer.

METHODS

A PubMed literature search was performed to include articles published up to April 2016. Data were extracted and analyzed.

RESULTS

Several large-scale studies have found an increased cancer detection rate in MRI-targeted lesions with an improved ability to target anterior lesions as well as an increased cancer detection in high-risk cancers using fusion platforms vs TRUS alone.

CONCLUSIONS

To date, there have been few head-to-head trials to directly compare the use of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI), transrectal ultrasound, and MRI-ultrasound fusion modalities for accurate and reliable detection, active surveillance, or biopsy procedure success rates. Further investigation utilizing these modalities are needed before they can be relied upon in active surveillance management, although mpMRI appears to be currently the most reliable in monitoring and diagnosing prostate lesions.