mpMRI PI-RADS score 3 lesions diagnosed by reference vs affiliated radiological centers: Our experience in 950 cases

Preliminary clinical practice of radical prostatectomy without preoperative biopsy

BACKGROUND

At present, biopsy is essential for the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa) before radical prostatectomy (RP). However, with the development of prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PSMA PET/CT) and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), it might be feasible to avoid biopsy before RP. Herein, we aimed to explore the feasibility of avoiding biopsy before RP in patients highly suspected of having PCa after assessment of PSMA PET/CT and mpMRI.

METHODS

Between December 2017 and April 2022, 56 patients with maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) of ≥4 and Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) ≥4 lesions who received RP without preoperative biopsy were enrolled from two tertiary hospitals. The consistency between clinical and pathological diagnoses was evaluated. Preoperative characteristics were compared among patients with different pathological types, T stages, International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grades, and European Association of Urology (EAU) risk groups.

RESULTS

Fifty-five (98%) patients were confirmed with PCa by pathology, including 49 (89%) with clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa, defined as ISUP grade ≥2 malignancy). One patient was diagnosed with high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN). CsPCa patients, compared with clinically insignificant prostate cancer (cisPCa) and HGPIN patients, were associated with a higher level of prostate-specific antigen (22.9 ng/mL vs. 10.0 ng/mL, P = 0.032), a lower median prostate volume (32.2 mL vs. 65.0 mL, P = 0.001), and a higher median SUVmax (13.3 vs. 5.6, P <0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

It might be feasible to avoid biopsy before RP for patients with a high probability of PCa based on PSMA PET/CT and mpMRI. However, the diagnostic efficacy of csPCa with PI-RADS ≥4 and SUVmax of ≥4 is inadequate for performing a procedure such as RP. Further prospective multicenter studies with larger sample sizes are necessary to confirm our perspectives and establish predictive models with PSMA PET/CT and mpMRI.

Clinical and Radiological Factors for Predicting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in Biopsy-Naive Patients With PI-RADS 3 Lesions

OBJECTIVE

This study intends to examine the anticipatory power of clinical and radiological parameters in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer in patients demonstrating Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System 3 lesions.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study. The study included participation from 453 patients at the First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, sampled between September 2017 through August 2022. Each patient underwent a routine 12-core prostate biopsy followed by a 2 to 5 core fusion-targeted biopsy. We utilized both univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses to identify the parameters that have a correlation with clinically significant prostate cancer. The predictive ability of these parameters was assessed using the receiver operating characteristic curve, leading to the creation of a nomogram.

RESULTS

Clinically significant prostate cancer was detected in 68 out of 453 patients with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System 3 lesions (15.01%). Among Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System 3a and 3b patients, 4.78% (3.09% of the total) and 33.75% (11.92% of the total), respectively, had clinically significant prostate cancer. Systematic biopsy improved prostate cancer and clinically significant prostate cancer detection rates by 7.72% and 3.09%, respectively, compared to targeted biopsy. Without systematic biopsy, there would be an undetected rate of 15% for prostate cancer and 8.13% for clinically significant prostate cancer in Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System 3b patients. Several clinical parameters, including age, prostate-specific antigen density, lesion volume, apparent diffusion coefficient, and digital rectal examination, were statistically significant in the logistic regression analysis for clinically significant prostate cancer. The individual diagnostic accuracies of these parameters for clinically significant prostate cancer were 0.648, 0.645, 0.75, 0.763, and 0.7, respectively, but their combined accuracy improved to 0.866. A well-fit nomogram based on the identified risk factors was constructed (χ2 = 10.254, P = .248).

CONCLUSION

The combination of age, prostate-specific antigen density, lesion volume, apparent diffusion coefficient, and digital rectal examination presented a higher diagnostic value for clinically significant prostate cancer than any single parameter in patients with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System 3 lesions. Systematic biopsy proved crucial for biopsy-naive patients with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System 3 lesions and should not be omitted.

Management Strategy for Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Category 3 Lesions

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) category 3 lesions present a clinical dilemma due to their uncertain nature, which complicates the development of a definitive management strategy. These lesions have an incidence rate of approximately 22-32%, with clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) accounting for about 10-30%. Therefore, a thorough evaluation is warranted.

RECENT FINDINGS

This review highlights the need for radiology peer review, including the confirmation of dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) compliance, as the initial step. Additional MRI models such as VERDICT or Tofts need to be verified. Current evidence shows that imaging and clinical indicators can be used for risk stratification of PI-RADS 3 lesions. For low-risk lesions, a safety net monitoring approach involving annual repeat MRI can be employed. In contrast, lesions deemed potentially risky based on prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD), 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT, MPS, Proclarix, or AI/machine learning models should undergo biopsy. It is recommended to establish a multidisciplinary team that takes into account factors such as age, PSAD, prostate, and lesion size, as well as previous biopsy pathological findings. Combining expert opinions, clinical-imaging indicators, and emerging methods will contribute to the development of management strategies for PI-RADS 3 lesions.

Understanding tumor localization in multiparametric MRI of the prostate-effectiveness of 3D printed models

Introduction

Understanding tumor localization in multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) of the prostate is challenging for urologists but of great importance in mpMRI-fused prostate biopsy or radical prostatectomy. The aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of 3D printed models of the prostate to help urologists to locate tumors.

Methods and Participants

20 urologists from University Medical Center Mainz (Germany) were asked to plot the location of a cancer suspicious lesion (PI-RADS ≥ 4) on a total of 30 mpMRI on a prostate sector diagram. The following 3 groups (as matched triplets) were divided into: mpMRI only, mpMRI with radiological report and mpMRI with 3D printed model (scaled 1:1). Statistical analysis was performed using one-way and two-way ANOVA (with bonferroni post-test).

Results

Overall, localization of the suspicious lesion was superior with the radiological report (median of max. 10 [IQR]: MRI 2 [IQR 1;5], MRI + report: 8 [6.3;9], MRI + 3D model 3 [1.3;5.8]; p < 0.001). Residents with <1 year of experience had a significantly higher detection rate using a 3D printed model [5 (5;5.8)] compared to mpMRI alone [1.5 (1;3.5)] (p < 0.05). Regarding the estimation of index lesion extension, the 3D model showed a significant benefit (mean percentage difference [95% CI]: MRI alone 234% [17.1;451.5], MRI + report 114% [78.5;149.6], MRI + 3D model 17% [-7.4;41.3] (p < 0.01).

Conclusion

Urologists still need the written radiological report for a sufficient understanding of tumor localization. The effectiveness of the 3D printed model regarding tumor localization is particularly evident in young residents (<1 year) and leads to a better overall assessment of the tumor extension.

Prediction of Significant Prostate Cancer in Equivocal Magnetic Resonance Imaging Lesions: A High-volume International Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

Decision of performing prostate biopsy in men with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) 3 findings in prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is challenging as they have a low but still relevant risk of harboring significant prostate cancer (sPC).

OBJECTIVE

To identify clinical predictors of sPC in men with PI-RADS 3 lesions in prostate MRI and to analyze the hypothetical effect of incorporating prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) into biopsy decision.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

We analyzed a retrospective multinational cohort from ten academic centers comprising 1476 men who underwent a combined prostate biopsy (MRI targeted plus systematic biopsy) between February 2012 and April 2021 due to a PI-RADS 3 lesion in prostate MRI.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary outcome was the detection of sPC (ISUP ≥2) in a combined biopsy. Predictors were identified by a regression analysis. Descriptive statistics were applied to evaluate the hypothetical effect of involving PSAD into biopsy decision.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Of all patients, 273/1476 (18.5%) were diagnosed with sPC. MRI-targeted biopsy diagnosed fewer sPC cases than combined strategy: 183/1476 (12.4%) versus 273/1476 (18.5%), p < 0.01. Age (odds ratio [OR] 1.10 [95% confidence interval {CI}: 1.05-1.15], p < 0.001), prior negative biopsy (OR 0.46 [0.24-0.89], p = 0.022), and PSAD (p < 0.001) were found to be independent predictors of sPC. Applying a PSAD cutoff of 0.15, 817/1398 (58.4%) biopsies would have been avoided at the cost of missing sPC in 91 (6.5%) men. Limitations were the retrospective design, heterogeneity of the study cohort due to the long inclusion period, and no central revision of MRI.

CONCLUSIONS

Age, previous biopsy status, and PSAD were found to be independent predictors of sPC in men with equivocal prostate MRI. Implementation of PSAD into biopsy decision can avoid unnecessary biopsies. Clinical parameters such as PSAD need validation in a prospective setting.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In this study, we looked for clinical predictors of significant prostate cancer in men with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System 3 lesions in prostate magnetic resonance imaging. We identified age, previous biopsy status, and especially prostate-specific antigen density as independent predictors.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of short biparametric magnetic resonance imaging protocol in men at risk of prostate cancer

OBJECTIVES

To compare the cost-effectiveness of a short biparametric MRI (BP-MRI) with that of contrast-enhanced multiparametric MRI (MP-MRI) for the detection of prostate cancer in men with elevated prostatespecific antigen (PSA) levels.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We compared two diagnostic procedures for detection of prostate cancer (Pca), BP-MRI and MP-MRI, in terms of quality-adjusted life years (QALY), incremental costeffectiveness ratio (ICER) and net monetary benefit (NMB) for a hypothetical cohort of 10,000 patients. We compared two scenarios in which different protocols would be used for the early diagnosis of prostate cancer in relation to PSA values. Scenario 1. BP-MRI/MP-MRI yearly if > 3.0 ng/ml, every 2 years otherwise; Scenario 2. BP-MRI/MP-MRI yearly with age-dependent threshold 3.5 ng/ml (50-59 years), 4.5 ng/ml (60-69 years), 6.5 ng/ml (70-79 years).

RESULTS

BP-MRI was more effective than the comparator in terms of cost (160.10 € vs 249.99€) QALYs (a mean of 9.12 vs 8.46), ICER (a mean of 232.45) and NMB (a mean of 273.439 vs 251.863). BP-MRI was dominant, being more effective and less expensive, with a lower social cost. Scenario 2 was more cost-effective compared to scenario 1.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results confirmed the hypothesis that a short bi-parametric MRI protocol represents a cost-efficient procedure, optimizing resources in a policy perspective.

Diagnostic assessment program for prostate cancer: Lessons learned after 2 years and degree of compliance to Canadian guidelines

BACKGROUND

In 2018, our Institute launched the Diagnostic Assessment Program (DAP) for prostate cancer. It enabled quick access to a urologist for patients presented to family physician with elevated PSA and allowed fast multidisciplinary patient care. We aim to document our data over 2 years in comparison to data before implementation of DAP and its impact on the degree of adherence to Canadian guidelines.

METHODS

From April 2016 to April 2020, 880 patients who were evaluated for prostate cancer at Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre (TBRHSC) were included in this study. Patients' characteristics, clinical data, waiting times and line of treatment before and after implementation of DAP were calculated and statistically analysed.

RESULTS

The median waiting time to urology consultation was significantly reduced from 68 (IQR 27-168) days to 34 (23-44) days (p < 0.001). The time from patient's referral to prostate biopsy decreased substantially from 34 (20-66) days to 18(11- 25) days after DAP (p < 0.001). After DAP, the percentage of Gleason 6 detected prostate cancers were significantly increased (19.7% to 30%) (p = 0.02). After DAP, rate for intermediate-risk patients elected for external beam radiotherapy (from 53.5% to 57.9%, p = 0.53) and radical prostatectomy (from 34.5% to 39.4%, p = 0.47) increased. More compliance to Canadian guidelines was observed in intermediate risk patients (88% vs 97.3%, p =.008).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of DAP has led to a notable reduction of waiting time to urology consult and prostate biopsy. There is significant increase in Gleason 6 detected prostate cancer. Increased compliance to Canadian guidelines was detected in intermediate risk patients.