MRI-guided Focused Ultrasound Focal Therapy for Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: Final Results from a 2-year Phase II Clinical Trial.

Background MRI-guided focal therapy (FT) allows for accurate targeting of localized clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) while preserving healthy prostate tissue, but the long-term outcomes of this approach require more study. Purpose To assess the 2-year oncological and functional outcomes of men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa) treated with targeted FT. Materials and Methods In this single-center prospective phase II trial, men with localized unifocal intermediate-risk PCa underwent transrectal MRI-guided focused ultrasound between July 2016 and July 2019. Planned ablation volumes included 10-mm margins when possible. Data regarding adverse events were collected and quality-of-life questionnaires were completed by participants at 6 weeks and at 5, 12, 18, and 24 months after treatment. Multiparametric MRI and targeted and systematic biopsies were performed at 24 months. Ablation volumes were determined by manual contouring of nonperfused volumes on immediate contrast-enhanced images. Generalized estimating equations were used to model trends in quality-of-life measures. Results Treatment was successfully completed in the 44 participants (median age, 67 years; IQR, 62-70 years; 36 patients with grade group [GG] 2; eight patients with GG 3). No major adverse events from treatment were recorded. One participant refused biopsy at 24 months. After 2 years, 39 of 43 participants (91%) had no csPCa at the treatment site and 36 of 43 (84%) had no cancer in the entire gland. No changes in International Index of Erectile Function-15 score or International Prostate Symptom Score were observed during 2-year follow-up (P = .73 and .39, respectively). Conclusion The majority of men treated with MRI-guided focused ultrasound for intermediate risk PCa had negative results for csPCa at biopsy 2 years after treatment. Additionally, there was no significant decline in quality of life per the validated questionnaires. Clinical trial registration no. NCT02968784 © RSNA, 2024 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Woodrum in this issue.

Comparison of Micro-US and Multiparametric MRI for Prostate Cancer Detection in Biopsy-Naive Men.

Background Multiparametric MRI has led to increased detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). Micro-US is being investigated for csPCa detection. Purpose To compare multiparametric MRI and micro-US in detecting csPCa (grade group ≥2) and to determine the proportion of MRI nodules visible at micro-US for real-time targeted biopsy. Materials and methods This prospective, single-center trial enrolled biopsy-naive men with suspected prostate cancer (PCa) between May 2019 and September 2020. All patients underwent multiparametric MRI followed by micro-US; findings at both were interpreted in a blinded fashion, followed by targeted biopsy and nontargeted systematic biopsy using micro-US. Proportions were compared using the exact McNemar test. The differences in proportions were calculated. Results Ninety-four men (median age, 61 years; IQR, 57-68 years) were included. MRI- and micro-US-targeted biopsy depicted csPCa in 37 (39%) and 33 (35%) of the 94 men, respectively (P = .22); clinically insignificant PCa in 14 (15%) and 15 (16%) (P > .99); and cribriform and/or intraductal PCa in 14 (15%) and 13 (14%) (P > .99). The MRI- plus micro-US-targeted biopsy pathway depicted csPCa in 38 of the 94 (40%) men. The addition of nontargeted systematic biopsy to MRI- plus micro-US-targeted biopsy did not enable identification of any additional men with csPCa but did help identify nine additional men with clinically insignificant PCa (P = .04). Biopsy was avoided in 32 of the 94 men (34%) with MRI and nine of the 94 men (10%) with micro-US (P < .001). Among 93 MRI targets, 62 (67%) were prospectively visible at micro-US. Conclusion MRI and micro-US showed similar rates of prostate cancer detection, but more biopsies were avoided with the MRI pathway than with micro-US, with no benefit of adding nontargeted systematic biopsy to the MRI- plus micro-US-targeted biopsy pathway. Most MRI lesions were prospectively visible at micro-US, allowing real-time targeted biopsy. ClinicalTrials.gov registration no.: NCT03938376 © RSNA, 2022 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

MRI-guided Focused Ultrasound Ablation for Localized Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: Early Results of a Phase II Trial.

Background To reduce adverse effects of whole-gland therapy, participants with localized clinically significant prostate cancer can undergo MRI-guided focal therapy. Purpose To explore safety and early oncologic and functional outcomes of targeted focal high-intensity focused ultrasound performed under MRI-guided focused ultrasound for intermediate-risk clinically significant prostate cancer. Materials and Methods In this prospective phase II trial, between February 2016 and July 2019, men with unifocal clinically significant prostate cancer visible at MRI were treated with transrectal MRI-guided focused ultrasound. The primary end point was the 5-month biopsy (last recorded in December 2019) with continuation to the 24-month follow-up projected to December 2021. Real-time ablation monitoring was performed with MR thermography. Nonperfused volume was measured at treatment completion. Periprocedural complications were recorded. Follow-up included International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and International Index of Erectile Function-15 (IIEF-15) score at 6 weeks and 5 months, and multiparametric MRI and targeted biopsy of the treated area at 5 months. The generalized estimating equation model was used for statistical analysis, and the Holm method was used to adjust P value. Results Treatment was successfully completed in all 44 men, 36 with grade group (GG) 2 and eight with GG 3 disease (median age, 67 years; interquartile range [IQR], 62-70 years). No major treatment-related adverse events occurred. Forty-one of 44 participants (93%; 95% CI: 82, 98) were free of clinically significant prostate cancer (≥6 mm GG 1 disease or any volume ≥GG 2 disease) at the treatment site at 5-month biopsy (median, seven cores). Median IIEF-15 and IPSS scores were similar at baseline and at 5 months (IIEF-15 score at baseline, 61 [IQR, 34-67] and at 5 months, 53 [IQR, 24-65.5], P = .18; IPSS score at baseline, 3.5 [IQR, 1.8-7] and at 5 months, 6 [IQR, 2-7.3], P = .43). Larger ablations (≥15 cm3) compared with smaller ones were associated with a decline in IIEF-15 scores at 6 weeks (adjusted P < .01) and at 5 months (adjusted P = .07). Conclusion Targeted focal therapy of intermediate-risk prostate cancer performed with MRI-guided focused ultrasound ablation was safe and had encouraging early oncologic and functional outcomes. © RSNA, 2021 Online supplemental material is available for this article See also the editorial by Tempany-Afdhal in this issue.

Inter-reader variability and reproducibility of the PI-QUAL score in a multicentre setting.

PURPOSE: To assess the inter-reader reproducibility of the Prostate Imaging Quality (PI-QUAL) score between readers with varying clinical experience and its reproducibility at assessing imaging quality between different institutions. METHODS: Following IRB approval, we assessed 60 consecutive prostate MRI scans performed at different academic teaching and non-academic hospitals uploaded to our institutes' PACS for second opinion or discussion in case conferences. Anonymized scans were independently reviewed using the PI-QUAL scoring sheet by three readers - two radiologists (with 1 and 12 years Prostate MRI reporting experience), and an experienced MRI technician with interest in image acquisition and quality. All readers were blinded to the site where scans were acquired. RESULTS: Agreement coefficients between the 3 readers in paired comparison for each individual PI-QUAL score was moderate. When the scans were clustered into 2 groups according to their ability to rule in or rule out clinically significant prostate cancer [i.e., PI-QUAL score 1-3 vs PI-QUAL score 4-5], the Gwet AC1 coefficients between the three readers in paired comparison was good to very good [Gwet AC 1:0.77, 0.67, 0.836 respectively] with agreement percentage of 88.3%, 83.3% and 91.7% respectively. Agreement coefficient was higher between the experienced radiologist and the experienced MRI technician than between the less experienced trainee radiologist and the other two readers. The mean PI-QUAL score provided by each reader for the scans was significantly higher in the academic hospitals (n = 32) compared to the community hospital (n = 28) [experienced radiologist 4.6 vs 2.9; trainee radiologist 4.5 vs 2.4; experienced technologist 4.4 vs 2.4; p value < 0.001]. CONCLUSION: We observed good to very good reproducibility in the assessment of each MRI sequence and when scans were clustered into two groups [PI-QUAL 1-3 vs PI-QUAL 4-5] between readers with varying clinical experience. However, the reproducibility for each single PI-QUAL score between readers was moderate. Better definitions for each PI-QUAL score criteria may further improve reproducibility between readers. Additionally, the mean PI-QUAL score provided by all three readers was significantly higher for scans performed at academic teaching hospitals compared to community hospital.

Salvage interstitial laser thermal therapy under MRI guidance (MRgFLA) for high-intensity focal ultrasound (HIFU) recurrences: feasibility study.

While focal therapy (FT) is increasingly endorsed for treating localized prostate cancer in the appropriately selected patient, management of recurrences following FT is not well-established in the literature. This case series describes three patients who received high-intensity focal ultrasound (HIFU) for primary treatment followed by focal laser interstitial thermal therapy (FLTT) for salvage therapy treated in the context of an ongoing clinical trial. Evaluation of these reported patients demonstrates that FLTT is feasible in the salvage setting with promising short-term oncologic outcomes and with the potential to preserve functional outcomes. Repeat focal therapy for previous failures is feasible however, it requires sophisticated imaging modalities for the accurate identification of recurrence and treatment of the tumor.