Using prostate-specific membrane antigen positron-emission tomography to guide prostate biopsies and stage men at high-risk of prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether a diagnostic pathway in which prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron-emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) is used as a single imaging modality is feasible to guide targeted biopsy and to detect clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in biopsy-naïve men at high-risk of disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 60 men with a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of 20-50 ng/mL underwent 18 F-PSMA(DCFPyL)-PET/CT prior to prostate biopsies in this prospective, non-randomised cohort study. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was not performed. Using a 12-segment mapping model of the prostate, PSMA-guided targeted biopsy was performed along with systematic biopsies. The detection rate of PCa and csPCa was assessed for combined systematic and targeted biopsy, and for targeted biopsy only. csPCa was defined as a prostate biopsy with an International Society of Uropathology (ISUP) Grade Group ≥2. RESULTS: Lesions suspicious for PCa in the prostate gland were observed on all PSMA-PET/CTs. A total of 27/60 men (45%) already had metastatic disease on staging 18 F-PSMA(DCFPyL)-PET/CT. Combined PSMA-guided targeted and systematic biopsies detected PCa in 56/60 (93.3%) patients, with 52 of them (92.9%) having csPCa. PSMA-guided targeted biopsy, if performed as a single biopsy modality, identified PCa in 52/60 men (86.7%) and in 27/27 men (100%) men with metastases. CONCLUSIONS: Using the PSMA-driven single imaging modality pathway in biopsy-naïve men at high-risk of PCa, a substantial number of diagnostic MRI scans could be avoided while at the same time obtaining adequate targeting, staging, and detection of csPCa.

Usefulness of grayscale values of hypoechoic lesions matched with target lesions observed on magnetic resonance imaging for the prediction of clinically significant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: To analyze grayscale values for hypoechoic lesions matched with target lesions evaluated using prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) according to the Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS). METHODS: We collected data on 420 target lesions in patients who underwent MRI/transrectal ultrasound fusion-targeted biopsies between January 2017 and September 2020. Images of hypoechoic lesions that matched the target lesions on MRI were stored in a picture archiving and communication system, and their grayscale values were estimated using the red/green/blue scoring method through an embedded function. We analyzed imaging data using grayscale values. RESULTS: Of the 420 lesions, 261 (62.1%) were prostate cancer lesions. There was no difference in the median grayscale values between benign and prostate cancer lesions. However, grayscale ranges (41.8-98.5 and 42.6-91.8) were significant predictors of prostate cancer and clinically significant prostate cancer (csPC) in multivariable logistic regression analyses. Area under the curve for detecting csPC using grayscale values along with conventional variables (age, prostate-specific antigen levels, prostate volume, previous prostate biopsy results, and PI-RADS scores) was 0.839, which was significantly higher than that for detecting csPC using only conventional variables (0.828; P = 0.036). Subgroup analysis revealed a significant difference for PI-RADS 3 lesions between grayscale values for benign and cancerous lesions (74.5 vs. 58.8, P = 0.008). Grayscale values were the only significant predictive factor (odds ratio = 4.46, P = 0.005) for csPC. CONCLUSIONS: Distribution of grayscale values according to PI-RAD 3 scores was potentially useful, and the grayscale range (42.6-91.8) was a potential predictor for csPC diagnosis.

Moving away from systematic biopsies: image-guided prostate biopsy (in-bore biopsy, cognitive fusion biopsy, MRUS fusion biopsy) -literature review.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the detection rate of clinically significant cancer (CSCa) by magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy (MRI-TB) with that by standard systematic biopsy (SB) and to evaluate the role of MRI-TB as a replacement from SB in men at clinical risk of prostate cancer. METHODS: The non-systematic literature was searched for peer-reviewed English-language articles using PubMed, including the prospective paired studies, where the index test was MRI-TB and the comparator text was SB. Also the randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are included if one arm was MRI-TB and another arm was SB. RESULTS: Eighteen prospective studies used both MRI-TB and TRUS-SB, and eight RCT received one of the tests for prostate cancer detection. In most prospective trials to compare MRI-TB vs. SB, there was no significant difference in any cancer detection rate; however, MRI-TB detected more men with CSCa and fewer men with CISCa than SB. CONCLUSION: MRI-TB is superior to SB in detection of CSCa. Since some significant cancer was detected by SB only, a combination of SB with the TB technique would avoid the underdiagnosis of CSCa.

MRI Targeted Prostate Biopsy Techniques: AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review.

Prostate cancer is the second most common malignancy in men worldwide. Systematic transrectal prostate biopsy is commonly used to obtain tissue to establish the diagnosis. In recent years, however, more clinically significant cancer and less clinically insignificant cancer have been detected with MRI targeted biopsy (on the basis of an MRI examination performed before consideration of biopsy) than with systematic biopsy. This approach of performing MRI before biopsy has become, or is becoming, a standard of practice in centers throughout the world. This growing use of an MRI-directed pathway is leading to performance of a larger volume of MRI targeted prostate biopsies. The three common MRI targeted biopsy techniques are cognitive biopsy, MRI-ultrasound software fusion biopsy, and MRI in-bore guided biopsy. These techniques for using MRI information at biopsy can be performed via a transrectal or transperineal approach. The purpose of this review is to describe the three MRI targeted biopsy techniques and their advantages and shortcomings. Comparisons among the techniques are summarized on the basis of the available evidence. Studies to date have had heterogeneous results, and the preferred technique remains debated.

Risk-stratification based on magnetic resonance imaging and prostate-specific antigen density may reduce unnecessary follow-up biopsy procedures in men on active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the value of risk-stratification based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and prostate-specific antigen density (PSA-D) in reducing unnecessary biopsies without missing Gleason pattern 4 prostate cancer in men on active surveillance (AS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 210 men on AS with Gleason score 3 + 3 prostate cancer received a first MRI and if indicated [Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score ≥3] targeted biopsy (TBx) using MRI-transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) fusion. The MRI was performed 3 months after diagnosis (group A: n = 97), at confirmatory biopsy (group B: n = 39) or at surveillance biopsy after one or more repeat TRUS-guided systematic biopsies (TRUS-Bx) (group C: n = 74). The primary outcome was upgrading to Gleason score ≥3 + 4 prostate cancer based on MRI ± TBx in groups A, B and C. Biopsy outcomes were stratified for the overall PI-RADS score and PSA-D to identify a subgroup of men in whom a biopsy could have been avoided as no Gleason score upgrading was detected. RESULTS: In all, 134/210 (64%) men had a positive MRI and 51/210 (24%) men had Gleason score upgrading based on MRI-TBx. The percentage of Gleason score upgrading based on MRI-TBx was 23% (22/97), 23% (9/39) and 27% (20/74) in respectively groups A, B and C. Additional Gleason score upgrading detected by TRUS-Bx occurred in 8% (3/39) of men in group B and 6% (1/17) of men who received TRUS-Bx in group C. No Gleason score upgrading was detected by MRI-TBx in men with a PI-RADS score of 3 and a PSA-D of <0.15 ng/mL2 (n = 15), nor by TRUS-Bx in men with a PI-RADS score of 1-3 and a PSA-D of <0.15 ng/mL2 (n = 15). CONCLUSION: At least one out of five men on AS with Gleason score 3 + 3 prostate cancer at diagnostic TRUS-Bx show Gleason score upgrading based on first MRI ± TBx at baseline, confirmatory or surveillance biopsy. Men with a PI-RADS score of 1-3 and PSA-D of <0.15 ng/mL2 did not show Gleason score upgrading at MRI ± TBx or TRUS-Bx at each time point of surveillance. Thus risk-stratification based on PI-RADS and PSA-D may reduce unnecessary follow-up biopsy procedures in men on AS.

Precision of MRI/ultrasound-fusion biopsy in prostate cancer diagnosis: an ex vivo comparison of alternative biopsy techniques on prostate phantoms.

PURPOSE: Comparing the accuracy of MRI/ultrasound-guided target-biopsy by transrectal biopsy (TRB) with elastic versus rigid image fusion versus transperineal biopsy (TPB) with rigid image fusion in a standardized setting. METHODS: Target-biopsy of six differently sized and located lesions was performed on customized CIRS 070L prostate phantoms. Lesions were only MRI-visible. After prior MRI for lesion location, one targeted biopsy per lesion was obtained by TRB with elastic image fusion with Artemis™ (Eigen, USA), TRB with rigid image fusion with real-time virtual sonography (Hitachi, Japan) and TPB with rigid image fusion with a brachytherapy approach (Elekta, Sweden), each on a phantom of 50, 100 and 150 ml prostate volume. The needle trajectories were marked by contrast agent and detected in a postinterventional MRI. RESULTS: Overall target detection rate was 79.6% with a slight superiority for the TPB (83.3 vs. 77.8 vs. 77.8%). TRB with elastic image fusion showed the highest overall precision [median distance to lesion center 2.37 mm (0.14-4.18 mm)], independent of prostate volume. Anterior lesions were significantly more precisely hit than transitional and basal lesions (p = 0.034; p = 0.015) with comparable accuracy for TRB with elastic image fusion and TPB. In general, TRB with rigid image fusion was inferior [median 3.15 mm (0.37-10.62 mm)], particularly in small lesions. CONCLUSION: All biopsy techniques allow detection of clinically significant tumors with a median error of 2-3 mm. Elastic image fusion appears to be the most precise technique, independent of prostate volume, target size or location.

Prostate histoscanning true targeting guided prostate biopsy: initial clinical experience.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility of prostate histoscanning true targeting (PHS-TT) guided transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) biopsy. METHODS: This is a prospective, single center, pilot study performed during February 2013-September 2013. All consecutive patients planned for prostate biopsy were included in the study, and all the procedure was performed by a single surgeon aided by the specialized true targeting software. Initially, the patients underwent PHS to map the abnormal areas within the prostate that were ≥0.2 cm(3). TRUS guided biopsies were performed targeting the abnormal areas with a specialized software. Additionally, routine bisextant biopsies were also taken. The final histopathology of the target cores was compared with the bisextant cores. RESULTS: A total of 43 patients underwent combined 'targeted PHS guided' and 'standard 12 core systematic' biopsies. The mean volume of abnormal area detected by PHS is 4.3 cm(3). The overall cancer detection rate was 46.5 % (20/43) with systemic cores and target cores detecting cancer in 44 % (19/43) and 26 % (11/43), respectively. The mean % cancer/core length of the PHS-TT cores were significantly higher than the systematic cores (55.4 vs. 37.5 %. p < 0.05). In biopsy naïve patients, the cancer detection rate (43.7 % vs. 14.8 %. p = 0.06) and the cancer positivity of the cores (30.1 vs. 6.8 %. p < 0.01) of target cores were higher than those patients with prior biopsies. CONCLUSION: PHS-TT is feasible and can be an effective tool for real-time guidance of prostate biopsies.

Are systematic prostate biopsy still necessary in biopsy naive men?

PURPOSE: Multiparametric MRI and the transperineal approach have become standard in the diagnostic pathway for suspected prostate cancer. Targeting of MRI lesions is performed at most centers, but the routine use of systematic cores is controversial. We aim to assess the value of obtaining systematic cores in patients undergoing cognitive fusion targeted double-freehand transperineal prostate biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent a cognitive fusion, freehand TPB at a single tertiary urology service (Perth, Australia) between November 2020 and November 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were included if they were biopsy naive and had a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer, based on their mpMRI results. Both targeted and systematic cores were taken at the time of their biopsy. RESULTS: One hundred forty patients suited the selection criteria. Clinically significant cancer was identified in 63% of patients. Of those that had clinically significant cancer, the target lesion identified 91% of the disease, missing 9% of patients whom the target biopsy detected non-clinically significant cancer but was identified in the systematic cores. Higher PI-RADS category patients were also found to be associated with an increasing likelihood of identifying clinically significant cancer within the target. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with PI-RADS 3 and higher, the target biopsy can miss up to 9% of clinically significant cancer. Systematic cores can add value as they can also change management by identifying a high-risk disease where only intermediate cancer was identified in the target. A combination of targeted and systematic cores is still required to detect cancer.

Enhancing Prostate Cancer Detection Accuracy in Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsy: Optimizing the Number of Cores Taken.

Background and objective: The shift toward targeted biopsy (TBx) aims at enhancing prostate cancer (PCa) detection while reducing overdiagnosis of clinically insignificant disease. Despite the improved ability of TBx in identifying clinically significant PCa (csPCa), the optimal number and location of targeted cores remain unclear. This review aims to assess the optimal number of prostate biopsy magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted cores to detect csPCa. Methods: A narrative literature search was conducted using PubMed, focusing on studies published between January 2014 and January 2024, addressing factors influencing targeted core numbers during prostate biopsy. The search included both retrospective and prospective studies, prioritizing those with substantial sample sizes and employing terms such as "prostate biopsy", "mpMRI", "core number", and "cancer detection". Key findings and limitations: Two biopsy cores identified csPCa in 55-65% of cases. This detection rate improved to approximately 90% when the number of cores was ≥5. The inclusion of perilesional and systematic biopsies could maximize the detection of csPCa (from 10% to 45%), especially in patients under active surveillance or with prior negative biopsy results, although there is an increase in the overdiagnosis of indolent tumors (from 4% to 20%). Transperineal software-assisted target prostate biopsy may enhance cancer detection, particularly for tumors located at the apex/anterior part of the prostate. Increasing the number of TBx cores may incrementally raise the risk of complications (by 2-14% with each added core) and result in severe pain and significant discomfort for up to 17% and 25% of TBx patients, respectively. However, the overall rate and severity of these complications remain within acceptable limits. Conclusions and clinical implications: The optimal number of cores for targeted prostate biopsies should balance minimizing sampling errors with effective cancer detection and should be tailored to each patient's unique prostate characteristics. Up to five cores per MRI target may be considered to enhance the detection of csPCa, with adjustments based on factors such as prostate and lesion volume, Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System, biopsy techniques, complications, patient discomfort, and anxiety. Patient summary: In this report, we found that increasing the number of biopsy cores up to ≥5 improves the detection rates of significant prostate cancer significantly to around 90%. Although inclusion of nearby and systematic biopsies enhances detection, increasing the biopsy count may lead to higher risks of complications and indolent tumors. A customized biopsy approach based on multiple variables could be helpful in determining the appropriate number of targeted biopsies on a case-by-case basis.

Residents and Consultants Have Equal Outcomes When Performing Transrectal Fusion Biopsies: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

The aim of our study was to compare the performance of residents vs. consultants in transrectal fusion prostate biopsies (FUS-PBs), as well as patient-reported comfort. Between January 2021 and October 2022, a consecutive series of patients undergoing FUS-PBs were randomized into two groups: (A) FUS-PBs performed by a consultant; (B) FUS-PBs performed by trained residents (>50 procedures). All patients underwent FUS-PBs with 12 systematic cores and 3/6 target cores. The detection rate and number of positive cores in the target lesion were compared between groups, and the patient's discomfort after the procedure was evaluated using the VAS scale. Overall, 140 patients with a median age of 72 years were enrolled. Overall, 69/140 (49.3%) presented prostate cancer and 53/69 (76.8%) presented a clinically significant cancer (Grade Group ≥ 2). Consultants presented a detection rate of 37/70 (52.9%) and residents a detection rate of 32/70 (45.7%) (p > 0.2); the mean number of positive cores in the index lesion was similar in both groups (1.5 vs. 1.1; p > 0.10). In terms of the patients' experiences, the procedure was well tolerated, with a median VAS score of 2 in both groups, with no statistically significant differences. Residents showed satisfactory outcomes in terms of detection rate, procedural time, and patient comfort when performing prostate biopsies. Residents, after adequate training, can safely perform prostate biopsies.

Narrative review-focal therapy: are we ready to change the prostate cancer treatment paradigm?

Background and Objective: Prostate cancer (PCa) has seen improved detection methods with a subsequent rise in disease prevalence, making novel prostate cancer treatment options an exciting yet controversial topic. Current treatment modalities encompass traditional approaches, namely surgery (radical prostatectomy) and radiation therapy. While heralded as a standard of care, these modalities may come with significant risk profiles, primarily sexual (erectile dysfunction) and urinary incontinence. Advances in technology and imaging, specifically multi-parametric MRI, have afforded great leaps in targeted focal therapy as a primary treatment option for localized PCa. This review identifies and highlights published data for novel and emerging PCa focal therapy (FT) modalities. Methods: Our study identified and reviewed the current literature for relevant investigations related to primary FT modalities as they apply to the treatment of prostate cancer. After an internal review, relevant studies (published in English, between 2000-April 2022) were included for analysis and summarization. Key Content and Findings: We provide a concise review of several novel focal therapy modalities that offer realistic potential for primary treatment of localized prostate cancer. Our narrative includes studies that primarily include their respective results, specifically focusing on those that reported both oncologic and quality-of-life outcomes after focal therapy. While still in its cumulative infancy, we discuss the current limitations, future directions, and advancements that hopefully push focal therapy into the limelight. Conclusions: While many of the mentioned focal therapies for PCa have shown promising pathologic and quality of life outcomes, further clinical evidence is required to change overall management guidelines and recommendations. The advantages of FT in avoiding sexual and urinary side-effects of radical surgery or radiation are apparent; however, it is necessary to recognize the need for further long-term evidence that is durable over time and comparable to current gold-standard treatment options.

Diagnostic performance of transperineal prostate targeted biopsy alone according to the PI-RADS score based on bi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging.

Purpose: To compare the diagnostic performance of transperineal targeted biopsy (TB) or systematic biopsy (SB) alone based on combined TB+SB and radical prostatectomy (RP) specimen for detecting prostate cancer (PCa) according to the prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) score. Materials and methods: This study included 1077 men who underwent transperineal bi-parametric (bp) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-ultrasound (US) fusion TB+SB (bpMRI-US FTSB) between April 2019 and March 2022. To compare the performance of each modality (TB, SB, and combined TB+SB) with the RP specimen (as the standard) for detecting PCa and clinically significant PCa (csPCa), receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted. Results: PCa was detected in 581 of 1077 men (53.9%) using bpMRI-US FTSB. CsPCa was detected in 383 of 1077 men (35.6%), 17 of 285 (6.0%) with PI-RADS 0 to 2, 35 of 277 (12.6%) with PI-RADS 3, 134 of 274 (48.9%) with PI-RADS 4, and 197 of 241 (81.7%) with PI-RADS 5, respectively. The additional diagnostic value of TB vs. SB compared to combined TB+SB for diagnosing csPCa were 4.3% vs. 3.2% (p=0.844), 20.4% vs 5.1% (p<0.001), and 20.3% vs. 0.7% (p<0.001) with PI-RADS 3, 4, and 5, respectively. TB alone showed no significant difference in diagnostic performance for csPCa with combined TB+SB based on RP specimens in patients with PI-RADS 5 (p=0.732). Conclusion: A need for addition of SB to TB in patients with PI-RADS 3 and 4 lesions, however, TB alone may be performed without affecting the management of patients with PI-RADS 5.

External Validation of the IMPROD-MRI Volumetric Model to Predict the Utility of Systematic Biopsies at the Time of Targeted Biopsy.

Background: The aim of this study was to validate externally a nomogram that relies on MRI volumetric parameters and clinical data to determine the need for a standard biopsy in addition to a target biopsy for men with suspicious prostate MRI findings. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of 469 biopsy-naïve men who underwent prostate biopsies. These biopsies were guided by pre-biopsy multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (mpMRI) and were performed at two different institutions. We included men with a PIRADSsv 2.1 score from 3 to 5. Each patient underwent both an MRI-ultrasound fusion biopsy of identified MRI-suspicious lesions and a systematic biopsy according to our protocol. The lesion volume percentage was determined as the proportion of cancer volume on MRI relative to the entire prostate volume. The study's outcomes were iPCa (Gleason Grade Group 1) and csPCa (Gleason Grade Group > 1). We evaluated the model's performance using AUC decision curve analyses and a systematic analysis of model-derived probability cut-offs in terms of the potential to avoid diagnosing iPCa and to accurately diagnose csPCa. Results: The nomogram includes age, PSA value, prostate volume, PIRADSsv 2.1 score, percentage of MRI-suspicious lesion volume, and lesion location. AUC was determined to be 0.73. By using various nomogram cut-off thresholds (ranging from 5% to 30%), it was observed that 19% to 58% of men could potentially avoid undergoing standard biopsies. In this scenario, the model might miss 0% to 10% of diagnosis of csPCa and could prevent identifying 6% to 31% of iPCa cases. These results are in line with findings from the multi-institutional external validation study based on the IMPROD trial (n = 122) and the MULTI-IMPROD trial (n = 262). According to DCA, the use of this nomogram led to an increased overall net clinical benefit when the threshold probability exceeded 10%. Conclusions: This study supports the potential value of a model relying on MRI volumetric measurements for selecting individuals with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer who would benefit from undergoing a standard biopsy in addition to a targeted biopsy.

Paradigm Shift in Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: Pre-Biopsy Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Targeted Biopsy.

With regard to the indolent clinical characteristics of prostate cancer (PCa), the more selective detection of clinically significant PCa (CSC) has been emphasized in its diagnosis and management. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has advanced technically, and recent international cooperation has provided a standardized imaging and reporting system for prostate MRI. Accordingly, prostate MRI has recently been investigated and utilized as a triage tool before biopsy to guide tissue sampling to increase the detection rate of CSC beyond the staging tool for patients in whom PCa was already confirmed on conventional systematic biopsy. Radiologists must understand the current paradigm shift for better PCa diagnosis and management. This article reviewed the recent literature, demonstrating the diagnostic value of pre-biopsy prostate MRI with targeted biopsy and discussed unsolved issues regarding the paradigm shift in the diagnosis of PCa.

The value of MRI in the detection of prostate cancer in a peripheral center.

INTRODUCTION: This study evaluated the value of pre-biopsy MRI and target biopsy in detection of significant prostate cancer in a peripheral center. METHODS: A retrospective study included all patients of whom a MRI of the prostate was performed before biopsy, initial and repeated biopsy, between June 2016 and May 2017. Patients underwent transrectal ultrasound guided 8-12 cores prostate biopsy and cognitive fusion target biopsy was performed if a suspicious lesion was seen on MRI. The prostate cancer detection was compared between the MRI cognitive target biopsy and standard random biopsy. RESULTS: In a total of 265 patients a MRI was performed of whom 115 underwent prostate biopsy, 96 patients underwent MRI before initial biopsies and 19 patients had previous negative biopsies. In the initial biopsy group 83 MRI's were abnormal and only 7 (8.4%) target biopsies had an additional value in detecting or upstaging prostate cancer. Prostate cancer was found in 4 of 13 (30.8%) normal MRI's. In the prior negative biopsy group, 4 of 18 abnormal MRI's had an additional value in upstaging or detecting prostate cancer. CONCLUSION: In this study the pre-biopsy MRI had a limited additional value compared to standard biopsy in detecting or upstaging prostate cancer.

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.

Prostate heterogeneity correlates with clinical features on multiparametric MRI.

BACKGROUND: Prostate heterogeneity on multi-parametric MRI (mpMRI) may confound image interpretation by obscuring lesions; systematic biopsy may have a role in this context. PURPOSE: To determine if prostate heterogeneity (1) correlates with clinical risk factors for prostate cancer and (2) associates with higher-grade tumor in systematic biopsy (SB), compared with MRI-directed target biopsy (MDTB), i.e., SB > MDTB, thus providing a rationale for combined biopsy. METHODS: IRB-approved retrospective study included men who underwent mpMRI, SB, and MDTB between 2015 and 2017. Regions of interest were applied to the entire transition zone (TZ) and peripheral zone (PZ) on T2-weighted imaging (T2WI), apparent diffusion coefficient maps (ADC), and early dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) images on the midgland slice. Mean signal intensities and standard deviation (SD) of each zone were calculated. SD served as a measure of heterogeneity. Spearman's rank correlation analysis of clinical and imaging variables was performed. Univariate logistic regression was used to determine if any imaging variable associated with SB > MDTB. RESULTS: 93 patients were included. Significant correlations included age and TZ ADC heterogeneity (rho = 0.34, p = 0.013), PSA density, and mean TZ ADC (rho = - 0.29, p = 0.049). PZ T2WI heterogeneity correlated with PZ ADC heterogeneity (rho = 0.48, p < 0.001). PZ DCE heterogeneity correlated with TZ DCE heterogeneity (rho = 0.46, p < 0.001). TZ ADC heterogeneity was associated with SB > MDTB prior to multiple comparison correction (p = 0.032). p value after correction was 0.24. CONCLUSION: TZ ADC heterogeneity correlated with age and may reflect prostatic hyperplasia and/or prostate cancer. PZ heterogeneity, possibly a measure of prostatitis, correlated with TZ hyperplasia and/or inflammation. TZ ADC heterogeneity was associated with SB > MDTB with p value of < 0.05 prior to multiple correction; future investigation is needed to further elucidate significance of ADC heterogeneity in prostate imaging.

A Prospective Study on the Efficacy of Cognitive Targeted Transrectal Ultrasound Prostate Biopsy in Diagnosing Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: We present our study, done to identify the diagnostic yield of cognitive targeted biopsy using mpMRI data, to diagnose clinically significant prostate cancers, in a cohort of biopsy and treatment naive men. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a prospective, single institutional study, done from September 2018 to March 2020 in 75 biopsy naive men. The patients with 3, 4 and 5 PIRADS scores underwent mpMRI cognitive target biopsy (mpMRI CTB) followed by standard biopsy (SB) in the same setting by two different urologists. Diagnostic yield of biopsy cores, complications, and stage migration of Gleason's grades was analyzed. RESULTS: Out of 75 patients, 34.6% had abnormal digital rectal examination (DRE), and the median serum PSA was 10.6 (4.5-20) ng/mL. Total MRI suspicious lesions were 163. Out of 1263 SB cores, 371 cores were positive for cancer (29.35%), and out of 326 mpMRI CTB cores, 120 were positive for cancer (36.8%) (P<0.0001). Histopathological examination (HPE) revealed 88%, 92%, and 100% clinically significant cancers in PIRADS 3, 4 and 5 lesions. SB and mpMRI CTB in combination have better cancer detection yield than either of the modality when used alone (P-<0.0001). Clavien-Dindo grade 1 and grade 4a complication were seen in 47 (62.6%) and three (4%) patients. CONCLUSION: In biopsy-naive men with suspected prostate cancer and equivocal DRE, the addition of pre-biopsy mpMRI detects greater numbers of people with clinically significant prostate cancer when compared with SB alone. Combining SB with mpMRI CTB has a superior diagnosing ability when compared with either of the biopsy modalities when used alone.

Evolution of Targeted Prostate Biopsy by Adding Micro-Ultrasound to the Magnetic Resonance Imaging Pathway.

BACKGROUND: Although multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) revolutionized the implementation of prostate biopsies, a considerable amount of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) is missed when performing mpMRI-targeted biopsies only. Microultrasound (micro-US) is a new modality that allows real-time targeting of suspicious regions. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate micro-US of the prostate with real-time targeting of suspicious regions in patients suspected to have prostate cancer (PCa). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We examined 159 patients with prior mpMRI and suspicion of PCa with micro-US in the period from February to December 2018. Micro-US lesions were documented according to the prostate risk identification for micro-US (PRI-MUS) protocol, and were blinded to the mpMRI results and targeted independently of the mpMRI lesions. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The main outcomes were cancer detection rate, additional detection of csPCa, and International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade group upgrading via micro-US. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: PCa was found in 113/159 (71%) men, with 49% (78/159) having clinically significant cancer (csPCa; ISUP ≥ 2). Micro-US-targeted biopsies resulted in a higher ISUP grade group than the nontargeted biopsies in 26% (42/159), compared with both nontargeted and MRI-targeted biopsies in 16% (26/159). In 17% (27/159) of patients, targeted mpMRI-guided biopsy was negative with cancer identified in the micro-US-guided biopsy, of whom 20 had csPCa. The comparison with only MRI-positive patients is the main limitation of this analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show an added benefit of micro-US in addition to mpMRI-targeted biopsies in a population of men at risk of PCa. A novel biopsy protocol with solely targeted biopsy with micro-US and mpMRI seems possible, replacing conventional ultrasound and omitting standard systematic biopsies. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we looked at the performance of microultrasound in the setting of diagnosing prostate cancer. We found that microultrasound is a good addition to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the prostate and presents an alternative for men who may not undergo MRI.

Transperineal MRI-US Fusion-Guided Target Biopsy of the Prostate after Abdominoperineal Resection: A Case Report.

Main Teaching Point: MRI-US fusion-guided transperineal prostate biopsy can help sampling clinically relevant prostate cancer in patients with a history of abdominoperineal resection and is feasible under local anaesthesia and in an outpatient setting. Prostate cancer remains one of the most diagnosed cancers in men worldwide. Prostate biopsy in patients with a history of abdominoperineal resection poses a serious challenge since transrectal ultrasound is not possible. Several techniques have been described with their respective limitations and risks. This report of such a patient aged 75, presents a Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound fusion-guided transperineal approach to prostate biopsy which can be performed under local anaesthesia and in an outpatient setting.