Added value of randomised biopsy to multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy of the prostate in a contemporary cohort.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the added value of concurrent systematic randomised ultrasonography-guided biopsy (SBx) to multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-targeted biopsy and the additional rate of overdiagnosis of clinically insignificant prostate cancer (ciPCa) by SBx in a large contemporary, real-world cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 1552 patients with positive mpMRI and consecutive mpMRI-targeted biopsy and SBx were enrolled. Added value and the rate of overdiagnosis by SBx was evaluated. PRIMARY OUTCOME: added value of SBx, defined as detection rate of clinically significant PCa (csPCa; International Society of Urological Pathology [ISUP] Grade ≥2) by SBx, while mpMRI-targeted biopsy was negative or showed ciPCa (ISUP Grade 1). SECONDARY OUTCOME: rate of overdiagnosis by SBx, defined as detection of ciPCa in patients with negative mpMRI-targeted biopsy and PSA level of <10 ng/mL. RESULTS: Detection rate of csPCa by mpMRI-targeted biopsy and/or SBx was 753/1552 (49%). Added value of SBx was 145/944 (15%). Rate of overdiagnosis by SBx was 146/656 (22%). Added value of SBx did not change when comparing patients with previous prostate biopsy and biopsy naïve patients. In multivariable analysis, a Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) 4 index lesion (odds ratio [OR] 3.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.66-6.78; P = 0.001), a PI-RADS 5 index lesion (OR 2.89, 95% CI 1.39-6.46; P = 0.006) and age (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.03-1.08; P < 0.001) were independently associated with added value of SBx. CONCLUSIONS: In our real-world analysis, we saw a significant impact on added value and added rate of overdiagnosis by SBx. Subgroup analysis showed no significant decrease of added value in any evaluated risk group. Therefore, we do not endorse omitting concurrent SBx to mpMRI-guided biopsy of the prostate.

The Added Value of Side-specific Systematic Biopsy in Patients Diagnosed by Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsy.

BACKGROUND: Systematic biopsy (SB) combined with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsy is still recommended considering the risk of missing clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the added value in csPCa detection on side-specific SB relative to MRI lesion and to externally validate the Noujeim risk stratification model that predicts the risk of csPCa on distant SB cores relative to the index MRI lesion. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Overall, 4841 consecutive patients diagnosed by MRI-targeted biopsy and SB for Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System score ≥3 lesions were identified from a prospectively maintained database between January 2016 and April 2023 at 15 European referral centers. A total of 2387 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: McNemar's test was used to compare the csPCa detection rate between several biopsy strategies including MRI-targeted biopsy, side-specific SB, and a combination of both. Model performance was evaluated in terms of discrimination using area under the receiver operation characteristic curve (AUC), calibration plots, and decision curve analysis. Clinically significant prostate cancer was defined as International Society of Urological Pathology grade group ≥2. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, the csPCa detection rate was 49%. Considering MRI-targeted biopsy as reference, the added values in terms of csPCa detection were 5.8% (relative increase of 13%), 4.2% (relative increase of 9.8%), and 2.8% (relative increase of 6.1%) for SB, ipsilateral SB, and contralateral SB, respectively. Only 35 patients (1.5%) exclusively had csPCa on contralateral SB (p < 0.001). Considering patients with csPCa on MRI-targeted biopsy and ipsilateral SB, the upgrading rate was 2% (20/961) using contralateral SB (p < 0.001). The Noujeim model exhibited modest performance (AUC of 0.63) when tested using our validation set. CONCLUSIONS: The added value of contralateral SB was negligible in terms of cancer detection and upgrading rates. The Noujeim model could be included in the decision-making process regarding the appropriate prostate biopsy strategy. PATIENT SUMMARY: In the present study, we collected a set of patients who underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted and systematic biopsies for the detection of prostate cancer. We found that biopsies taken at the opposite side of the MRI suspicious lesion have a negligible impact on cancer detection. We also validate a risk stratification model that predicts the risk of cancer on biopsies beyond 10 mm from the initial lesion, which could be used in daily practice to improve the personalization of the prostate biopsy.

Expanding Active Surveillance Criteria for Low- and Intermediate-risk Prostate Cancer: Can We Accurately Predict the Risk of Misclassification for Patients Diagnosed by Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsy?

Models predicting the risk of adverse pathology (ie, International Society of Urological Pathology [ISUP] grade group ≥3, pT3, and/or pN1) among patients operated by radical prostatectomy (RP) have been proposed to expand active surveillance (AS) inclusion criteria. We aimed to test these models in a set of 1062 low-risk and favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients diagnosed by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and MRI-targeted biopsy. We hypothesized that the inclusion of radiological features into a novel model would improve patient selection. Performance was assessed using discrimination, calibration, and decision curve analysis (DCA). Available models were characterized by poor discrimination (areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUCs] of 59% and 60%), underestimation of predicted risk on calibration plots, and a small amount of net benefit against a probability threshold of 40-50% at the DCA. The development of a novel model slightly improved discrimination (AUC of 63% vs 59%, p = 0.001, and 63% vs 60%, p = 0.07) and net benefit against threshold probabilities of ≥30%. This first multicenter study demonstrated the poor performance of models predicting adverse pathology and that implementation of MRI and MRI-targeted biopsy in this setting was not associated with a clear improvement in patient selection. Patients harboring low-risk or favorable intermediate-risk PCa and candidates for RP cannot be referred accurately to an AS program without a non-negligible risk of misclassification. PATIENT SUMMARY: We tested prediction models that could expand the selection of prostate cancer patients for active surveillance. Models were inaccurate and associated with a high risk of misclassification despite the implementation of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and targeted biopsies.

Identification of the Optimal Candidates for Nodal Staging with Extended Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection Among Prostate Cancer Patients Who Underwent Preoperative Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography. External Validation of the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Briganti Nomograms and Development of a Novel Tool.

BACKGROUND: Although the therapeutic role of extended pelvic lymph node dissection (ePLND) in patients with prostate cancer (PCa) is still under debate, this procedure is recommended for staging purposes in selected cases. Nomograms for predicting lymph node invasion (LNI) do not account for prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) imaging, which is characterized by a high negative predictive value for nodal metastases. OBJECTIVE: To externally validate models predicting LNI in patients with miN0M0 PCa at PSMA PET and to develop a novel tool in this setting. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Overall, 458 patients with miN0M0 disease undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) and ePLND at 12 centers between 2017 and 2022 were identified. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSES: Available tools were externally validated using calibration plots, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), and decision curve analyses to assess calibration, discrimination, and the net benefit. A novel coefficient-based model was developed, internally validated, and compared with available tools. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, 53 patients (12%) had LNI. The AUC was 69% for the Briganti 2012, 64% for the Briganti 2017, 73% for the Briganti 2019, and 66% for the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center nomogram. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging stage, biopsy grade group 5, the diameter of the index lesion, and the percentage of positive cores at systematic biopsy were independent predictors of LNI (all p ≤ 0.04). Internal cross-validation confirmed a coefficient-based model with AUC of 78%, better calibration, and a higher net benefit in comparison to the other nomograms assessed. Use of a 5% cutoff would have spared 47% ePLND procedures (vs 13% for the Briganti 2019 nomogram) at the cost of missing only 2.1% LNI cases . The lack of central review of imaging and pathology represents the main limitation. CONCLUSIONS: Tools for predicting LNI are associated with suboptimal performance for men with miN0M0 PCa. We propose a novel model for predicting LNI that outperforms available tools in this population. PATIENT SUMMARY: Tools currently used to predict lymph node invasion (LNI) in prostate cancer are not optimal for men with negative node findings on PET (positron emission tomography) scans, leading to a high number of unnecessary extended pelvic lymph node dissection (ePLND) procedures. A novel tool should be used in clinical practice to identify candidates for ePLND to reduce the risk of unnecessary procedures without missing LNI cases.

Prostate Cancer Detection Rate of Manually Operated and Robot-assisted In-bore Magnetic Resonance Imaging Targeted Biopsy.

Background: The diagnostic efficacy regarding prostate cancer (PC) detection by manually operated in-bore magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) targeted prostate biopsy (MO-MRGB) versus robot-assisted in-bore MRI targeted prostate biopsy (RA-MRGB) is lacking evidence. Objective: We hypothesized that the detection rates (DRs) for PC of MO-MRGB and RA-MRGB were similar and aimed to compare these. Design setting and participants: We prospectively included all patients who received in-bore MRI targeted prostate biopsy (MRGB) of the prostate in the Central Denmark Region from August 2014 to February 2020. From August 2014, MO-MRGB was used, and from March 2018, RA-MRGB was preferred. Referral to in-bore MRGB was based on multiparametric MRI (mpMRI). Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: We compared PC DRs of MO-MRGB and RA-MRGB with Pearson's chi-square test. We made three binary regression models and calculated the risk difference (RD) of PC between the in-bore MRGB systems. Results and limitations: A total of 3107 patients were referred to mpMRI, and 884 (28%) patients went on to receive in-bore MRGB. The MO-MRGB and RA-MRGB systems were used in 505 (57%) and 379 (43%) patients, respectively. Taking clinically relevant covariates into account, we found no statistically significant difference in PC DRs between MO-MRGB and RA-MRGB (72% vs 73%, RD 1%, 95% confidence interval -4% to 7%, p = 0.6). The main limitation was a shift in population characteristics. Conclusions: We did not see evidence of an effect on the DR or the RD for PC when we compared MO-MRGB with RA-MRGB. Cost effectiveness should be considered carefully when choosing the MRGB system. Patient summary: We compared two magnetic resonance imaging guided prostate tissue sampling systems regarding prostate cancer (PC) detection. One system was manually operated, and the other system was robot assisted. Comparing the systems, we found no evidence of a difference in their ability to detect PC.

Effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy for detection of prostate cancer in comparison with systematic biopsy in our countries with low prevalence of prostate cancer: our first experience after 3 years.

BACKGROUND: Some men are subjected to multiple repeated biopsies because of ongoing suspicion of prostate cancer, which might subject them to complications. The aim of the study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/target fusion-guided biopsy in comparison with systematic biopsy in our low prevalence prostate cancer population, in terms of validity measure, case detection rate, and detection of clinically significant cancer. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study. All consecutive patients who met the inclusion criteria (all men with persistent high prostate-specific antigen levels >4 ng/ml and/or subnormal finding in direct rectal examination, with suspicious regions identified on prebiopsy MRI) were subjected to transrectal MRI/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy. RESULTS: A total of 165 cases met the inclusion criteria and were included in the study. The cancer detection rate (CDR) of target biopsy was significantly higher than that of standard biopsy (27.9% vs 14%, respectively), and 25 cases (52%) were missed by standard strategy and correctly classified by multiparametric MRI with targeted biopsy (MRI-TB). On the other hand, only 2 cases (4.3%) were misclassified by MRI-TB, and one of them was clinically significant. There was an exact agreement between the 2 strategies in 15 (31%) cases. Targeted biopsy diagnosed 41.5% more high-risk cancers vs systematic biopsy (41.6% vs 6.2%, P < .001). The difference between sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value of MRI-TG varies between 80% and 98%. CONCLUSION: The CDR of prostate cancer in general and clinically significant cancer, in specific, is significantly higher with MRI-TG modality than with systematic modality. Yet, MRI-TG biopsy still misses some men with clinically significant prostate cancer. Hence, the addition of a 12-core biopsy is required to evade missing cases of clinically significant and insignificant cancer.

Prognostic Implications of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Concomitant Systematic Biopsy in Predicting Biochemical Recurrence After Radical Prostatectomy in Prostate Cancer Patients Diagnosed with Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsy.

BACKGROUND: The prognostic role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and systematic biopsy in predicting biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP) in prostate cancer (PCa) patients has not been addressed yet. OBJECTIVE: To develop a risk tool predicting BCR after RP in patients diagnosed with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 804 patients with a clinical suspicion of PCa and positive mpMRI diagnosed with MRI-targeted plus concomitant systematic biopsy treated with RP were identified. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSES: The outcome was represented by BCR defined as two prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values ≥0.2ng/ml after surgery. Multivariable Cox regression analyses assessed the predictors of BCR. A risk tool model based on imaging and biopsy parameters was developed and validated internally. The c-index, calibration plot, and decision curve analyses were used to assess discrimination, calibration, and the net benefit associated with its use in predicting BCR at 36 mo. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Median (interquartile range) follow-up was 28 (25-29) mo, and 89 patients experienced BCR. The 36-mo BCR-free survival rate was 89%. The maximum diameter of the index lesion and seminal vesicle invasion (SVI) at mpMRI as well as the presence of clinically significant PCa at systematic biopsy (defined as a grade group of >2) were associated with BCR (all p≤0.03). A model based on PSA, Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System score, SVI at mpMRI, diameter of the index lesion, grade group at MRI-targeted biopsy, and clinically significant PCa at systematic biopsy achieved the highest discrimination (77%) among all clinical models, as well as the European Association of Urology risk groups (62%) and the Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) score (60%). This tool was characterized by excellent calibration at internal validation and the highest net benefit when predicting BCR for the threshold risk between 0% and 30%. CONCLUSIONS: The adoption of predictive models accounting for mpMRI and MRI-targeted biopsy-derived variables and concomitant systematic biopsy would improve clinicians' ability to identify patients at a higher risk of early recurrence after surgery. PATIENT SUMMARY: The use of information obtained at multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), and MRI-targeted and concomitant systematic biopsy would improve clinicians' ability to identify prostate cancer patients at a higher risk of experiencing early biochemical recurrence after surgery.

Concordance Between Biopsy and Radical Prostatectomy Pathology in the Era of Targeted Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

CONTEXT: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-targeted transrectal prostate biopsy (TBx) may better predict pathology at radical prostatectomy than systematic transrectal prostate biopsy (SBx). OBJECTIVE: To assess concordance between biopsy and radical prostatectomy pathology in men undergoing a TBx as compared with those undergoing an SBx. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Four electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, the Cochrane Library [Wiley], and EBSCHOHost) were searched from inception until July 2018. Studies were included if they were published after 2012, conducted both SBx and TBx, and compared the biopsy results with final pathology after radical prostatectomy for ≥50 patients. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were utilized. Bias was appraised using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Our search yielded 10 studies including 1215 men. However, our inclusion criteria applied only to a proportion of men included in these studies. The median age was 65 yr and the median prostate-specific antigen level was 7.2 ng/ml. In the eight studies examining upgrading at prostatectomy, pathology from SBx was significantly more likely to be upgraded relative to TBx (odds ratio [OR] 2.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.48-4.14, p = 0.001). We found no significant difference in downgrading (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.48-2.67, p = 0.783) between TBx and SBx. For both biopsy-naïve men and men with a prior negative biopsy, results from SBx were more likely to be upgraded than TBx at prostatectomy (OR 1.6 [95% CI 1.02-2.27, p < 0.001] and OR 4.23 [95% CI 1.68-8.48, p = 0.003], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Pathologic upgrading at prostatectomy was less likely with mpMRI-targeted biopsy versus systematic biopsy alone, without concurrent increase in downgrading. This increased accuracy should improve confidence in management decisions based on MRI-targeted biopsy pathology. PATIENT SUMMARY: We reviewed the ability of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging -targeted biopsy to predict cancer grade at radical prostatectomy. We found that targeted biopsy provides more accurate assessment of Gleason score at prostatectomy than systematic biopsy.

The Key Combined Value of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging, and Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted and Concomitant Systematic Biopsies for the Prediction of Adverse Pathological Features in Prostate Cancer Patients Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy.

BACKGROUND: The combined role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted and concomitant systematic biopsies in the identification of prostate cancer (PCa) patients at a higher risk of adverse pathology at radical prostatectomy (RP) is still unclear. OBJECTIVE: To develop novel models to predict extracapsular extension (ECE), seminal vesicle invasion (SVI), or upgrading in patients diagnosed with MRI-targeted and concomitant systematic biopsies. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We included 614 men with clinical stage≤T2 at digital rectal examination who underwent MRI-targeted biopsy with concomitant systematic biopsy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSES: Logistic regression analyses predicting ECE, SVI, and upgrading (ie, a shift from biopsy International Society of Urological Pathology grade group to any higher grade at RP) based on clinical variables with or without mp-MRI features and systematic biopsy information (the percentage of cores with grade group ≥2 PCa) were developed and internally validated. The area under the curve (AUC) was used to identify the models with the highest discrimination. Decision-curve analyses (DCAs) determined the net benefit associated with their use. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, 333 (54%), 88 (14%), and 169 (27%) patients had ECE, SVI, and upgrading at RP, respectively. The inclusion of mp-MRI data improved the discrimination of clinical models for ECE (67% vs 70%) and SVI (74% vs 76%). Models including mp-MRI, and MRI-targeted and concomitant systematic biopsy information achieved the highest AUC at internal validation for ECE (73%), SVI (81%), and upgrading (73%) and represented the basis for three risk calculators that yield the highest net benefit at DCA. CONCLUSIONS: Not only mp-MRI and MRI-targeted sampling, but also concomitant systematic biopsies provide significant information to identify patients at a higher risk of adverse pathology. Although omitting systematic prostate sampling at the time of MRI-targeted biopsy might be associated with a reduced risk of detecting insignificant PCa and lower patient discomfort, it reduces the ability to accurately predict pathological features. PATIENT SUMMARY: The combination of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) with accurate biopsy information on MRI-targeted and systematic biopsies improves the accuracy of multivariable models based on clinical and mp-MRI data alone. Correct mp-MRI interpretation and proper extensive prostate sampling are both needed to predict adverse pathology accurately at radical prostatectomy.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsy Versus Systematic Biopsy in the Detection of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

CONTEXT: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted prostate biopsy (MRI-TB) may be an alternative to systematic biopsy for diagnosing prostate cancer. OBJECTIVE: The primary aims of this systematic review and meta-analysis were to compare the detection rates of clinically significant and clinically insignificant cancer by MRI-TB with those by systematic biopsy in men undergoing prostate biopsy to identify prostate cancer. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A literature search was conducted using the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane library, and Clinicaltrials.gov databases. We included prospective and retrospective paired studies where the index test was MRI-TB and the comparator test was systematic biopsy. We also included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) if one arm included MRI-TB and another arm included systematic biopsy. The risk of bias was assessed using a modified Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 checklist. In addition, the Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool was used for RCTs. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: We included 68 studies with a paired design and eight RCTs, comprising a total of 14709 men who either received both MRI-TB and systematic biopsy, or were randomised to receive one of the tests. MRI-TB detected more men with clinically significant cancer than systematic biopsy (detection ratio [DR] 1.16 [95% confidence interval {CI} 1.09-1.24], p<0.0001) and fewer men with clinically insignificant cancer than systematic biopsy (DR 0.66 [95% CI 0.57-0.76], p<0.0001). The proportion of cores positive for cancer was greater for MRI-TB than for systematic biopsy (relative risk 3.17 [95% CI 2.82-3.56], p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: MRI-TB is an attractive alternative diagnostic strategy to systematic biopsy. PATIENT SUMMARY: We evaluated the published literature, comparing two methods of diagnosing prostate cancer. We found that biopsies targeted to suspicious areas on magnetic resonance imaging were better at detecting prostate cancer that needs to be treated and avoiding the diagnosis of disease that does not need treatment than the traditional systematic biopsy.

A Novel Nomogram to Identify Candidates for Extended Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection Among Patients with Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer Diagnosed with Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted and Systematic Biopsies.

BACKGROUND: Available models for predicting lymph node invasion (LNI) in prostate cancer (PCa) patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) might not be applicable to men diagnosed via magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsies. OBJECTIVE: To assess the accuracy of available tools to predict LNI and to develop a novel model for men diagnosed via MRI-targeted biopsies. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 497 patients diagnosed via MRI-targeted biopsies and treated with RP and extended pelvic lymph node dissection (ePLND) at five institutions were retrospectively identified. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSES: Three available models predicting LNI were evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), calibration plots, and decision curve analyses. A nomogram predicting LNI was developed and internally validated. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, 62 patients (12.5%) had LNI. The median number of nodes removed was 15. The AUC for the Briganti 2012, Briganti 2017, and MSKCC nomograms was 82%, 82%, and 81%, respectively, and their calibration characteristics were suboptimal. A model including PSA, clinical stage and maximum diameter of the index lesion on multiparametric MRI (mpMRI), grade group on targeted biopsy, and the presence of clinically significant PCa on concomitant systematic biopsy had an AUC of 86% and represented the basis for a coefficient-based nomogram. This tool exhibited a higher AUC and higher net benefit compared to available models developed using standard biopsies. Using a cutoff of 7%, 244 ePLNDs (57%) would be spared and a lower number of LNIs would be missed compared to available nomograms (1.6% vs 4.6% vs 4.5% vs 4.2% for the new nomogram vs Briganti 2012 vs Briganti 2017 vs MSKCC). CONCLUSIONS: Available models predicting LNI are characterized by suboptimal accuracy and clinical net benefit for patients diagnosed via MRI-targeted biopsies. A novel nomogram including mpMRI and MRI-targeted biopsy data should be used to identify candidates for ePLND in this setting. PATIENT SUMMARY: We developed the first nomogram to predict lymph node invasion (LNI) in prostate cancer patients diagnosed via magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy undergoing radical prostatectomy. Adoption of this model to identify candidates for extended pelvic lymph node dissection could avoid up to 60% of these procedures at the cost of missing only 1.6% patients with LNI.

Comparison of prostate cancer detection rates between magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy and transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy according to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System in patients with PSA ≥4 ng/mL: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have investigated magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy (MRI-TBx) on the detection for prostate cancer (PCa). Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS), as a standardized MRI reporting system, has widely been used in the management of PCa. However, basing the PI-RADS score, the comparability between MRI-TBx and transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS-Bx) in diagnosing PCa remained inconsistent or even controversial. Thus, this systematic meta-analysis aimed to assess the value of PI-RADS in sifting better prostate biopsy method. METHODS: A meta-analysis including 10 articles was performed. In these included studies, biopsy-naive subjects with concerning PSA levels and/or an abnormal digital rectal examination (DRE) were consecutively enrolled by referral from urologists. All subjects underwent multiparameter MRI (mpMRI) prostate and the results were scored independently by PI-RADS. Subjects with equivocal (PI-RADS 3) and intermediate/high-risk (PI-RADS 4/5) lesions underwent MRI-TBx and followed by TRUS-Bx performed by a urologist. The online databases PubMed, Embase and Web of Science were searched to find all correlated articles until October 1st, 2019. Data were pooled by odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to assess the strength of the associations. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on Gleason score. RESULTS: Overall, 10 studies were included in this meta-analysis from January, 2015 to June, 2019. In the comparison of the detection of MRI-TBx and TRUS-Bx in PCa patients, TRUS-Bx had a significant advantage in overall PCa detection compared with MRI-TBx (OR =0.78, 95% CI: 0.62-0.98) in PI-RADS 3. Basing subgroup analysis of Gleason score (csPCa: Gleason score ≥7; non-csPCa: Gleason score <7), a summary analysis of the detection rate of csPCa showed that no significant difference was found (OR =0.82, 95% CI: 0.58-1.16); Meanwhile, no significant difference in non-csPCa patients was also detected (OR =0.83, 95% CI: 0.53-1.28). In PI-RADS 4 or 5, no significant results were detected between MRI-TBx and TRUS-Bx (OR =0.96, 95% CI: 0.87-1.06) for overall PCa detection. The stratification analyses by Gleason score found that TRUS-Bx had an advantage over MRI-TBx in non-csPCa patients (OR =0.76, 95% CI: 0.60-0.98); However, there was no significant difference in the detection rate of csPCa (OR =1.05, 95% CI: 0.93-1.20). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis indicated that using TRUS-Bx was better than MRI-TBx for the diagnosis of PCa in PI-RADS 3; Besides, TRUS-Bx have an advantage over MRI-TBx in the detection for non-csPCa in PI-RADS 4 or 5. Therefore, PI-RADS could be used as a MRI evaluation system in the selection of prostate biopsy.