Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Why Does Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted Biopsy Miss Clinically Significant Cancer?
Williams, Cheyenne; Ahdoot, Michael; Daneshvar, Michael A; Hague, Christian; Wilbur, Andrew R; Gomella, Patrick T; Shih, Joanna; Khondakar, Nabila; Yerram, Nitin; Mehralivand, Sherif; Gurram, Sandeep; Siddiqui, Minhaj; Pinsky, Paul; Parnes, Howard; Merino, Maria; Wood, Bradford; Turkbey, Baris; Pinto, Peter A.
Affiliation
  • Williams C; Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Ahdoot M; Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Daneshvar MA; Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Hague C; Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Wilbur AR; Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Gomella PT; Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Shih J; Biometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Khondakar N; Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Yerram N; Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Mehralivand S; Molecular Imaging Program, Center for Cancer Research, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Gurram S; Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Siddiqui M; Director of Urologic Oncology and Robotic Surgery, VA Medical Center, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland.
  • Pinsky P; Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Parnes H; Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Merino M; Translational Surgical Pathology Section, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Wood B; Center for Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, & Interventional Radiology, Radiology and Imaging Sciences, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Turkbey B; Molecular Imaging Program, Center for Cancer Research, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Pinto PA; Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
J Urol ; 207(1): 95-107, 2022 01.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34433302
ABSTRACT

PURPOSE:

Multiple studies demonstrate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsy detects more clinically significant cancer than systematic biopsy; however, some clinically significant cancers are detected by systematic biopsy only. While these events are rare, we sought to perform a retrospective analysis of these cases to ascertain the reasons that MRI-targeted biopsy missed clinically significant cancer which was subsequently detected on systematic prostate biopsy. MATERIALS AND

METHODS:

Patients were enrolled in a prospective study comparing cancer detection rates by transrectal MRI-targeted fusion biopsy and systematic 12-core biopsy. Patients with an elevated prostate specific antigen (PSA), abnormal digital rectal examination, or imaging findings concerning for prostate cancer underwent prostate MRI and subsequent MRI-targeted and systematic biopsy in the same setting. The subset of patients with grade group (GG) ≥3 cancer found on systematic biopsy and GG ≤2 cancer (or no cancer) on MRI-targeted biopsy was classified as MRI-targeted biopsy misses. A retrospective analysis of the MRI and MRI-targeted biopsy real-time screen captures determined the cause of MRI-targeted biopsy miss. Multivariable logistic regression analysis compared baseline characteristics of patients with MRI-targeted biopsy misses to GG-matched patients whose clinically significant cancer was detected by MRI-targeted biopsy.

RESULTS:

Over the study period of 2007 to 2019, 2,103 patients met study inclusion criteria and underwent combined MRI-targeted and systematic prostate biopsies. A total of 41 (1.9%) men were classified as MRI-targeted biopsy misses. Most MRI-targeted biopsy misses were due to errors in lesion targeting (21, 51.2%), followed by MRI-invisible lesions (17, 40.5%) and MRI lesions missed by the radiologist (3, 7.1%). On logistic regression analysis, lower Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADSTM) score was associated with having clinically significant cancer missed on MRI-targeted biopsy.

CONCLUSIONS:

While uncommon, most MRI-targeted biopsy misses are due to errors in lesion targeting, which highlights the importance of accurate co-registration and targeting when using software-based fusion platforms. Additionally, some patients will harbor MRI-invisible lesions which are untargetable by MRI-targeted platforms. The presence of a low PI-RADS score despite a high PSA is suggestive of harboring an MRI-invisible lesion.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Prostate / Prostatic Neoplasms / Magnetic Resonance Imaging / Missed Diagnosis Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Limits: Aged / Humans / Male / Middle aged Language: En Journal: J Urol Year: 2022 Type: Article

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Prostate / Prostatic Neoplasms / Magnetic Resonance Imaging / Missed Diagnosis Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Limits: Aged / Humans / Male / Middle aged Language: En Journal: J Urol Year: 2022 Type: Article