Site-specific concordance of targeted and systematic biopsy cores at the index lesion on multiparametric magnetic resonance: can we spare the double-tap?

PURPOSE: To define the impact of systematic biopsy (SB) cores directed in the same area of index lesion in patients undergoing targeted biopsy (TB) and SB for prostate cancer (PCa) suspicion. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data of biopsy-naïve patients with one single suspicious lesion at mpMRI who underwent TB plus SB at our institution between January 2015 and September 2021. A convenient sample of 336 patients was available for our analyses. The primary outcome was to evaluate the impact of overlapping SB cores directed to the index lesion at mpMRI. The secondary outcome was to evaluate the SB cores concordance in terms of highest Gleason Score Detection with TB cores. RESULTS: 56% of patients were found to have site-specific concordance. SB cores determined disease upgrade in 22.1% patients. Thirty-one (16.4%) site-concordant patients experienced upgrade through overlapping SB cores, while 149 (79.3%) had no benefit by SB cores, and 8 (4.3%) patients had the worst ISUP at TB cores. 50% of the patients with negative-TB were upgraded to insignificant PCa, and 17.5% was upgraded from negative to unfavorable-intermediate- or high-risk PCa. Overall, 14 (19.4%) patients were also upgraded from ISUP 1 on TB to csPCa, with 28.5% of these harboring high-risk PCa. In csPCas at TB, 9 (12.5%) patients were upgraded from intermediate- to high-risk disease by SB. CONCLUSIONS: TB alone consents to identify worst ISUP PCa in vast majority of patients scheduled for biopsy. A non-negligible number of patients are upgraded via-SB cores, including also index lesion overlapping cores. Omitting these cores might lead to a suboptimal patient management.

Comparison of prostate cancer detection rate at targeted biopsy of hub and spoke centers mpMRI: experience matters.

BACKGROUND: Latest changes in European guidelines on prostate cancer determined a widespread of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) even in less experienced centers due to an increased demand. This could decrease diagnostic accuracy of targeted biopsy (TB) since image interpretation can be challenging and requires adequate and supervised training. Therefore we aimed to evaluate the prostate cancer (PCa) detection rate on TB according to mpMRI center's volume and experience. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data of 737 patients who underwent mpMRI-TB at our institution. Patients were stratified according to mpMRI center: Hub (high volume >100 exams/year with dedicated radiologists and supervised training) and Spoke center (low volume <100 exams/year without dedicated radiologists and/or supervised training). Detection rate of PCa at TB and possible predictors of clinically significant PCa (csPCa) at TB. Differences in detection rate were explored using Chi-square test. Predictors of csPCa were evaluated through uni and multivariable logistic regression. The adjustment for casemix included: age, PSA, mpMRI center, lesion's location, PSA density, PI-RADS score and index lesion's size. RESULTS: Four hundred forty-nine (60.9%) and 288 (39.1%) patients underwent mpMRI at a Hub or Spoke center, respectively. Hub group had higher detection rate for both any (60.3% vs. 48.1%) and csPCa (46.9% vs 38.7%; all P≤0.001). After stratifying for PI-RADS score, Hub group had higher detection rate for PI-RADS score 3 (csPCA 25.2% vs. 15.7%; p 0.04) and 4 (csPCa 65.7% vs. 45.7%; P=0.001). At multivariable analyses, receiving an mpMRI scan at a Spoke center was an independent predictor for csPCa on TB (OR 0.65; P=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: mpMRI performed in Hub centers provided a significantly higher PCa yield on TB. A dedicated team of experienced radiologist, a supervised training for mpMRI and a central revision of mpMRI performed in non-experienced centres are essential to avoid unnecessary and potentially harmful procedures.