MRI assessment of seminal vesicle involvement by prostate cancer using T2 signal intensity and volume.

BACKGROUND: Seminal vesicle involvement (SVI) in patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer is associated with high rates of treatment failure and tumor recurrence; correct identification of SVI allows for effective management decisions and surgical planning. METHODS: This single-center retrospective study analyzed MR images of the seminal vesicles from patients undergoing radical prostatectomy with confirmed T3b disease, comparing them to a control group without SVI matched for age and Gleason grade with a final stage of T2 or T3a. Seminal vesicles were segmented by an experienced uroradiologist, "raw" and bladder-normalized T2 signal intensity, as well as SV volume, were obtained. RESULTS: Among the 82 patients with SVI, 34 (41.6%) had unilateral invasion, and 48 (58.4%) had bilateral disease. There was no statistically significant difference in the degree of distension between normal and involved seminal vesicles (P = 0.08). Similarly, no statistically significant difference was identified in the raw SV T2 signal intensity (P = 0.09) between the groups. In the 159 patients analyzed, SVI was prospectively suspected in 10 of 82 patients (specificity, 100%; sensitivity, 12.2%). In all these cases, lesions macroscopically invaded the seminal vesicle, and the raw T2 signal intensity was significantly lower than that in the SVI and control groups (P = 0.02 and 0.01). CONCLUSION: While signal intensity measurements in T2-weighted images may provide insight into T3b disease, our findings suggest that this data alone is insufficient to reliably predict SVI, indicating the need for further investigation and complementary diagnostic approaches.

Evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging for bladder cancer detection following transurethral resection of bladder tumour (TURBT).

PURPOSE: To evaluate the performance of MRI for detection of bladder cancer following transurethral resection of bladder tumour (TURBT). METHODS: This single-centre retrospective study included forty-one consecutive patients with bladder cancer who underwent bladder MRI after TURBT. Two uroradiologists retrospectively assessed the presence of tumour using bladder MRI with and without DWI (diffusion weighted imaging) using a five-point Likert scale. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated and inter-reader agreement was assessed. Histopathology was used as the reference standard. RESULTS: 24 out of 41 patients (58.5%) had no residual tumour or Tis (carcinoma in situ) after TURBT. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV for detection of tumour using T1WI (T1-weighted imaging) and T2WI (T2-weighted imaging) was 50.0%, 54.6%, 21.1%, and 81.8%, respectively and for T1WI, T2WI and DWI combined was 100%, 76.5%, 50.0% and 100%, respectively. Overestimation of tumour was more common than underestimation. MRI showed high accuracy for patients in whom there was no residual tumour (78.9%). Inter-reader agreement for tumour detection improved from fair (κ = 0.54) to moderate (κ = 0.70) when DWI was included. CONCLUSION: Non-contrast MRI with DWI showed high sensitivity and relatively high specificity for detection of residual tumour after TURBT. Inter-reader agreement improved from fair to moderate with the addition of DWI. MRI can be useful after TURBT in order to guide further management.

Biparametric MRI in prostate cancer during active surveillance: is it safe?

Active surveillance (AS) is the preferred option for patients presenting with low-intermediate-risk prostate cancer. MRI now plays a crucial role for baseline assessment and ongoing monitoring of AS. The Prostate Cancer Radiological Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation (PRECISE) recommendations aid radiological assessment of progression; however, current guidelines do not advise on MRI protocols nor on frequency. Biparametric (bp) imaging without contrast administration offers advantages such as reduced costs and increased throughput, with similar outcomes to multiparametric (mp) MRI shown in the biopsy naïve setting. In AS follow-up, the paradigm shifts from MRI lesion detection to assessment of progression, and patients have the further safety net of continuing clinical surveillance. As such, bpMRI may be appropriate in clinically stable patients on routine AS follow-up pathways; however, there is currently limited published evidence for this approach. It should be noted that mpMRI may be mandated in certain patients and potentially offers additional advantages, including improving image quality, new lesion detection, and staging accuracy. Recently developed AI solutions have enabled higher quality and faster scanning protocols, which may help mitigate against disadvantages of bpMRI. In this article, we explore the current role of MRI in AS and address the need for contrast-enhanced sequences. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Active surveillance is the preferred plan for patients with lower-risk prostate cancer, and MRI plays a crucial role in patient selection and monitoring; however, current guidelines do not currently recommend how or when to perform MRI in follow-up. KEY POINTS: Noncontrast biparametric MRI has reduced costs and increased throughput and may be appropriate for monitoring stable patients. Multiparametric MRI may be mandated in certain patients, and contrast potentially offers additional advantages. AI solutions enable higher quality, faster scanning protocols, and could mitigate the disadvantages of biparametric imaging.

PRECISE Version 2: Updated Recommendations for Reporting Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Patients on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The Prostate Cancer Radiological Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation (PRECISE) recommendations standardise the reporting of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients on active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer. An international consensus group recently updated these recommendations and identified the areas of uncertainty. METHODS: A panel of 38 experts used the formal RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method consensus methodology. Panellists scored 193 statements using a 1-9 agreement scale, where 9 means full agreement. A summary of agreement, uncertainty, or disagreement (derived from the group median score) and consensus (determined using the Interpercentile Range Adjusted for Symmetry method) was calculated for each statement and presented for discussion before individual rescoring. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: Participants agreed that MRI scans must meet a minimum image quality standard (median 9) or be given a score of 'X' for insufficient quality. The current scan should be compared with both baseline and previous scans (median 9), with the PRECISE score being the maximum from any lesion (median 8). PRECISE 3 (stable MRI) was subdivided into 3-V (visible) and 3-NonV (nonvisible) disease (median 9). Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System/Likert ≥3 lesions should be measured on T2-weighted imaging, using other sequences to aid in the identification (median 8), and whenever possible, reported pictorially (diagrams, screenshots, or contours; median 9). There was no consensus on how to measure tumour size. More research is needed to determine a significant size increase (median 9). PRECISE 5 was clarified as progression to stage ≥T3a (median 9). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The updated PRECISE recommendations reflect expert consensus opinion on minimal standards and reporting criteria for prostate MRI in AS. PATIENT SUMMARY: The Prostate Cancer Radiological Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation (PRECISE) recommendations are used in clinical practice and research to guide the interpretation and reporting of magnetic resonance imaging for patients on active surveillance for prostate cancer. An international panel has updated these recommendations, clarified the areas of uncertainty, and highlighted the areas for further research.

Expect the unexpected: investigating discordant prostate MRI and biopsy results.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate discrepant radio-pathological outcomes in biopsy-naïve patients undergoing prostate MRI and to provide insights into the underlying causes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 2780 biopsy-naïve patients undergoing prostate MRI at a tertiary referral centre between October 2015 and June 2022. Exclusion criteria were biopsy not performed, indeterminate MRI findings (PI-RADS 3), and clinically insignificant PCa (Gleason score 3 + 3). Patients with discrepant findings between MRI and biopsy results were categorised into two groups: MRI-negative/Biopsy-positive and MRI-positive/Biopsy-negative (biopsy-positive defined as Gleason score ≥ 3 + 4). An expert uroradiologist reviewed discrepant cases, retrospectively re-assigning PI-RADS scores, identifying any missed MRI targets, and evaluating the quality of MRI scans. Potential explanations for discrepancies included MRI overcalls (including known pitfalls), benign pathology findings, and biopsy targeting errors. RESULTS: Patients who did not undergo biopsy (n = 1258) or who had indeterminate MRI findings (n = 204), as well as those with clinically insignificant PCa (n = 216), were excluded, with a total of 1102 patients analysed. Of these, 32/1,102 (3%) were classified as MRI-negative/biopsy-positive and 117/1102 (11%) as MRI-positive/biopsy-negative. In the MRI-negative/Biopsy-positive group, 44% of studies were considered non-diagnostic quality. Upon retrospective image review, target lesions were identified in 28% of cases. In the MRI-positive/Biopsy-negative group, 42% of cases were considered to be MRI overcalls, and 32% had an explanatory benign pathological finding, with biopsy targeting errors accounting for 11% of cases. CONCLUSION: Prostate MRI demonstrated a high diagnostic accuracy, with low occurrences of discrepant findings as defined. Common reasons for MRI-positive/Biopsy-negative cases included explanatory benign findings and MRI overcalls. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: This study highlights the importance of optimal prostate MRI image quality and expertise in reducing diagnostic errors, improving patient outcomes, and guiding appropriate management decisions in the prostate cancer diagnostic pathway. KEY POINTS: • Discrepancies between prostate MRI and biopsy results can occur, with higher numbers of MRI-positive/biopsy-negative relative to MRI-negative/biopsy-positive cases. • MRI-positive/biopsy-negative cases were mostly overcalls or explainable by benign biopsy findings. • In about one-third of MRI-negative/biopsy-positive cases, a target lesion was retrospectively identified.

Clinical and economic impact of the introduction of pre-biopsy MRI-based assessment on a large prostate cancer centre diagnostic population and activity: 10 years on.

INTRODUCTION: Prostate mpMRI was introduced in 2011 as a secondary test and subsequently integrated into a prostate cancer (PCa) diagnostics unit representing a population of approximately 550,000 people. The following represents an audit of its step-wise introduction between 2 index years, 2009 and 2018, focusing on the activity, patient outcomes and economic benefits. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The 2 distinct years were selected for relying on a transrectal ultrasound biopsy pathway in 2009 to an mpMRI-based pathway in 2018. All referrals were retrospectively screened and compared for age, PSA levels, DRE findings, biopsy history, biopsy and mpMRI allocation data. Cost analysis was determined using local unit procedure costs. RESULTS: Patients referred included 648 in 2009 and 714 in 2018. mpMRI seldomly informed decision to biopsy in 2009 (9.8%), while in 2018 it was performed in the pre-biopsy setting in 87.9% cases and enabled biopsy avoidance in 137 patients. In 2018, there was a 31.8% decrease in the number of biopsies in patients without previous PCa diagnosis, coupled with an increase in diagnostic rates of csPCa, from 28.6 to 49.0% (p < 0.0001) and a reduction in negative biopsy rates from 52.3 to 33.8%. mpMRI had a positive impact on the system with reduced patient morbidity and post-procedural complications. The estimated overall cost savings amount to approximately £75,000/year for PCa diagnosis and £11,000/year due to reduced complications. CONCLUSION: Our evaluation shows the mpMRI-based pathway has improved early detection of csPCa and reduction of repeat biopsies, resulting in significant financial benefits for the local healthcare system.

Risk stratification of prostate cancer with MRI and prostate-specific antigen density-based tool for personalized decision making.

OBJECTIVES: MRI is now established for initial prostate cancer diagnosis; however, there is no standardized pathway to avoid unnecessary biopsy in low-risk patients. Our study aimed to test previously proposed MRI-focussed and risk-adapted biopsy decision models on a real-world dataset. METHODS: Single-centre retrospective study performed on 2055 biopsy naïve patients undergoing MRI. Diagnostic pathways included "biopsy all", "MRI-focussed" and two risk-based MRI-directed pathways. Risk thresholds were based on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density as low (<0.10 ng mL-2), intermediate (0.10-0.15 ng mL-2), high (0.15-0.20 ng mL-2), or very high-risk (>0.20 ng mL-2). The outcome measures included rates of biopsy avoidance, detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa), missed csPCa, and overdiagnosis of insignificant prostate cancer (iPCa). RESULTS: Overall cancer rate was 39.9% (819/2055), with csPCa (Grade-Group ≥2) detection of 30.3% (623/2055). In men with a negative MRI (Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System, PI-RADS 1-2), the risk of cancer was 1.2%, 2.6%, 9.0%, and 12.9% in the low, intermediate, high, and very high groups, respectively; for PI-RADS score 3 lesions, the rates were 10.5%, 14.3%, 25.0%, and 33.3%, respectively. MRI-guided pathway and risk-based pathway with a low threshold missed only 1.6% csPCa with a biopsy-avoidance rate of 54.4%, and the risk-based pathway with a higher threshold avoided 62.9% (1292/2055) of biopsies with 2.9% (61/2055) missed csPCa detection. Decision curve analysis found that the "risk-based low threshold" pathway has the highest net benefit for probability thresholds between 3.6% and 13.9%. CONCLUSION: Combined MRI and PSA-density risk-based pathways can be a helpful decision-making tool enabling high csPCa detection rates with the benefit of biopsy avoidance and reduced iPCa detection. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This real-world dataset from a large UK-based cohort confirms that combining MRI scoring with PSA density for risk stratification enables safe biopsy avoidance and limits the over-diagnosis of insignificant cancers.

Interactive training workshop to improve prostate mpMRI knowledge: results from the ESOR Nicholas Gourtsoyiannis teaching fellowship.

PURPOSE: Prostate MRI is established for the investigation of patients presenting with suspected early prostate cancer. Outcomes are dependent on both image quality and interpretation. This study assessed the impact of an educational intervention on participants' theoretical knowledge of the technique. METHODS: Eighty-one clinicians from two centers with varying experience in prostate MRI participated. Baseline knowledge was assessed with 10 written and image-based multiple-choice questions (MCQs) prior to a course including didactic lectures and hands-on interactive workshops on prostate MRI interpretation. Post-course, participants completed a second 10-question MCQ test, matched by format, themes, and difficulty, to assess for any improvement in knowledge and performance. Results were assessed using the Wilcoxon rank sum test, and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test for paired data. RESULTS: Thirty-nine participants, including 25/49 (51.0%) and 14/32 (43.8%) at each center completed both assessments, with their results used for subsequent evaluation. Overall, there was a significant improvement from pre- (4.92 ± 2.41) to post-course scores (6.77 ± 1.46), p < 0.001 and at both Copenhagen (5.92 ± 2.25 to 7.36 ± 1.25) and Toronto (3.14 ± 1.51 to 5.71 ± 1.20); p = 0.005 and p = 0.002, respectively. Participants with no prostate MRI experience showed the greatest improvement (3.77 ± 1.97 to 6.18 ± 1.5, p < 0.001), followed by intermediate level (< 500 MRIs reported) experience (6.18 ± 1.99 to 7.46 ± 1.13, p = 0.058), then advanced (> 500 MRIs reported) experience (6.83 ± 2.48 to 7.67 ± 0.82, p = 0.339). CONCLUSIONS: A dedicated prostate MRI teaching course combining didactic lectures and hands-on workshops significantly improved short-term theoretical knowledge of the technique for clinicians with differing levels of experience. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: A dedicated teaching course significantly improved theoretical knowledge of the technique particularly for clinicians with less reporting experience and a lower baseline knowledge. The multiple-choice questions format mapped improved performance and may be considered as part of future MRI certification initiatives. KEY POINTS: • Prostate MRI knowledge is important for image interpretation and optimizing acquisition sequences. • A dedicated teaching course significantly improved theoretical knowledge of the technique. • Improved performance was more apparent in clinicians with less reporting experience and a lower baseline knowledge.

Quality of T2-weighted MRI re-acquisition versus deep learning GAN image reconstruction: A multi-reader study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate CycleGAN's ability to enhance T2-weighted image (T2WI) quality. METHOD: A CycleGAN algorithm was used to enhance T2WI quality. 96 patients (192 scans) were identified from patients who underwent multiple axial T2WI due to poor quality on the first attempt (RAD1) and improved quality on re-acquisition (RAD2). CycleGAN algorithm gave DL classifier scores (0-1) for quality quantification and produced enhanced versions of QI1 and QI2 from RAD1 and RAD2, respectively. A subset (n = 20 patients) was selected for a blinded, multi-reader study, where four radiologists rated T2WI on a scale of 1-4 for quality. The multi-reader study presented readers with 60 image pairs (RAD1 vs RAD2, RAD1 vs QI1, and RAD2 vs QI2), allowing for selecting sequence preferences and quantifying the quality changes. RESULTS: The DL classifier correctly discerned 71.9 % of quality classes, with 90.6 % (96/106) as poor quality and 48.8 % (42/86) as diagnostic in original sequences (RAD1, RAD2). CycleGAN images (QI1, QI2) demonstrated quantitative improvements, with consistently higher DL classifier scores than original scans (p < 0.001). In the multi-reader analysis, CycleGAN demonstrated no qualitative improvements, with diminished overall quality and motion in QI2 in most patients compared to RAD2, with noise levels remaining similar (8/20). No readers preferred QI2 to RAD2 for diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Despite quantitative enhancements with CycleGAN, there was no qualitative boost in T2WI diagnostic quality, noise, or motion. Expert radiologists didn't favor CycleGAN images over standard scans, highlighting the divide between quantitative and qualitative metrics.

Imaging tumor lactate is feasible for identifying intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients with postsurgical biochemical recurrence.

While radical prostatectomy remains the mainstay of prostate cancer (PCa) treatment, 20 to 40% of patients develop postsurgical biochemical recurrence (BCR). A particularly challenging clinical cohort includes patients with intermediate-risk disease whose risk stratification would benefit from advanced approaches that complement standard-of-care diagnostic tools. Here, we show that imaging tumor lactate using hyperpolarized 13C MRI and spatial metabolomics identifies BCR-positive patients in two prospective intermediate-risk surgical cohorts. Supported by spatially resolved tissue analysis of established glycolytic biomarkers, this study provides the rationale for multicenter trials of tumor metabolic imaging as an auxiliary tool to support PCa treatment decision-making.

Assessment of deep learning-based reconstruction on T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted prostate MRI image quality.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of a commercially available deep learning-based reconstruction (DLR) algorithm with varying combinations of DLR noise reduction settings and imaging parameters on quantitative and qualitative image quality, PI-RADS classification and examination time in prostate T2-weighted (T2WI) and diffusion-weighted (DWI) imaging. METHOD: Forty patients were included. Standard-of-care (SoC) prostate MRI sequences including T2WI and DWI were reconstructed without and with different DLR de-noising levels (low, medium, high). In addition, faster T2WI(Fast) and DWI(Fast) sequences, and a higher resolution T2WI(HR) sequence were evaluated. Quantitative analysis included signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values. Two radiologists performed qualitative analysis, independently evaluating imaging datasets using 5-point scoring scales for image quality and artifacts. PI-RADS category assignment was also performed by the more experienced radiologist. RESULTS: All DLR levels resulted in significantly higher SNR and CNR compared to the DLR(off) acquisitions. DLR allowed the acquisition time to be reduced by 33% for T2WI(Fast) and 49% for DWI(Fast) compared to SoC, without affecting image quality, whilst T2WI(HR) with DLR allowed for a 73% increase in spatial resolution in the phase encode direction compared to SoC. The inter-reader agreement for image quality and artifact scores was substantial for all subjective measurements on T2WI and DWI. The T2WI(Fast) protocol with DLR(medium) and DWI(Fast) with DLR(low) received the highest qualitative quality score. CONCLUSION: DLR can reduce T2WI and DWI acquisition time and increase SNR and CNR without compromising image quality or altering PI-RADS classification.

The PRECISE Recommendations for Prostate MRI in Patients on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: A Critical Review.

The Prostate Cancer Radiological Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation (PRECISE) recommendations were published in 2016 to standardize the reporting of MRI examinations performed to assess for disease progression in patients on active surveillance for prostate cancer. Although a limited number of studies have reported outcomes from use of PRECISE in clinical practice, the available studies have demonstrated PRECISE to have high pooled NPV but low pooled PPV for predicting progression. Our experience in using PRECISE in clinical practice at two teaching hospitals has highlighted issues with its application and areas requiring clarification. This Clinical Perspective critically appraises PRECISE on the basis of this experience, focusing on the system's key advantages and disadvantages and exploring potential changes to improve the system's utility. These changes include consideration of image quality when applying PRECISE scoring, incorporation of quantitative thresholds for disease progression, adoption of a PRECISE 3F sub-category for progression not qualifying as substantial, and comparisons with both the baseline and most recent prior examinations. Items requiring clarification include derivation of a patient-level score in patients with multiple lesions, intended application of PRECISE score 5 (i.e., if requiring development of disease that is no longer organ-confined), and categorization of new lesions in patients with prior MRI-invisible disease.

Using a Recurrent Neural Network To Inform the Use of Prostate-specific Antigen (PSA) and PSA Density for Dynamic Monitoring of the Risk of Prostate Cancer Progression on Active Surveillance.

The global uptake of prostate cancer (PCa) active surveillance (AS) is steadily increasing. While prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) is an important baseline predictor of PCa progression on AS, there is a scarcity of recommendations on its use in follow-up. In particular, the best way of measuring PSAD is unclear. One approach would be to use the baseline gland volume (BGV) as a denominator in all calculations throughout AS (nonadaptive PSAD, PSADNA), while another would be to remeasure gland volume at each new magnetic resonance imaging scan (adaptive PSAD, PSADA). In addition, little is known about the predictive value of serial PSAD in comparison to PSA. We applied a long short-term memory recurrent neural network to an AS cohort of 332 patients and found that serial PSADNA significantly outperformed both PSADA and PSA for follow-up prediction of PCa progression because of its high sensitivity. Importantly, while PSADNA was superior in patients with smaller glands (BGV ≤55 ml), serial PSA was better in men with larger prostates of >55 ml. Patient summary: Repeat measurements of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and PSA density (PSAD) are the mainstay of active surveillance in prostate cancer. Our study suggests that in patients with a prostate gland of 55 ml or smaller, PSAD measurements are a better predictor of tumour progression, whereas men with a larger gland may benefit more from PSA monitoring.

Prospective Implementation and Early Outcomes of a Risk-stratified Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance Follow-up Protocol.

Background: Active surveillance (AS) is a major management option for men with early prostate cancer. Current guidelines however advocate identical AS follow-up for all without considering different disease trajectories. We previously proposed a pragmatic three-tier STRATified CANcer Surveillance (STRATCANS) follow-up strategy based on different progression risks from clinic-pathological and imaging features. Objective: To report early outcomes from the implementation of the STRATCANS protocol in our centre. Design setting and participants: Men on AS were enrolled into a prospective stratified follow-up programme. Intervention: Three tiers of increasing follow-up intensity based on National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE): Cambridge Prognostic Group (CPG) 1 or 2, prostate-specific antigen density, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) Likert score at entry. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Rates of progression to CPG ≥3, any pathological progression, AS attrition, and patient choice for treatment were assessed. Differences in progression were compared with chi-square statistics. Results and limitations: Data from 156 men (median age 67.3 yr) were analysed. Of these, 38.4% had CPG2 disease and 27.5% had grade group 2 disease at diagnosis. The median time on AS was 4 yr (interquartile range 3.2-4.9) and 1.5 yr on STRATCANS. Overall, 135/156 (86.5%) men remained on AS or converted to watchful waiting and 6/156 (3.8%) stopped AS by choice by the end of the evaluation period. Of the 156 patients, 66 (42.3%) were allocated to STRATCANS 1 (least intense follow-up), 61 (39.1%) to STRATCANS 2, and 29 (18.6%) to STRATCANS 3 (highest intensity). By increasing STRATCANS tier, progression rates to CPG ≥3 and any progression events were 0% and 4.6%, 3.4% and 8.6%, and 7.4% and 22.2%, respectively (p = 0.019). Modelling resource usage suggested potential reductions in appointments by 22% and MRI by 42% compared with current NICE guideline recommendations (first 12 months of AS). The study is limited by short follow-up, a relatively small cohort, and being single centre. Conclusions: A simple risk-tiered AS strategy is possible with early outcomes supporting stratified follow-up intensity. STRATCANS implementation could de-escalate follow-up in men at a low risk of progression while husbanding resources for those who need closer follow-up. Patient summary: We report a practical way to personalise follow-up for men on active surveillance for early prostate cancer. Our method may allow reductions in the follow-up burden for men at a low risk of disease change while maintaining vigilance for those at a higher risk.

Time series radiomics for the prediction of prostate cancer progression in patients on active surveillance.

Serial MRI is an essential assessment tool in prostate cancer (PCa) patients enrolled on active surveillance (AS). However, it has only moderate sensitivity for predicting histopathological tumour progression at follow-up, which is in part due to the subjective nature of its clinical reporting and variation among centres and readers. In this study, we used a long short-term memory (LSTM) recurrent neural network (RNN) to develop a time series radiomics (TSR) predictive model that analysed longitudinal changes in tumour-derived radiomic features across 297 scans from 76 AS patients, 28 with histopathological PCa progression and 48 with stable disease. Using leave-one-out cross-validation (LOOCV), we found that an LSTM-based model combining TSR and serial PSA density (AUC 0.86 [95% CI: 0.78-0.94]) significantly outperformed a model combining conventional delta-radiomics and delta-PSA density (0.75 [0.64-0.87]; p = 0.048) and achieved comparable performance to expert-performed serial MRI analysis using the Prostate Cancer Radiologic Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation (PRECISE) scoring system (0.84 [0.76-0.93]; p = 0.710). The proposed TSR framework, therefore, offers a feasible quantitative tool for standardising serial MRI assessment in PCa AS. It also presents a novel methodological approach to serial image analysis that can be used to support clinical decision-making in multiple scenarios, from continuous disease monitoring to treatment response evaluation. KEY POINTS: •LSTM RNN can be used to predict the outcome of PCa AS using time series changes in tumour-derived radiomic features and PSA density. •Using all available TSR features and serial PSA density yields a significantly better predictive performance compared to using just two time points within the delta-radiomics framework. •The concept of TSR can be applied to other clinical scenarios involving serial imaging, setting out a new field in AI-driven radiology research.

Vector Prostate Biopsy: A Novel Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Image Fusion Transperineal Biopsy Technique Using Electromagnetic Needle Tracking Under Local Anaesthesia.

BACKGROUND: Prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is now standard for assessment of suspected prostate cancer (PCa). A variety of approaches to MRI-based targeting has revolutionised prostate biopsies. OBJECTIVE: To describe the procedure and show the accuracy and tolerability of a novel Vector MRI/ultrasound fusion transperineal (TP) biopsy technique that uses electromagnetic (EM) needle tracking under local anaesthesia (LA). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Vector prostate biopsy using BiopSee fusion software, EM tracking technology, and transrectal ultrasound was performed in 69 patients meeting the biopsy criteria in two UK centres between September 2020 and August 2022. SURGICAL PROCEDURE: Stepper-mounted rectal ultrasound images were fused with MRI scans. LA was applied into two defined perineal tracks and a needle sheath with an EM sensor was inserted. The biopsy needle was directed precisely through the sheath to MRI targets under EM tracking. Biopsies were taken without antibiotic prophylaxis. MEASUREMENTS: Cancer detection (any PCa; grade group ≥2), side effects, and patient experience measures were recorded. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Cancer detection in patients with Likert 4-5 lesions was 98% for any PCa and 83% for grade group ≥2. According to the 50 questionnaires returned, 42 patients (84%) reported no or minimal pain, while 40 (80%) reported no or minimal discomfort. No episodes of postoperative urinary retention occurred, and only one patient required treatment for infection. Limitations include the low patient number and incomplete responses to questionnaires. CONCLUSIONS: This novel Vector technique provides a feasible and tolerable procedure for MRI/ultrasound fusion TP biopsy under LA, with high cancer detection rates. This is achieved while maintaining patient comfort and with minimal rates of complications. PATIENT SUMMARY: We report a novel technique that uses electromagnetic needle tracking to perform highly accurate and comfortable prostate biopsies through the perineum under local anaesthetic.

Survey on prostate MRI reading and interpretation among urology residents in Italy, Brazil and the UK: a cry for help.

BACKGROUND: Prostate MRI is an essential tool in the diagnostic pathway of prostate cancer and its accurate reading helps decision to biopsy. The aim of this study was to assess the Urology residents' level of confidence in reading and interpreting prostate MRI, their interest in new learning opportunities and whether prostate MRI training should be part of the urology core curriculum during residency. METHODS: A 23-item survey has been created and distributed via Web to an international cohort of Urology residents over a 3-month period. Surveys obtained from Countries representing >10% total distribution of responses were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 304 complete surveys were obtained from Urology residents, with a geographical prevalence from Europe (59.54%, 181/304) and South America (29.28%, 89/304). Only 17-20% of residents reported having received formal prostate MRI training during residency. Overall, <20% residents expressed to feel confident in reading and interpreting prostate MRI. As a result, >90% Urology trainees stated they would be willing to receive a formal training and would be interested in new learning opportunities in MRI reading and interpretation during residency, independently of their year of training. Despite UK Urology trainees showed to have a higher availability of MRI resources and MRI-based biopsies compared to the other countries, they still expressed concerns in regard to not feeling confident with MRI reading and interpretation and requested a formal training. CONCLUSIONS: This survey highlights the need for major learning opportunities and a formal training in prostate MRI reading and interpretation during urology residency.

Natural History of Patients with Prostate MRI Likert 1-3 and Development of RosCaP: a Multivariate Risk Score for Clinically Significant Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Clinically significant prostate cancer (csCaP) with Gleason ≥3 + 4 is found in 10% negative prebiopsy multiparametric (mp) MRI cases and varies widely for equivocal mpMRI cases. The objective of this study was to investigate long-term outcomes of patients with negative and equivocal mpMRIs and to develop a predictive score for csCaP risk stratification in this group. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent an upfront mpMRI between May 2015 and March 2018 with an MRI score Likert 1 to 3 were included in the study. Patients had either a CaP diagnosis at MRI-targeted biopsy or were not diagnosed and attended follow-up in the community. Outcomes were analysed through the Kaplan-Meier estimator and Cox Model. Regression coefficients of significant variables were used to develop a Risk of significant Cancer of the Prostate score (RosCaP). RESULTS: At first assessment 281/469 patients had mpMRI only and 188/469 mpMRI and biopsy, 26 csCaP were found at biopsy, including 10/26 in Likert 3 patients. 12/371 patients discharged without CaP after first assessment were diagnosed with csCaP during a median of 34.2 months' follow-up, 11/12 diagnosis occurred in patients omitting initial biopsy. csCaP diagnosis-free survival was 95.7% in the MRI group and 99.1% in the biopsy group. From these outcomes, a continuous RosCaP score was developed: RosCaP = 0.083 x Age - 0.202 x (1/PSA Density) + 0.786 (if Likert 3), and 4 risk classes were proposed. Limitations include retrospective design and absence of external validation. CONCLUSION: Age, PSA Density and MRI Likert score were significantly associated to the risk of csCaP and utilised to devise the novel RosCap predictive score focused to support risk assessment in patients with negative or equivocal mpMRI results.