Imaging Prostate Cancer: Clinical Utility of Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen.

PURPOSE: Our goal was to review the pathway and pertinent materials leading to approval of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) scanning by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Beginning with the pivotal trials and working backward, we summarize the evolution of PSMA scanning, beginning with the discovery of the molecule, the mechanism of action to identify prostate cancer, the route to the present-day test and some of the major publications leading to each step of the sequence. From the thousands of PSMA articles listed on PubMed®, the present review is focused on the 4 large U.S. trials incorporating university studies of the gallium-68 compound and commercial studies of the fluorine-18 compound. The review further focuses on the role of PSMA scanning for both initial staging of prostate cancer and diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer. RESULTS: PSMA is a transmembrane-bound glycoprotein which is overexpressed by 100-1,000-fold in prostate cancer cells. Preclinical PSMA studies at Cornell and Johns Hopkins in the 1990s were followed by early human studies in Germany in the early 2010s, then pivotal clinical trials at University of California, Los Angeles and University of California, San Francisco, leading to the first FDA approval in December 2020 (68Ga-PSMA-11). In January 2021, a commercially available product (18F-DCFPyL) was approved on the basis of multisite registration trials (CONDOR and OSPREY). Sensitivity and specificity of PSMA scanning exceeds that of any other imaging method currently available for initial staging of prostate cancer and diagnosis of recurrent disease. The accuracy of PSMA scanning is attributed to the great image contrast (high signal-to-noise ratio), a property deriving from the high PSMA tracer uptake by prostate cancer cells. That property can be estimated quantitatively by a metric, the standardized uptake value. A follow-on PSMA compound, the theranostic lutetium-177, is currently pending FDA approval for treatment of metastases. CONCLUSIONS: PSMA scanning is a disruptive technology that promises to transform the way prostate cancer is initially staged, recurrence is diagnosed and some advanced cases are treated.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Guided Biopsy in Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: The underlying premise of prostate cancer active surveillance (AS) is that cancers likely to metastasize will be recognized and eliminated before cancer-related disease can ensue. Our study was designed to determine the prostate cancer upgrading rate when biopsy guided by magnetic resonance imaging (MRGBx) is used before entry and during AS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The cohort included 519 men with low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer who enrolled in prospective studies (NCT00949819 and NCT00102544) between February 2008 and February 2020. Subjects were preliminarily diagnosed with Gleason Grade Group (GG) 1 cancer; AS began when subsequent MRGBx confirmed GG1 or GG2. Participants underwent confirmatory MRGBx (targeted and systematic) followed by surveillance MRGBx approximately every 12 to 24 months. The primary outcome was tumor upgrading to ≥GG3. RESULTS: Upgrading to ≥GG3 was found in 92 men after a median followup of 4.8 years (IQR 3.1-6.5) after confirmatory MRGBx. Upgrade-free probability after 5 years was 0.85 (95% CI 0.81-0.88). Cancer detected in a magnetic resonance imaging lesion at confirmatory MRGBx increased risk of subsequent upgrading during AS (HR 2.8; 95% CI 1.3-6.0), as did presence of GG2 (HR 2.9; 95% CI 1.1-8.2) In men who upgraded ≥GG3 during AS, upgrading was detected by targeted cores only in 27%, systematic cores only in 25% and both in 47%. In 63 men undergoing prostatectomy, upgrading from MRGBx was found in only 5 (8%). CONCLUSIONS: When AS begins and follows with MRGBx (targeted and systematic), upgrading rate (≥GG3) is greater when tumor is initially present within a magnetic resonance imaging lesion or when pathology is GG2 than when these features are absent.

Expectant management for men with early stage prostate cancer.

Since the dissemination of prostate-specific antigen screening, most men with prostate cancer are now diagnosed with localized, low-risk prostate cancer that is unlikely to be lethal. Nevertheless, nearly all of these men undergo primary treatment with surgery or radiation, placing them at risk for longstanding side effects, including erectile dysfunction and impaired urinary function. Active surveillance and other observational strategies (ie, expectant management) have produced excellent long-term disease-specific survival and minimal morbidity for men with prostate cancer. Despite this, expectant management remains underused for men with localized prostate cancer. In this review, various approaches to the expectant management of men with prostate cancer are summarized, including watchful waiting and active surveillance strategies. Contemporary cancer-specific and health care quality-of-life outcomes are described for each of these approaches. Finally, contemporary patterns of use, potential disparities in care, and ongoing research and controversies surrounding expectant management of men with localized prostate cancer are discussed.

Optimizing Spatial Biopsy Sampling for the Detection of Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: The appropriate number of systematic biopsy cores to retrieve during magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted prostate biopsy is not well defined. We aimed to demonstrate a biopsy sampling approach that reduces required core count while maintaining diagnostic performance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We collected data from a cohort of 971 men who underwent MRI-ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy for suspected prostate cancer. A regional targeted biopsy (RTB) was evaluated retrospectively; only cores within 2 cm of the margin of a radiologist-defined region of interest were considered part of the RTB. We compared detection rates for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) and cancer upgrading rate on final whole mount pathology after prostatectomy between RTB, combined, MRI-targeted, and systematic biopsy. RESULTS: A total of 16,459 total cores from 971 men were included in the study data sets, of which 1,535 (9%) contained csPCa. The csPCa detection rates for systematic, MRI-targeted, combined, and RTB were 27.0% (262/971), 38.3% (372/971), 44.8% (435/971), and 44.0% (427/971), respectively. Combined biopsy detected significantly more csPCa than systematic and MRI-targeted biopsy (p <0.001 and p=0.004, respectively) but was similar to RTB (p=0.71), which used on average 3.8 (22%) fewer cores per patient. In 102 patients who underwent prostatectomy, there was no significant difference in upgrading rates between RTB and combined biopsy (p=0.84). CONCLUSIONS: A RTB approach can maintain state-of-the-art detection rates while requiring fewer retrieved cores. This result informs decision making about biopsy site selection and total retrieved core count.

Factors Associated with Time to Conversion from Active Surveillance to Treatment for Prostate Cancer in a Multi-Institutional Cohort.

PURPOSE: We examined the demographic and clinicopathological parameters associated with the time to convert from active surveillance to treatment among men with prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multi-institutional cohort of 7,279 patients managed with active surveillance had data and biospecimens collected for germline genetic analyses. RESULTS: Of 6,775 men included in the analysis, 2,260 (33.4%) converted to treatment at a median followup of 6.7 years. Earlier conversion was associated with higher Gleason grade groups (GG2 vs GG1 adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.57, 95% CI 1.36-1.82; ≥GG3 vs GG1 aHR 1.77, 95% CI 1.29-2.43), serum prostate specific antigen concentrations (aHR per 5 ng/ml increment 1.18, 95% CI 1.11-1.25), tumor stages (cT2 vs cT1 aHR 1.58, 95% CI 1.41-1.77; ≥cT3 vs cT1 aHR 4.36, 95% CI 3.19-5.96) and number of cancerous biopsy cores (3 vs 1-2 cores aHR 1.59, 95% CI 1.37-1.84; ≥4 vs 1-2 cores aHR 3.29, 95% CI 2.94-3.69), and younger age (age continuous per 5-year increase aHR 0.96, 95% CI 0.93-0.99). Patients with high-volume GG1 tumors had a shorter interval to conversion than those with low-volume GG1 tumors and behaved like the higher-risk patients. We found no significant association between the time to conversion and self-reported race or genetic ancestry. CONCLUSIONS: A shorter time to conversion from active surveillance to treatment was associated with higher-risk clinicopathological tumor features. Furthermore, patients with high-volume GG1 tumors behaved similarly to those with intermediate and high-risk tumors. An exploratory analysis of self-reported race and genetic ancestry revealed no association with the time to conversion.

Prostate Cancer Detection Rate of Freehand versus 3-Dimensional Template Mapping Biopsy Using a Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Device in Biopsy Naïve Men.

PURPOSE: Targeted prostate biopsy devices include a 3-dimensional digital template grid to guide systematic biopsy locations. Following a template could better ensure uniform and well distributed sampling of the prostate compared to the traditional freehand biopsy approach, possibly decreasing the chance of false-negative biopsy. Thus, we determined cancer detection rates obtained by conventional freehand systematic sampling vs template mapping sampling using a magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion device. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Men who underwent first line conventional or image guided prostate biopsy were identified retrospectively in an institutional review board approved protocol. Excluded from study were men with prior biopsy or treatment or fewer than 10 cores taken. Targeted cores obtained by image guided biopsy were censored from analysis to simulate systematic template biopsy. The resulting cancer detection rate was compared to that of conventional biopsy. RESULTS: We identified 1,582 patients between 2006 and 2014 who met the criteria for analysis, including 1,052 who underwent conventional biopsy and 530 who underwent template biopsy with a magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion device. Patient age, prostate specific antigen and the number of systematic cores were the same in the 2 groups. Template biopsy detected any prostate cancer in 257 of 530 men (48.5%) and clinically significant cancer in 196 (37.0%) while conventional biopsy detected any cancer in 432 of 1,052 (41.0%) (p=0.005) and clinically significant cancer in 308 (29.2%) (p=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Template mapping systematic biopsy detected more prostate cancer than conventional sampling in biopsy naïve men. It is a promising cost-effective alternative to magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion biopsy as an upfront screening tool.

Risk of Prostate Cancer after a Negative Magnetic Resonance Imaging Guided Biopsy.

PURPOSE: Magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy which reveals no cancer may impart reassurance beyond that offered by ultrasound guided biopsy. However, followup of men after a negative magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy has been mostly by prostate specific antigen testing and reports of followup tissue confirmation are few. We investigated the incidence of clinically significant prostate cancer in such men who, because of persistent cancer suspicion, subsequently underwent a repeat magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Subjects were all men with a negative initial magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy who underwent at least 1 further magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy due to continued clinical suspicion of clinically significant prostate cancer (September 2009 to July 2019). Biopsies were magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion with targeted and systematic cores. Regions of interest from initial magnetic resonance imaging and any new regions of interest at followup magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy were targeted. The primary end point was detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (Gleason Grade Group 2 or greater). RESULTS: Of 2,716 men 733 had a negative initial magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy. Study subjects were 73/733 who underwent followup magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy. Median (IQR) age and prostate specific antigen density were 64 years (59-67) and 0.12 ng/ml/cc (0.08-0.17), respectively. Baseline PI-RADS® scores were 3 or greater in 74%. At followup magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy (median 2.4 years, IQR 1.3-3.6), 17/73 (23%) were diagnosed with clinically significant prostate cancer. When followup magnetic resonance imaging revealed a lesion (PI-RADS 3 or greater), clinically significant prostate cancer was found in 17/53 (32%). When followup magnetic resonance imaging was negative (PI-RADS less than 3), cancer was not found (0/20) (p <0.01). Overall 54% of men with PI-RADS 5 at followup magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy were found to have clinically significant prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Men with negative magnetic resonance imaging following an initial negative magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy are unlikely to harbor clinically significant prostate cancer and may avoid repeat biopsy. However, when lesions are seen on followup magnetic resonance imaging, repeat magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy is warranted.

Variation in Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Targeted Biopsy Outcomes in Asian American Men: A Multicenter Study.

PURPOSE: Asian American men have distinctly different prostate cancer epidemiology than other men. To our knowledge the role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and targeted biopsy for elevated prostate specific antigen in this population has not been assessed. We sought to define imaging and targeted biopsy outcomes in Asian American men compared to other men. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We accrued a multicenter, prospective cohort of men who underwent magnetic resonance imaging targeted and systematic biopsy for elevated prostate specific antigen. The outcome of interest was a diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer (Gleason Grade Group 2 or greater) stratified by the PI-RADS™ (Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System) score and a history of negative biopsy. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the effect of Asian American race on cancer detection. RESULTS: Of the 2,571 men 275 (11%) were Asian American. Clinically significant prostate cancer was detected in 37% of Asian American men compared to 48% of men of other races (p <0.001). Asian American men were also less likely to be diagnosed with Grade Group 1 cancer (12% vs 18%, p=0.007). Additionally, there was significantly lower detection of significant cancer using PI-RADS 3 in Asian American men vs men of other races (12% vs 21%, p=0.032). On adjusted analysis Asian American men were less likely to be diagnosed with significant cancer (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.42-0.79, p <0.001) and Grade Group 1 cancer (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.38-0.84, p=0.005) than nonAsian men. CONCLUSIONS: Asian American men are less likely to be diagnosed with clinically significant prostate cancer on targeted biopsy, illustrating the different performance of PI-RADS in this population. Conventional risk assessment tools should be modified when selecting Asian American men for biopsy.

Using spatial tracking with magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound-guided biopsy to identify unilateral prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To create reliable predictive metrics of unilateral disease using spatial tracking from a fusion device, thereby improving patient selection for hemi-gland ablation of prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified patients who received magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/ultrasound-guided biopsy and radical prostatectomy at a single institution between 2011 and 2018. In addition to standard clinical features, we extracted quantitative features related to biopsy core and MRI target locations predictive of tumour unilaterality. Classification and Regression Tree (CART) analysis was used to create a decision tree (DT) for identifying cancer laterality. We evaluated concordance of model-determined laterality with final surgical pathology. RESULTS: A total of 173 patients were identified with biopsy coordinates and surgical pathology available. Based on CART analysis, in addition to biopsy- and MRI-confirmed disease unilaterality, patients should be further screened for cancer detected within 7 mm of midline in a 40 mL prostate, which equates to the central third of any-sized prostate by radius. The area under the curve for this DT was 0.82. Standard diagnostics and the DT correctly identified disease laterality in 73% and 80% of patients, respectively (P = 0.13). Of the patients identified as unilateral by standard diagnostics, 47% had undetected contralateral disease or were otherwise incorrectly identified. This error rate was reduced to 17% (P = 0.01) with the DT. CONCLUSION: Using spatial tracking from fusion devices, a DT was more reliable for identifying laterality of prostate cancer compared to standard diagnostics. Patients with cancer detected within the central third of the prostate by radius are poor hemi-gland ablation candidates due to the risk of midline extension of tumour.

Do contemporary imaging and biopsy techniques reliably identify unilateral prostate cancer? Implications for hemiablation patient selection.

BACKGROUND: Hemiablation is a less morbid treatment alternative for appropriately selected patients with unilateral prostate cancer (PCa). However, to the authors' knowledge, traditional diagnostic techniques inadequately identify appropriate candidates. In the current study, the authors quantified the accuracy for identifying hemiablation candidates using contemporary diagnostic techniques, including multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and MRI-fusion with complete systematic template biopsy. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing MRI and MRI-fusion prostate biopsy, including full systematic template biopsy, prior to radical prostatectomy in a single tertiary academic institution between June 2010 and February 2018 was performed. Hemiablation candidates had unilateral intermediate-risk PCa (Gleason score [GS] of 3+4 or 4+3, clinical T classification ≤T2, and prostate-specific antigen level <20 ng/dL) on MRI-fusion biopsy and 2) no contralateral highly or very highly suspicious Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADSv2) MRI lesions. Hemiablation candidates were inappropriately selected if pathologists identified contralateral GS ≥3+4 or high-risk ipsilateral PCa on prostatectomy. The authors tested a range of hemiablation inclusion criteria and performed multivariable analysis of preoperative predictors of undetected contralateral disease. RESULTS: Of 665 patients, 92 met primary hemiablation criteria. Of these 92 patients, 44 (48%) were incorrectly identified due to ipsilateral GS ≥3+4 tumors crossing the midline (21 patients), undetected distinct contralateral GS ≥3+4 tumors (20 patients), and/or ipsilateral high-risk PCa (3 patients) on prostatectomy. The rate of undetected contralateral disease ranged from 41% to 48% depending on inclusion criteria. On multivariable analysis, men with anterior index tumors were found to be 2.4 times more likely to harbor undetected contralateral GS ≥3+4 PCa compared with men with posterior lesions (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians and patients must weigh the risk of inadequate oncologic treatment against the functional benefits of hemiablation. Further investigation into methods for improving patient selection for hemiablation is necessary.

Cancer core length from targeted biopsy: an index of prostate cancer volume and pathological stage.

OBJECTIVE: To study the relationship of maximum cancer core length (MCCL), on targeted biopsy (TB) of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-visible index lesions, to volume of that tumour found at radical prostatectomy (RP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 205 men undergoing fusion biopsy and RP were divided into two groups: 136 in whom the MCCL came from an index MRI-visible lesion (TB) and 69 in whom MCCL came from a non-targeted lesion (non-targeted biopsy [NTB]). MRI was 3-T multi-parametric and biopsy was via MRI-ultrasonography fusion. RESULTS: In the TB group, MCCL correlated with volume of clinically significant index tumours (ρ = 0.44-0.60, P < 0.01). The correlation was similar for first and repeat biopsy and for transition and peripheral zone lesions (ρ = 0.42-0.49, P < 0.01). No correlations were found in the NTB group. TB MCCL (6-10 and >10 mm) and MRI lesion diameter (>20 mm) were independently associated with tumour volume. TB MCCLs >10 mm and Gleason scores >7 were each associated with pathological T3 disease (odds ratios 5.73 and 5.04, respectively), but MRI lesion diameter lesion was not. CONCLUSIONS: MCCL on a TB from an MRI-visible lesion is an independent predictor of both cancer volume and pathological stage. This relationship does not exist for MCCL from a NTB core. Quantifying CCL on MRI-TBs may have a value, not previously described, to risk-stratify patients with prostate cancer before treatment.

Utility of Multiparametric MRI for Predicting Residual Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer After Focal Laser Ablation.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to compare in a multireader manner the diagnostic accuracies of 3-T multiparametric MRI interpretation and serial prostate-specific antigen (PSA) measurement in predicting the presence of residual clinically significant prostate cancer after focal laser ablation. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Eighteen men had undergone focal laser ablation for low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer as part of two National Cancer Institute-funded phase 1 clinical trials. Multiparametric MRI was performed immediately after and 6 and 12 months after focal laser ablation. Serial PSA measurements after focal laser ablation were recorded, and MRI-ultrasound fusion biopsy was performed 6 and 12 months after ablation and served as the reference standard. Multiparametric MRI was performed at 3 T with pelvic phased-array coils. T2-weighted, DW, and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR images were retrospectively assessed by two blinded radiologists using a 3-point Likert scale (0-2). Inter-reader agreement was assessed with the Cohen kappa statistic. The diagnostic accuracies of multiparametric MRI and PSA measurement were compared. RESULTS. Residual clinically significant prostate cancer was identified in 11 of 18 (61%) men. Logistic regression analysis of serial PSA measurements yielded a correct classification rate of 61.1% (p > 0.05). Using a multiparametric MRI threshold score of 4 or greater, both radiologists made correct classifications for 16 of 18 men (89%) at 6 months and 15 of 17 men (88%) at 12 months. Interreader agreement was substantial to excellent for T2-weighted imaging, DWI, and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and improved uniformly from 6 to 12 months. Logistic regression analysis of the retrospectively reviewed multiparametric MR images yielded AUCs greater than 0.90 for each radiologist 6 and 12 months after focal laser ablation (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION. Multiparametric MRI 6 and 12 months after focal laser ablation significantly outperformed serial PSA measurements for predicting the presence of residual clinically significant prostate cancer.

Utility of Restriction Spectrum Imaging Among Men Undergoing First-Time Biopsy for Suspected Prostate Cancer.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article is to evaluate restriction spectrum imaging (RSI) in men undergoing MRI-ultrasound fusion biopsy for suspected prostate cancer (PCa) and to compare the performance of RSI with that of conventional DWI. MATERIALS AND METHODS. One hundred ninety-eight biopsy-naïve men enrolled in a concurrent prospective clinical trial evaluating MRI-targeted prostate biopsy underwent multiparametric MRI with RSI. Clinical and imaging features were compared between men with and without clinically significant (CS) PCa (MRI-ultrasound fusion biopsy Gleason score ≥ 3 + 4). RSI z score and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) were correlated, and their diagnostic performances were compared. RESULTS. CS PCa was detected in 109 of 198 men (55%). Using predefined thresholds of ADC less than or equal to 1000 µm2/s and RSI z score greater than or equal to 3, sensitivity and specificity for CS PCa were 86% and 38%, respectively, for ADC and 61% and 70%, respectively, for RSI. In the transition zone (n = 69), the sensitivity and specificity were 94% and 17%, respectively, for ADC and 59% and 69%, respectively, for RSI. Among lesions with CS PCa, RSI z score and ADC were significantly inversely correlated in the peripheral zone (ρ = -0.4852; p < 0.01) but not the transition zone (ρ = -0.2412; p = 0.17). Overall diagnostic accuracies of RSI and DWI were 0.70 and 0.68, respectively (p = 0.74). CONCLUSION. RSI and DWI achieved equivalent diagnostic performance for PCa detection in a large population of men undergoing first-time prostate biopsy for suspected PCa, but RSI had superior specificity for transition zone lesions.

High Intensity Focused Ultrasound for Radiorecurrent Prostate Cancer: A North American Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: We determined the safety and efficacy of whole gland high intensity focused ultrasound in men with radiorecurrent prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 100 men with clinically localized recurrent prostate cancer at least 2 years after external beam radiation therapy underwent whole gland high intensity focused ultrasound in an open label trial from 2009 to 2012. Treatments were performed at 16 sites, including 14 in the United States and 2 in Canada. The primary end point was the combination of a prostate specific antigen nadir of 0.5 ng/ml or less and negative biopsy at 12 months. Validated questionnaires were administered to monitor changes in urinary and sexual function. RESULTS: Of the 100 treated men, in whom mean age was 70 years (range 53 to 83), 78 completed the 12-month biopsy, which was negative in 63 (81%). Mean prostate specific antigen was 4.9 ng/ml (range 0.4 to 14) and the median Gleason score was 7. The 1-year end point of a prostate specific antigen nadir of 0.5 ng/ml or less plus negative biopsy was achieved in 50 men. During post-trial followup mean prostate specific antigen at 2 years was 1.1 ng/ml (range 0.1 to 17) in 33 patients. Adverse events developed in 91 men through 12 months, which were CTCAE grade 1 in 67, grade 2 in 80 and grade 3 in 20. Treatment related grade 3 adverse events included rectal fistulas in 5 men, which required surgery in 3, osteitis pubis in 3 and hematuria requiring intervention in 3. Treatment related grade 3 adverse events developed early in the trial and appeared related to operator experience. There were no life threatening adverse events or treatment related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Whole gland high intensity focused ultrasound appears reasonably safe and effective to treat radiorecurrent prostate cancer. The rate of complications, which are potentially severe, was acceptable, especially considering the advanced, refractory nature of the disease and the limited treatment options.

Focal Therapy Eligibility Determined by Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy.

PURPOSE: We assessed focal therapy eligibility in men who underwent multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and targeted biopsy with correlation to whole mount histology after radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Subjects were selected from among the 454 men in whom targeted biopsy proven prostate cancer was derived from regions of interest on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging from 2010 to 2016. Focal therapy eligibility was limited to a maximum Gleason score of 4 + 3 in regions of interest with or without other foci of low risk prostate cancer (Gleason score 3 + 3 and less than 4 mm). Men who did not meet NCCN® intermediate risk criteria were classified as ineligible for focal therapy. Of the 454 men 64 underwent radical prostatectomy and biopsy findings were compared to final pathology findings. RESULTS: Of the 454 men with a biopsy proven region of interest 175 (38.5%) were eligible for focal therapy. Fusion biopsy, which combined targeted and template biopsy, had 80.0% sensitivity (12 of 15 cases), 73.5% specificity (36 of 49) and 75.0% accuracy (48 of 64) for focal therapy eligibility. Targeted cores alone yielded 73.3% sensitivity (11 of 15 cases), 47.9% specificity (23 of 48) and 54.7% accuracy (35 of 64). Gleason score and extension across the midline differed in 4 and 9, respectively, of the 13 cases that showed discordant biopsy and whole mount histology. CONCLUSIONS: Using intermediate risk eligibility criteria more than a third of men with a targeted biopsy proven lesion identified on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging would have been eligible for focal therapy. Eligibility determined by fusion biopsy was concordant with whole mount histology in 75% of cases. Improved selection criteria are needed to reliably determine focal therapy eligibility.

Value of Tracking Biopsy in Men Undergoing Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: We compared the upgrading rate obtained by resampling precise spots of prostate cancer (tracking biopsy) vs conventional systematic resampling during followup of men on active surveillance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 2009 to 2017 in 352 men prostate cancer was Gleason 3 + 3 in 268 and Gleason 3 + 4 in 84 at initial magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion biopsy. These men subsequently underwent a second fusion biopsy. At the first biopsy session all men underwent 12-core systematic biopsies and, when magnetic resonance imaging visible lesions were present, targeted biopsies. All cancerous sites were recorded electronically. During active surveillance at a second fusion biopsy session 6 to 18 months later tracking and systematic nontracking samples were obtained. The primary outcome measure was an increase in Gleason score (upgrading) at followup sampling, which was stratified by biopsy method. RESULTS: Overall 91 of the 352 men (25.9%) experienced upgrading at the second biopsy during a median 11-month interval. The upgrade rate in the Gleason 3 + 3 and 3 + 4 groups was 26.9% and 22.6%, respectively. The mean number of cores taken at second biopsy was 12.2 ± 3.3 in men with upgrading and 12.4 ± 4.1 in those who remained stable (p not significant). Men with grade 0 to 4 magnetic resonance imaging targets were all upgraded at approximately the same rate of 20% to 30% (p not significant). However, 58.8% of the men with grade 5 magnetic resonance imaging targets were upgraded. Of the 91 upgrades 48 (53%) were detected only by tracking. CONCLUSIONS: The tracking function of magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion biopsy warrants further study. When specific sites are resampled in men undergoing active surveillance of prostate cancer, upgrading is detected more often than by nontracking biopsy.

A 17-Gene Genomic Prostate Score Assay Provides Independent Information on Adverse Pathology in the Setting of Combined Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Fusion Targeted and Systematic Prostate Biopsy.

PURPOSE: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and biopsy based molecular tests such as the 17-gene Oncotype DX® Genomic Prostate Score™ assay are increasingly performed to improve risk stratification in men with clinically localized prostate cancer. The prostate score assay was previously shown to be a significant independent predictor of adverse pathology findings at radical prostatectomy in men diagnosed by systematic biopsies only. Therefore, we investigated the ability of the prostate score assay to predict adverse pathology findings in the setting of magnetic resonance imaging guided prostate biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified men diagnosed with NCCN® (National Comprehensive Cancer Network®) very low, low or intermediate risk prostate cancer who underwent simultaneous multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging fusion targeted and systematic prostate biopsy with subsequent radical prostatectomy within 6 months. Prostate score assay testing was performed on biopsy tissue with the highest Gleason score. The primary outcome of the study was adverse pathology findings, defined as Gleason score 4 + 3 or greater disease and/or pT3+ at radical prostatectomy. Independent predictors of adverse pathology findings were determined in a multivariable model to adjust for clinical parameters. RESULTS: A total of 134 men were eligible for primary analysis. On univariable analysis the UCLA score, magnetic resonance imaging, prostate score assay results and biopsy Gleason score were significant predictors of adverse pathology findings. After multivariable adjustment prostate score assay values remained a significant predictor of adverse pathology results (prostate score assay per 20 U OR 3.28, 95% CI 1.74-6.62, p <0.001). A wide and overlapping distribution of prostate score assay results was seen across PI-RADS® (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System) version 2 scores. CONCLUSIONS: The prostate score assay result is an independent predictor of adverse pathology findings in patients who were diagnosed with very low, low or intermediate risk prostate cancer in the setting of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging fusion prostate biopsy. This assay can be useful as an independent technology or an adjunct technology to multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging to individualize risk stratification of low and intermediate risk prostate cancer.

Development of a Nationally Representative Coordinated Registry Network for Prostate Ablation Technologies.

PURPOSE: The accumulation of data through a prospective, multicenter coordinated registry network is a practical way to gather real world evidence on the performance of novel prostate ablation technologies. Urological oncologists, targeted biopsy experts, industry representatives and representatives of the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) convened to discuss the role, feasibility and important data elements of a coordinated registry network to assess new and existing prostate ablation technologies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multiround Delphi consensus approach was performed which included the opinion of 15 expert urologists, representatives of the FDA and leadership from high intensity focused ultrasound device manufacturers. Stakeholders provided input in 3 consecutive rounds with conference calls following each round to obtain consensus on remaining items. Participants agreed that these elements initially developed for high intensity focused ultrasound are compatible with other prostate ablation technologies. Coordinated registry network elements were reviewed and supplemented with data elements from the FDA common study metrics. RESULTS: The working group reached consensus on capturing specific patient demographics, treatment details, oncologic outcomes, functional outcomes and complications. Validated health related quality of life questionnaires were selected to capture patient reported outcomes, including the IIEF-5 (International Index of Erectile Function-5), the I-PSS (International Prostate Symptom Score), the EPIC-26 (Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite-26) and the MSHQ-EjD (Male Sexual Health Questionnaire for Ejaculatory Dysfunction). Group consensus was to obtain followup multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and prostate biopsy approximately 12 months after ablation with additional imaging or biopsy performed as clinically indicated. CONCLUSIONS: A national prostate ablation coordinated registry network brings forth vital practice pattern and outcomes data for this emerging treatment paradigm in the United States. Our multiple stakeholder consensus identifies critical elements to evaluate new and existing energy modalities and devices.

MR-guided biopsy and focal therapy: new options for prostate cancer management.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Options for prostate cancer management are rapidly expanding. The recent advent of MRI technology has led to guided prostate biopsies by radiologists working in-bore or by urologists using MR/US fusion technology. The resulting tumor visualization now provides the option of focal therapy. Currently available are highly directed energies - focused ultrasound (HIFU), cryotherapy, and laser - all offering the hope of curing prostate cancer with few side effects. RECENT FINDINGS: MRI now enables visualization of many prostate cancers. MR/US fusion biopsy makes possible the targeted biopsy of suspicious lesions efficiently in the urology clinic. Several fusion devices are now commercially available. Focal therapy, a derivative of targeted biopsy, is reshaping the approach to treatment of some prostate cancers. Focal laser ablation, originally done in the MRI gantry (in-bore), promises to soon become feasible in a clinic setting (out-of-bore) under local anesthesia. Other focal therapy options, including HIFU and cryotherapy, are currently available. Herein are summarized outcomes data on focal therapy modalities. SUMMARY: MRI-guided biopsy is optimizing prostate cancer diagnosis. Focal therapy, an outgrowth of guided biopsy, promises to become a well tolerated and effective approach to treating many men with prostate cancer while minimizing the risks of incontinence and impotence from radical treatment.