Search

Purpose: Patients with suspicion of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPC) on multiparametric prostate MRI (mpMRI) but negative or inconclusive MRI/US fusion-guided biopsy (FB) can be challenging in clinical practice. To assess the utility of MRI in-bore biopsy (IB) in patients with discordant imaging and histopathological findings after FB., Methods: Consecutive patients with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) category 4 or 5 on mpMRI at 3T after FB without histologically confirmed csPC who underwent IB between 01/2014 and 05/2022, were retrospectively included. The primary objective was to assess the detection rate of csPC. Secondary objectives were to analyze clinical parameters, MRI parameters, and lesion localization., Results: In the final cohort of 51 patients, the IB resulted in an overall detection rate of 71% for PC and 47% for csPC. Furthermore, in 55% of cases with initial low-grade PC, the Gleason score was upgraded after IB. CsPC was often detected apical and/or anterior. The detection rate for PC was 58% in PI-RADS category 4 and 94% in PI-RADS category 5 (csPC 39% and 61%, respectively). Patients with csPC had statistically significant smaller prostate volumes, a higher PI-RADS category, a higher prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD), and were older., Conclusions: For a relevant proportion of patients with PI-RADS category 4 or 5 and negative or inconclusive findings on previous FB, but with persistent suspicion of csPC, a subsequent IB verified the presence of csPC. Therefore, IB can be a backup in cases of uncertainty., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Die Autorinnen/Autoren geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Dynamic contrast enhanced imaging (DCE) as an integral part of multiparametric prostate magnet resonance imaging (mpMRI) can be evaluated using qualitative, semi-quantitative, or quantitative assessment methods. Aim of this study is to analyze the clinical benefits of these evaluations of DCE regarding clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection and grading. 209 DCE data sets of 103 consecutive patients with mpMRI (T2, DWI, and DCE) and subsequent MRI-(in-bore)-biopsy were retrospectively analyzed. Qualitative DCE evaluation according to PI-RADS v2.1, semi-quantitative (curve type; DCE score according to PI-RADS v1), and quantitative Tofts analyses (Ktrans, kep, and ve) as well as PI-RADS v1 and v2.1 overall classification of 209 lesions (92 PCa, 117 benign lesions) were performed. Of each DCE assessment method, cancer detection, discrimination of csPCa, and localization were assessed and compared to histopathology findings. All DCE analyses (p<0.01-0.05), except ve (p = 0.02), showed significantly different results for PCa and benign lesions in the peripheral zone (PZ) with area under the curve (AUC) values of up to 0.92 for PI-RADS v2.1 overall classification. In the transition zone (TZ) only the qualitative DCE evalulation within PI-RADS (v1 and v2.1) could distinguish between PCa and benign lesions (p<0.01; AUC = 0.95). None of the DCE parameters could differentiate csPCa from non-significant (ns) PCa (p ≥ 0.1). Qualitative analysis of DCE within mpMRI according to PI-RADS version 2.1 showed excellent results regarding (cs)PCa detection. Semi-quantitative and quantitative parameters provided no additional improvements. DCE alone wasn't able to discriminate csPCa from nsPCa., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: The Rotterdam European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer risk calculators (ERSPC-RCs) help to avoid unnecessary transrectal ultrasound-guided systematic biopsies (TRUS-Bx). Multivariable risk stratification could also avoid unnecessary biopsies following multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)., Objective: To construct MRI-ERSPC-RCs for the prediction of any- and high-grade (Gleason score ≥3 + 4) prostate cancer (PCa) in 12-core TRUS-Bx±MRI-targeted biopsy (MRI-TBx) by adding Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) and age as parameters to the ERSPC-RC3 (biopsy-naïve men) and ERSPC-RC4 (previously biopsied men)., Design, Setting, and Participants: A total of 961 men received mpMRI and 12-core TRUS-Bx±MRI-TBx (in case of PI-RADS ≥3) in five institutions. Data of 504 biopsy-naïve and 457 previously biopsied men were used to adjust the ERSPC-RC3 and ERSPC-RC4., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Logistic regression models were constructed. The areas under the curve (AUCs) of the original ERSPC-RCs and MRI-ERSPC-RCs (including PI-RADS and age) for any- and high-grade PCa were compared. Decision curve analysis was performed to assess the clinical utility of the MRI-ERSPC-RCs., Results and Limitations: MRI-ERSPC-RC3 had a significantly higher AUC for high-grade PCa compared with the ERSPC-RC3: 0.84 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.81-0.88) versus 0.76 (95% CI 0.71-0.80, p<0.01). Similarly, MRI-ERSPC-RC4 had a higher AUC for high-grade PCa compared with the ERSPC-RC4: 0.85 (95% CI 0.81-0.89) versus 0.74 (95% CI 0.69-0.79, p<0.01). Unlike for the MRI-ERSPC-RC3, decision curve analysis showed clear net benefit of the MRI-ERSPC-RC4 at a high-grade PCa risk threshold of ≥5%. Using a ≥10% high-grade PCa risk threshold to biopsy for the MRI-ERSPC-RC4, 36% biopsies are saved, missing low- and high-grade PCa, respectively, in 15% and 4% of men who are not biopsied., Conclusions: We adjusted the ERSPC-RCs for the prediction of any- and high-grade PCa in 12-core TRUS-Bx±MRI-TBx. Although the ability of the MRI-ERSPC-RC3 for biopsy-naïve men to avoid biopsies remains questionable, application of the MRI-ERSPC-RC4 in previously biopsied men in our cohort would have avoided 36% of biopsies, missing high-grade PCa in 4% of men who would not have received a biopsy., Patient Summary: We have constructed magnetic resonance imaging-based Rotterdam European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (MRI-ERSPC) risk calculators for prostate cancer prediction in transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy and MRI-targeted biopsy by incorporating age and Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System score into the original ERSPC risk calculators. The MRI-ERSPC risk calculator for previously biopsied men could be used to avoid one-third of biopsies following MRI., (Copyright © 2018 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

Purpose: This study evaluates the feasibility of performing less than two core biopsies per MRI-lesion when performing targeted MR-guided in-bore prostate biopsy., Methods: Retrospectively evaluated were 1545 biopsy cores of 774 intraprostatic lesions (two cores per lesion) in 290 patients (66 ± 7.8 years; median PSA 8.2 ng/ml) regarding prostate cancer (PCa) detection, Gleason score, and tumor infiltration of the first (FBC) compared to the second biopsy core (SBC). Biopsies were acquired under in-bore MR-guidance., Results: For the biopsy cores, 491 were PCa positive, 239 of 774 (31 %) were FBC and 252 of 771 (33 %) were SBC (p = 0.4). Patient PCa detection rate based on the FBC vs. SBC were 46 % vs. 48 % (p = 0.6). For clinically significant PCa (Gleason score ≥4 + 3 = 7) the detection rate was 18 % for both, FBC and SBC (p = 0.9). Six hundred and eighty-seven SBC (89 %) showed no histologic difference. On the lesion level, 40 SBC detected PCa with negative FBC (7.5 %). Twenty SBC showed a Gleason upgrade from 3 + 3 = 6 to ≥3 + 4 = 7 (2.6 %) and 4 to ≥4 + 3 = 7 (0.5 %)., Conclusion: The benefit of a second targeted biopsy core per suspicious MRI-lesion is likely minor, especially regarding PCa detection rate and significant Gleason upgrading. Therefore, a further reduction of biopsy cores is reasonable when performing a targeted MR-guided in-bore prostate biopsy., Key Points: • Higher PI-RADS overall score (IV-V) correlated well with PCa detection rate • In more than 80 % SBC was concordant regarding overall PCa detection • In almost 90 % there was no Gleason upgrading by the SBC • Only 2/54 (3.7 %) csPCa was missed when the SBC was omitted • For IB-GB a further reduction of biopsy cores is reasonable.

Purpose: The objective of this study was to compare patient comfort between MR-guided in-bore prostate biopsy (IB-GB) and MRI/ultrasound fusion-guided prostate biopsy (FUS-GB) with additional systematic 12-core transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided biopsy within a prospective randomized trial., Methods: Two hundred and ten consecutive patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either IB-GB and prior intrarectal instillation of a 2% lidocaine gel (n = 106) or FUS-GB plus additional systematic 12-core TRUS-guided biopsy and prior application of a periprostatic nerve block (PPNB) with 2% mepivacaine (n = 104). The maximal procedural pain (MPP) on a 0-10 visual analog scale and the operating room time were recorded for each biopsy session., Results: Baseline characteristics and mean number of targeted biopsy cores (5.6 ± 0.8 vs 5.4 ± 1.2 for IB-GB and FUS-GB, respectively; p = 0.278) were similar in both study arms. In relation to the IB-GB arm, the total number of biopsy cores in the FUS-GB arm, including the systematic 12-core TRUS-guided biopsy, was significantly higher (17.4 ± 1.2; p < 0.001). Patients with IB-GB had significantly higher MPP scores (2.95 ± 2.15) compared with subjects with FUS-GB (1.95 ± 1.56; p < 0.001). FUS-GB required significantly less time (28.22 ± 11.61 min) in comparison with IB-GB (42.09 ± 11.37 min; p < 0.001)., Conclusions: The PPNB can easily be administered just prior to performing FUS-GB. Thus, patients have significantly lower pain levels in comparison with IB-GB, which is usually done with intrarectal anesthetic gels. Although the addition of a systematic 12-core TRUS-guided biopsy significantly increases the number of biopsy cores, FUS-GB still requires significantly less time in comparison with IB-GB.

Objective: The objective of our study was to evaluate transrectal MRI-guided in-bore biopsy in patients who either were biopsy-naive (primary biopsy) or had undergone at least one previous negative transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (secondary biopsy) with regard to cancer detection rate, tumor localization, and lesion size., Materials and Methods: In total, 1602 biopsy cores from 297 consecutive patients (mean ± SD, 66.1 ± 7.8 years; median prostate-specific antigen value, 8.2 ng/mL) in primary (n = 160) and secondary (n = 137) prostate biopsy settings were evaluated in this retrospective study. All patients previously underwent prostate MRI (T2-weighted imaging, DWI, dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging) at 3 T. All described lesions were biopsied with MRI-guided in-bore biopsy and were examined histologically., Results: In 148 patients, overall 511 cores were positive for prostate cancer. Clinically significant prostate cancer (any Gleason pattern ≥ 4) was found in 82.4% of patients. The prostate cancer detection rate for patients who underwent primary biopsies was 55.6% and was 43.1% for patients who underwent secondary biopsies. In patients with primary versus secondary biopsies, prostate cancer was located peripherally in 62.9% versus 49.5% (p = 0.04), in the transition zone in 27.4% versus 27.5% (p = 1.0), and in the anterior stroma in 10.3% versus 22.9% (p < 0.01), respectively. The prostate cancer detection rates for patients with smaller prostate volumes (< 30 vs 30-50 vs > 50 mL; p < 0.01) or for patients with larger lesions (> 0.5 vs 0.25-0.5 vs < 0.25 cm(3); p < 0.01) were significantly higher., Conclusion: MRI-guided in-bore biopsy led to high detection rates in primary and secondary prostate biopsies. Prostate cancer detection rates were significantly higher for patients with larger lesions and smaller prostate glands. In patients who underwent secondary biopsies, prostate cancer was located in the anterior stroma at a significantly more frequent rate.

Background: A significant proportion of prostate cancers (PCas) are missed by conventional transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS-GB). It remains unclear whether the combined approach using targeted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy (FUS-GB) and systematic TRUS-GB is superior to targeted MRI-guided in-bore biopsy (IB-GB) for PCa detection., Objective: To compare PCa detection between IB-GB alone and FUS-GB + TRUS-GB in patients with at least one negative TRUS-GB and prostate-specific antigen ≥4 ng/ml., Design, Setting, and Participants: Patients were prospectively randomized after multiparametric prostate MRI to IB-GB (arm A) or FUS-GB + TRUS-GB (arm B) from November 2011 to July 2014., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: The study was powered at 80% to demonstrate an overall PCa detection rate of ≥60% in arm B compared to 40% in arm A. Secondary endpoints were the distribution of highest Gleason scores, the rate of detection of significant PCa (Gleason ≥7), the number of biopsy cores to detect one (significant) PCa, the positivity rate for biopsy cores, and tumor involvement per biopsy core., Results and Limitations: The study was halted after interim analysis because the primary endpoint was not met. The trial enrolled 267 patients, of whom 210 were analyzed (106 randomized to arm A and 104 to arm B). PCa detection was 37% in arm A and 39% in arm B (95% confidence interval for difference, -16% to 11%; p=0.7). Detection rates for significant PCa (29% vs 32%; p=0.7) and the highest percentage tumor involvement per biopsy core (48% vs 42%; p=0.4) were similar between the arms. The mean number of cores was 5.6 versus 17 (p<0.001). A limitation is the limited number of patients because of early cessation of accrual., Conclusions: This trial failed to identify an important improvement in detection rate for the combined biopsy approach over MRI-targeted biopsy alone. A prospective comparison between MRI-targeted biopsy alone and systematic TRUS-GB is justified., Patient Summary: Our randomized study showed similar prostate cancer detection rates between targeted prostate biopsy guided by magnetic resonance imaging and the combination of targeted biopsy and systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. An important improvement in detection rates using the combined biopsy approach can be excluded., (Copyright © 2015 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy is increasingly performed to diagnose prostate cancer. However, there is a lack of well controlled, prospective trials to support this treatment method. We prospectively compared magnetic resonance imaging guided in-bore biopsy with standard systematic transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy in biopsy naïve men with increased prostate specific antigen., Materials and Methods: We performed a prospective study in 132 biopsy naïve men with increased prostate specific antigen (greater than 4 ng/ml). After 3 Tesla functional multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging patients were referred for magnetic resonance imaging guided in-bore biopsy of prostate lesions (maximum 3) followed by standard systematic transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy (12 cores). We analyzed the detection rates of prostate cancer and significant prostate cancer (greater than 5 mm total cancer length or any Gleason pattern greater than 3)., Results: A total of 128 patients with a mean ± SD age of 66.1 ± 8.1 years met all study requirements. Median prostate specific antigen was 6.7 ng/ml (IQR 5.1-9.0). Transrectal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsies provided the same 53.1% detection rate, including 79.4% and 85.3%, respectively, for significant prostate cancer. Magnetic resonance imaging and transrectal ultrasound guided biopsies missed 7.8% and 9.4% of clinically significant prostate cancers, respectively. Magnetic resonance imaging biopsy required significantly fewer cores and revealed a higher percent of cancer involvement per biopsy core (each p <0.01). Combining the 2 methods provided a 60.9% detection rate with an 82.1% rate for significant prostate cancer., Conclusions: Magnetic resonance imaging guided in-bore and systematic transrectal ultrasound guided biopsies achieved equally high detection rates in biopsy naïve patients with increased prostate specific antigen. Magnetic resonance imaging guided in-bore biopsies required significantly fewer cores and revealed a significantly higher percent of cancer involvement per biopsy core., (Copyright © 2014 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: This study evaluated the accuracy of MR sequences [T2-, diffusion-weighted, and dynamic contrast-enhanced (T2WI, DWI, and DCE) imaging] at 3T, based on the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) scoring system [Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS)] using MR-guided in-bore prostate biopsies as reference standard., Methods: In 235 consecutive patients [aged 65.7 ± 7.9 years; median prostate-specific antigen (PSA) 8 ng/ml] with multiparametric prostate MRI (mp-MRI), 566 lesions were scored according to PI-RADS. Histology of all lesions was obtained by targeted MR-guided in-bore biopsy., Results: In 200 lesions, biopsy revealed prostate cancer (PCa). The area under the curve (AUC) for cancer detection was 0.70 (T2WI), 0.80 (DWI), and 0.74 (DCE). A combination of T2WI + DWI, T2WI + DCE, and DWI + DCE achieved an AUC of 0.81, 0.78, and 0.79. A summed PI-RADS score of T2WI + DWI + DCE achieved an AUC of 0.81. For higher grade PCa (primary Gleason pattern ≥ 4), the AUC was 0.85 for T2WI + DWI, 0.84 for T2WI + DCE, 0.86 for DWI + DCE, and 0.87 for T2WI + DWI + DCE. The AUC for T2WI + DWI + DCE for transitional-zone PCa was 0.73, and for the peripheral zone 0.88. Regarding higher-grade PCa, AUC for transitional-zone PCa was 0.88, and for peripheral zone 0.96., Conclusion: The combination of T2WI + DWI + DCE achieved the highest test accuracy, especially in patients with higher-grade PCa. The use of ≤2 MR sequences led to lower AUC in higher-grade and peripheral-zone cancers., Key Points: • T2WI + DWI + DCE achieved the highest accuracy in patients with higher grade PCa • T2WI + DWI + DCE was more accurate for peripheral- than for transitional-zone PCa • DCE increased PCa detection accuracy in the peripheral zone • DWI was the leading sequence in the transitional zone.

Background: To estimate potential malignant lesions within the prostate gland, the usage of a scoring system has recently been proposed by a European consensus meeting., Purpose: To prospectively investigate a scoring system for functional prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) using in-bore MR-guided prostate biopsy at 3-T., Material and Methods: Prostate MRI examinations of 59 patients (between February 2011 and May 2012) with no known prostate cancer, elevated prostate specific antigen (PSA) level, and unsuspicious digital rectal examination were included in the study. In each patient up to three lesions were defined and scored using a 5-point scoring system for each MR sequence (T2-weighted images, diffusion-weighted imaging, dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging). Following MRI-guided in-bore biopsy these lesions were correlated to the histopathological findings., Results: A total number of 144 lesions were defined in 59 patients. In 28 patients (51 lesions) MR-guided in-bore biopsy was positive for tumor (Gleason grade 6 or higher). A cut-off limit of 10 or more points in summation of the individual scores of all three sequences was used, leading to a 90% sensitivity, 63% specificity, 58% positive predictive value, and 92% negative predictive value., Conclusion: A simple 5-point scoring system of functional prostate MRI achieves excellent sensitivity and moderate specificity for directing 3-T-guided prostate biopsy relative to the histopathological findings.

Objectives: The recent European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) guidelines for evaluation and reporting of prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) include the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS). The aim of this study was to investigate the inter-reader agreement of this scoring system., Methods: One hundred and sixty-four lesions in 67 consecutive patients with elevated prostate-specific antigen and previously negative trans-rectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided biopsy were scored retrospectively by three blinded readers using PI-RADS. Mp-MRI was performed at 3 T using T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced imagings (T2WI, DWI, DCE-MRI). Histology of all lesions was obtained by in-bore MRI-guided biopsy. Cohen's kappa statistics were calculated for all readers., Results: Inter-reader agreement for all lesions was good to moderate (T2WI, κ = 0.55; DWI, κ = 0.64; DCE-MRI, κ = 0.65). For tumour lesions it was good (T2WI, κ = 0.66; DWI, κ = 0.80; DCE-MRI, κ = 0.63) and for benign lesions moderate to good (T2WI, κ = 0.46; DWI, κ = 0.52; DCE-MRI, κ = 0.67). Using an overall PI-RADS score with a threshold of ≥10, we achieved a sensitivity of 85.7 %, and negative predictive value of 90.1 % for biopsied lesions., Conclusion: PI-RADS score shows good to moderate inter-reader agreement and enables standardised evaluation of prostate mp-MRI, with high sensitivity and negative predictive value., Key Points: • The European Society of Urogenital Radiology recently published guidelines for prostate MRI. • We have evaluated inter-reader agreement of ESUR scoring for multiparametric prostate MRI. • PI-RADS shows good to moderate inter-reader agreement and is clinically applicable. • PI-RADS achieves in our series high sensitivity and negative predictive value for biopsied lesions. • PI-RADS can be used as standardised scoring system in prostate cancer detection.