Fusion US/MRI prostate biopsy using a Computer Aided Diagnostic (CAD) system.

344 - Trans-perineal MR/US fusion Prostate Biopsy: Evaluating the Benefits of Targeted Biopsy alone vs. Targeted Plus Random Biopsy in diagnosing clinically significant disease.

What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Transrectal gray-scale ultrasonography guided prostate biopsy sampling is the method for diagnosing prostate cancer (PC) in patients with an increased prostate specific antigen level and/or abnormal digital rectal examination. Several imaging strategies have been proposed to optimize the diagnostic value of biopsy sampling, although at the first biopsy nearly 10-30% of PC still remains undiagnosed. This study compares the PC detection rate when employing Colour Doppler ultransongraphy with or without the injection of SonoVue™ microbubble contrast agent, versus the transrectal ultrasongraphy-guided systematic biopsy sampling. The limited accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and the additional cost of using the contrast agent do not justify its routine application in PC detection. • To compare prostate cancer (PC) detection rate employing colour Doppler ultrasonography with or without SonoVue™ contrast agent with transrectal ultrasonography-guided systematic biopsy sampling. • A total of 300 patients with negative digital rectal examination and transrectal grey-scale ultrasonography, with PSA values ranging between 2.5 and 9.9 ng/mL, were randomized into three groups: 100 patients (group A) underwent transrectal ultrasonography-guided systematic bioptic sampling; 100 patients (group B) underwent colour Doppler ultrasonography, and 100 patients (group C) underwent colour Doppler ultrasonography before and during the injection of SonoVue™. • Contrast-enhanced targeted biopsies were sampled into hypervascularized areas of peripheral, transitional, apical or anterior prostate zones. • All the patients included in Groups B and C underwent a further 13 systematic prostate biopsies. The cancer detection rate was calculated for each group. • In 88 (29.3%) patients a histological diagnosis of PC was made, whereas 22 (7.4%) patients were diagnosed with high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia or atypical small acinar proliferation. • No significant differences were found among the three groups for cancer detection rate (P= 0.329). • Additionally, low sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of colour Doppler with or without SonoVue™ contrast agent were found. • Prostate cancer detection rate does not significantly improve with the use of colour Doppler ultrasonography with or without SonoVue™. • Although no collateral effects have been highlighted, the combined use of colour Doppler ultrasonography and SonoVue™ determines adjunctive costs and increases the mean time for taking a single prostate biopsy.

To investigate the effect of three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction-assisted cognitive fusion in targeted prostate biopsy. There was no significant difference in the detection rate of prostate cancer (PCa) between targeted biopsy and systematic biopsy, and there was significant difference in the detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) between targeted biopsy and systematic biopsy. In the low prostate total specific antigen (tPSA) group, there was no statistically significant difference in the detection rate of prostate cancer between the two biopsy modalities. However, compared with systematic puncture, targeted puncture had a higher detection rate for csPCa and a lower detection rate for clinically insignificant prostate cancer (ciPCa), and the difference was statistically significant. In the high tPSA group, there was no significant difference in the detection rate of PCa, csPCa, and ciPCa between the two biopsy types. Single needle positive rate of targeted puncture (29.77%) was significantly higher than that of systematic puncture (10.28%). The detection rate of csPCa in 3D reconstruction-assisted cognitive fusion targeted prostate biopsy is better than that of 12-needle systematic biopsy, which markedly improved the positive rate of prostate biopsy.

Prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly integrated within the prostate cancer (PCa) early detection pathway. To systematically evaluate the existing evidence regarding screening pathways incorporating MRI with targeted biopsy and assess their diagnostic value compared with prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening with systematic biopsy strategies. PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane/Central, Scopus, and Web of Science (through May 2023). Randomized clinical trials and prospective cohort studies were eligible if they reported data on the diagnostic utility of prostate MRI in the setting of PCa screening. Number of screened individuals, biopsy indications, biopsies performed, clinically significant PCa (csPCa) defined as International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade 2 or higher, and insignificant (ISUP1) PCas detected were extracted. The primary outcome was csPCa detection rate. Secondary outcomes included clinical insignificant PCa detection rate, biopsy indication rates, and the positive predictive value for the detection of csPCa. The generalized mixed-effect approach with pooled odds ratios (ORs) and random-effect models was used to compare the MRI-based and PSA-only screening strategies. Separate analyses were performed based on the timing of MRI (primary/sequential after a PSA test) and cutoff (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System [PI-RADS] score ≥3 or ≥4) for biopsy indication. Data were synthesized from 80 114 men from 12 studies. Compared with standard PSA-based screening, the MRI pathway (sequential screening, PI-RADS score ≥3 cutoff for biopsy) was associated with higher odds of csPCa when tests results were positive (OR, 4.15; 95% CI, 2.93-5.88; P ≤ .001), decreased odds of biopsies (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.22-0.36; P ≤ .001), and insignificant cancers detected (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.23-0.49; P = .002) without significant differences in the detection of csPCa (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.75-1.37; P = .86). Implementing a PI-RADS score of 4 or greater threshold for biopsy selection was associated with a further reduction in the odds of detecting insignificant PCa (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.05-0.97; P = .048) and biopsies performed (OR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.09-0.38; P = .01) without differences in csPCa detection (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.49-1.45; P = .22). The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that integrating MRI in PCa screening pathways is associated with a reduced number of unnecessary biopsies and overdiagnosis of insignificant PCa while maintaining csPCa detection as compared with PSA-only screening.

Background. Currently, about 80 % of men with low-grade prostate cancer (per ISUP 1 (International Society of Urological Pathology)) have indications for radical treatment. Overdiagnosis of low-grade cancer is associated with the use of systematic biopsy methods (standard transrectal, saturation) under ultrasound control for diagnosis verification. To improve prostate cancer diagnosis, the European Association of Urology (2019) recommended multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging before biopsy, and in case of detection of a suspicious lesion magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsy. In clinical practice, the most common method of MRI-targeted biopsy is multiparametric MRI ultrasound-guided (mpMRI/US) fusion biopsy. However, some studies show contradictory results in detection of prostate cancer using systematic and MRI-targeted biopsy techniques.Aim. To compare detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (ISUP ≥2) using mpMRI/US fusion, standard, and saturation biopsy.Materials and methods. The study included 96 patients. The following inclusion criteria were applied: prostate-specific antigen >2 ng/mL and/or detection of a suspicious lesion during digital rectal and/or transrectal ultrasound examination, and PI-RADS (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System) v.2.1 score ≥3. At the first stage, “unblinded” urologist performed a transperineal mpMRI/US fusion and saturation biopsies. At the second stage, “blinded” urologist performed standard transrectal biopsy. Clinically significant cancer was defined as ISUP ≥2.Results. Median age was 63 years, prostate volume – 47 cm3, prostate-specific antigen – 6.82 ng/mL. MpMRI/US fusion, standard, and saturation biopsies were comparable in regard to the rate of detection of clinically significant (29, 24, 28 %; p = 0.81) and clinically insignificant (25, 26, 35 %; p = 0.43) cancer. Overall prostate cancer detection rates were also similar: 54, 50, 63 %, respectively (p = 0.59). The percentages of positive cores in mpMRI/US fusion, standard, and saturation biopsies were 33, 10 and 13 %, respectively (p <0.01). The maximal core length in mpMRI/US was 6.4 mm, in standard biopsy – 6.35 mm, in saturation biopsy – 5.1 mm (p = 0.7).Conclusion. Detection rates of clinically significant, clinically insignificant prostate cancer and overall detection rate are comparable between systematic biopsy techniques and mpMRI/US fusion biopsy.

Systematic Biopsy of the Prostate can Be Omitted in Men with PI-RADS™ 5 and Prostate Specific Antigen Density Greater than 15.

MP53-05 CLINICALLY SIGNIFICANT PROSTATE CANCER DETECTION RATE OF PROSTATE IMAGING REPORTING AND DATA SYSTEM SCORE 4 IN THE PERIPHERAL ZONE

Purpose: To evaluate the detection rates of prostate cancer (PCa) and clinically significant prostate cancer (CSPCa) detection via target biopsy (TB), systematic biopsy (SB), and combined biopsy (CB) in patients with PI-RADS 5 lesions. Methods: Patients with at least one PI-RADS 5 lesion were retrospectively enrolled in a prospectively collected database. The patients underwent multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) followed by transrectal TB of PI-RADS 5 lesions and SB. The PCa and CSPCa detection rates and cores of TB and SB were compared with those of CB. Results: In 585 patients, prostate biopsy revealed PCa in 560 cases (95.73%) and CSPCa in 549 cases (93.85%). PCa was detected in T2 patients (93.13%, 217/233) and in T3/4 patients (97.44%, 343/352). CSPCa was detected in T2 patients (89.27%, 208/233) and in T3/4 patients (96.87%, 341/352). The positive rates of TB for T2/3/4, T3/4, and T2 were 94.02%, 96.21%, and 90.56%, respectively. SB added 1.71% (10/585) PCa and 1.37% (8/585) CSPCa detection to TB. There was no difference between TB and SB in detecting different stages of cancer (p > 0.05). In the biopsy core analysis, TB had fewer biopsy cores and a higher detection rate than SB (all p < 0.05). Conclusions: In patients with PI-RADS score 5 lesions, TB can achieve the same detection rate as, with fewer biopsy cores than, CB. SB adds minimal clinical value and can be omitted for these patients.

Introduction: Hematospermia is an uncommon presentation of prostate cancer. Following the introduction of MRI for patients with hematospermia we evaluated its use and effect on prostate biopsy and cancer detection rates. Materials and Methods: Analysis of patients attending our outpatient department over 2 years was undertaken. Diagnostic workup included digital rectal examination and PSA. Those with abnormal findings or persisting symptoms were offered prostate biopsy. In the second year MRI became available for patients with hematospermia. Abnormal MRI or persisting symptoms were offered biopsy. We compared the frequency of prostate biopsy and cancer detection in patients undergoing MRI and those not having imaging. Results: Forty-seven patients were referred with hematospermia. Nineteen patients did not undergo MRI; four received prostate biopsy with one adenocarcinoma found. Twenty-four patients had an MRI with 17 biopsies undertaken. Three biopsies revealed adenocarcinoma. In the MRI group 71% of patients underwent prostate biopsy but only 21% from the non-MRI group (p < 0.05). Prostate cancer detection rate in the MRI group was 18% whilst in the non-MRI group was 25% (p = 0.7). Conclusions: Our findings indicate that caution should be used with MRI as it can lead to an increase in prostate biopsy with no change in cancer detection rate.

Freehand transperineal prostate biopsy with a coaxial needle under local anesthesia: Experience from a single institution in Malaysia

To investigate the impact of implementing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasonography fusion technology on biopsy and prostate cancer (PCa) detection rates in men presenting with clinical suspicion for PCa in the clinical practice setting. We performed a review of 1808 consecutive men referred for elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level between 2011 and 2014. The study population was divided into two groups based on whether MRI was used as a risk stratification tool. Univariable and multivariable analyses of biopsy rates and overall and clinically significant PCa detection rates between groups were performed. The MRI and PSA-only groups consisted of 1020 and 788 patients, respectively. A total of 465 patients (45.6%) in the MRI group and 442 (56.1%) in the PSA-only group underwent biopsy, corresponding to an 18.7% decrease in the proportion of patients receiving biopsy in the MRI group (P < 0.001). Overall PCa (56.8% vs 40.7%; P < 0.001) and clinically significant PCa detection (47.3% vs 31.0%; P < 0.001) was significantly higher in the MRI vs the PSA-only group. In logistic regression analyses, the odds of overall PCa detection (odds ratio [OR] 1.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.29-2.35; P < 0.001) and clinically significant PCa detection (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.48-2.80; P < 0.001) were higher in the MRI than in the PSA-only group after adjusting for clinically relevant PCa variables. Among men presenting with clinical suspicion for PCa, addition of MRI increases detection of clinically significant cancers while reducing prostate biopsy rates when implemented in a clinical practice setting.

Concerns exist regarding the effects of 5-alpha reductase inhibitors (5-ARIs) on multipa-rametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection. Our objective is to analyze the effect of 5-ARI on the prostate imaging-reporting and data system (PI-RADS) distribution and csPCa and insignificant PCa (iPCa) detection. Among 2212 men with serum prostate-specific antigen levels of >3.0 ng/mL and/or suspicious digital rectal examinations who underwent mpMRI and targeted and/or systematic biopsies, 120 individuals exposed to 5-ARI treatment for over a year were identified. CsPCa was defined when the grade group (GG) was >2. The overall csPCa and iPCa detection rates were 44.6% and 18.8%, respectively. Since logistic regression revealed independent predictors of PCa, a randomized matched group of 236 individuals was selected for analysis. The PI-RADS distribution was comparable with 5-ARI exposure (p 0.685). The CsPCa detection rates in 5-ARI-naïve men and 5-ARI-exposed men were 52.6% and 47.4%, respectively (p 0.596). IPCa was detected in 37.6 and 62.5%, respectively (p 0.089). The tumor GG distribution based on 5-ARI exposure was similar (p 0.149) to the rates of csPCa and iPCa across the PI-RADS categories. We conclude that exposure to 5-ARI in suspected PCa men did not change the PI-RADS distribution and the csPCa and iPCa detection rates.

To assess the diagnostic value of an initial 24-sample transrectal ultrasound guided (TRUS) prostate biopsy protocol compared to the 10-core technique. We retrospectively reviewed the prostate biopsy database of consecutive men undergoing prostate biopsies under local anesthesia by using the 10 (Group A) and 24 (Group B) protocols. Men were stratified according to biopsy protocol and PSA levels. Exclusion criteria were age ≥ 75 years and PSA > 20 ng/mL. The Mann-Whitney U and Fisher's exact test were used for statistical analysis. Between April 2007 and August 2009, 869 men underwent TRUS prostate biopsies of which 379 were eligible for the study. Group A (10-cores) consisted of 243 (64.11%) men and group B (24-cores) included 139 (35.89%) men. The overall prostate cancer detection rate was 39.09% and 34.55% in Group A and B, respectively (p = 0.43). An overall 9.8% increase in Gleason 7 detection rate was found in Group B (p = 0.24). The high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN) detection rate in men with negative initial biopsies was 15.54% and 35.55% in Group A and B, respectively (p < 0.001). In patients with PSA < 10 ng/mL, the 24-core technique increased Gleason 7 detection rate by 13.4% (p = 0.16) and HGPIN by 23.4% (p = 0.0008), compared to the 10 core technique. The 24-core technique increased the concordance between needle biopsy and prostatectomy specimen compared to 10-core technique (p < 0.002). The initial 24-core prostate biopsy protocol did not show any benefit in the detection of prostate cancer compared to the 10-core technique. However, it improved the HGPIN detection and the correlation between biopsy results and radical prostatectomy Gleason score in men with lower PSA levels.

338 Background: Micro-Ultrasound (MicroUS) is a new imaging modality capable of identifying prostate cancer (PCa). Prior evaluation of MicroUS and multiparametric MRI (MRI) have demonstrated comparable accuracy but are limited by relying on biopsy pathology for ground truth. There are no available studies that comprehensively evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and extraprostatic extension (EPE) of MicroUS, MRI, and PSMA PET/CT (PSMA) against wholemount histopathology (WMHP) as the reference. Methods: Patients with PCa who underwent MicroUS and MRI before radical prostatectomy were included. Among the included patients, a subgroup analysis was performed in patients with a PSMA scan. Imaging scans and WMHP findings were translated into involvement on a standardized 36 sector map. Accuracy in determining the PCa, csPCa (GG≥2) and EPE was assessed using receiver-operating-characteristic curve analysis (AUC). Results: The final analysis included 25 patients, 19 of whom underwent PSMA scan. The lesion-level PCa and csPCa detection rates were 55% and 72%, 57% and 75%, 53% and 70% for Micro-US, MRI and PSMA, respectively (Table). For the sector-level analysis, the AUCs of MRI were higher than that of MicroUS and PSMA in identifying PCa, and csPCa (P&lt;0.05). MicroUS and PSMA had comparable sector-level PCa and csPCa AUCs. The AUCs of MRI and PSMA were higher than MicroUS for sector-level EPE (P&lt;0.05). The AUCs for prediction of patient-level EPE were 0.68, 0.69 and 0.54 for MicroUS, MRI and PSMA, respectively (p = NS). Patient level PCa, csPCa, and for specific pathologic features was similar among imaging modalities. Conclusions: MicroUS showed good reliability in identifying csPCa and patient-level EPE. At the patient level, its performance is comparable to that of MRI. MRI performs better at the sector-level. Diagnostic accuracy and EPE staging for MicroUS, MRI, and PSMA PET/CT. N = 25 MicroUS Multiparametric MRI PSMA PET CT P-Value PCa Sector-Level AUC 0.67 (0.64, 0.71) 0.71 (0.68, 0.75) - 0.03 csPCa Sector-Level AUC 0.69 (0.65, 0.72) 0.74 (0.70, 0.77) - 0.01 EPE Patient-Level AUC 0.68 (0.47, 0.88) 0.69 (0.51, 0.87) - 0.93 EPE Sector Level AUC 0.57 (0.47, 0.67) 0.79 (0.65, 0.93) - &lt;0.01 N = 19 PCa Sector-Level AUC 0.66 (0.61, 0.71) 0.62 (0.57, 0.68) 0.62 (0.57, 0.68) 0.03*, &lt;0.01** csPCa Sector-Level AUC 0.67 (0.63, 0.71) 0.71 (0.67, 0.75) 0.64 (0.60, 0.67) 0.06*, &lt;0.01** EPE Patient-Level AUC 0.69 (0.51, 0.87) 0.72 (0.51, 0.94) 0.54 (0.30, 0.78) 0.32*, 0.28** EPE Sector Level AUC 0.54 (0.45, 0.62) 0.78 (0.63, 0.92) 0.73 (0.58, 0.87) 0.01* , 0.50** Pathologic Feature Detection Rates for MicroUS, mpMRI, and PSMA PET CT MicroUS Multiparametric MRI PSMA PET CT P-Value PCa (%) 55.3 57.4 52.8 0.81 csPCa (%) 72.2 75.0 70.4 0.78 Index Lesion (%) 96.0 92.0 84.2 0.26 Cribiform/IDC (%) 94.1 100 83.3 0.08 EPE (%) 44.4 66.7 62.5 0.17 *MicroUS vs. PSMA PET/CT. **mpMRI vs PSMA PET/CT.

Prostate cancer detection rate in Indonesian men