MRI-Targeted, Systematic, and Combined Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis
Michael Ahdoot, Andrew R Wilbur, Sarah E Reese, Amir H Lebastchi, Sherif Mehralivand, Patrick T Gomella, Jonathan Bloom, Sandeep Gurram, Minhaj Siddiqui, Paul Pinsky, Howard Parnes, W Marston Linehan, Maria Merino, Peter L Choyke, Joanna H Shih, Baris Turkbey, Bradford J Wood, Peter A Pinto, Michael Ahdoot, Andrew R Wilbur, Sarah E Reese, Amir H Lebastchi, Sherif Mehralivand, Patrick T Gomella, Jonathan Bloom, Sandeep Gurram, Minhaj Siddiqui, Paul Pinsky, Howard Parnes, W Marston Linehan, Maria Merino, Peter L Choyke, Joanna H Shih, Baris Turkbey, Bradford J Wood, Peter A Pinto
Abstract
Background: The use of 12-core systematic prostate biopsy is associated with diagnostic inaccuracy that contributes to both overdiagnosis and underdiagnosis of prostate cancer. Biopsies performed with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) targeting may reduce the misclassification of prostate cancer in men with MRI-visible lesions.
Methods: Men with MRI-visible prostate lesions underwent both MRI-targeted and systematic biopsy. The primary outcome was cancer detection according to grade group (i.e., a clustering of Gleason grades). Grade group 1 refers to clinically insignificant disease; grade group 2 or higher, cancer with favorable intermediate risk or worse; and grade group 3 or higher, cancer with unfavorable intermediate risk or worse. Among the men who underwent subsequent radical prostatectomy, upgrading and downgrading of grade group from biopsy to whole-mount histopathological analysis of surgical specimens were recorded. Secondary outcomes were the detection of cancers of grade group 2 or higher and grade group 3 or higher, cancer detection stratified by previous biopsy status, and grade reclassification between biopsy and radical prostatectomy.
Results: A total of 2103 men underwent both biopsy methods; cancer was diagnosed in 1312 (62.4%) by a combination of the two methods (combined biopsy), and 404 (19.2%) underwent radical prostatectomy. Cancer detection rates on MRI-targeted biopsy were significantly lower than on systematic biopsy for grade group 1 cancers and significantly higher for grade groups 3 through 5 (P<0.01 for all comparisons). Combined biopsy led to cancer diagnoses in 208 more men (9.9%) than with either method alone and to upgrading to a higher grade group in 458 men (21.8%). However, if only MRI-target biopsies had been performed, 8.8% of clinically significant cancers (grade group ≥3) would have been misclassified. Among the 404 men who underwent subsequent radical prostatectomy, combined biopsy was associated with the fewest upgrades to grade group 3 or higher on histopathological analysis of surgical specimens (3.5%), as compared with MRI-targeted biopsy (8.7%) and systematic biopsy (16.8%).
Conclusions: Among patients with MRI-visible lesions, combined biopsy led to more detection of all prostate cancers. However, MRI-targeted biopsy alone underestimated the histologic grade of some tumors. After radical prostatectomy, upgrades to grade group 3 or higher on histopathological analysis were substantially lower after combined biopsy. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and others; Trio Study ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00102544.).
Conflict of interest statement
No other potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.
Copyright © 2020 Massachusetts Medical Society.
Figures
![Figure 1.. Enrollment and Outcomes.](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/7323919/bin/nihms-1590450-f0001.jpg)
![Figure 2.. Prostate Cancer Detection According to…](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/7323919/bin/nihms-1590450-f0002.jpg)
Figure 3.. Cross-Tabulation of Highest Grade Group…
Figure 3.. Cross-Tabulation of Highest Grade Group Detected by Biopsy Method.
Shown are the numbers…
Figure 4.. Downgrading and Upgrading of Cancer…
Figure 4.. Downgrading and Upgrading of Cancer Grade Group after Whole-Mount Histopathological Analysis, According to…
- MRI, TRUS or both?Sidaway P. Sidaway P. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2020 May;17(5):274. doi: 10.1038/s41571-020-0358-2. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2020. PMID: 32203276 No abstract available.
- MRI, TRUS or both?Sidaway P. Sidaway P. Nat Rev Urol. 2020 May;17(5):256. doi: 10.1038/s41585-020-0311-2. Nat Rev Urol. 2020. PMID: 32218543 No abstract available.
- Re: MRI-Targeted, Systematic, and Combined Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis.Radtke JP, Hadaschik B. Radtke JP, et al. Eur Urol. 2020 Aug;78(2):291-292. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.04.014. Epub 2020 May 4. Eur Urol. 2020. PMID: 32381459 No abstract available.
- Re: MRI-Targeted, Systematic, and Combined Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis.Rodríguez Sánchez L, Macek P, Barbé Y, Cathelineau X, Sanchez-Salas R. Rodríguez Sánchez L, et al. Eur Urol. 2020 Sep;78(3):469-470. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.04.022. Epub 2020 May 6. Eur Urol. 2020. PMID: 32387122 No abstract available.
- Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis.Scholz M, Lam R, Turner J. Scholz M, et al. N Engl J Med. 2020 Jun 4;382(23):2270. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc2007985. N Engl J Med. 2020. PMID: 32492311 No abstract available.
- Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis.Stanzione A, Imbriaco M, Cuocolo R. Stanzione A, et al. N Engl J Med. 2020 Jun 4;382(23):2270-2271. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc2007985. N Engl J Med. 2020. PMID: 32492312 No abstract available.
- Commentary on "MRI-Targeted, Systematic, and Combined Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis".George AK, Margolis DJ. George AK, et al. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2021 Mar;216(3):584. doi: 10.2214/AJR.20.24319. Epub 2021 Jan 21. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2021. PMID: 32755211 No abstract available.
- Re: MRI-Targeted, Systematic, and Combined Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis.Taneja SS. Taneja SS. J Urol. 2020 Dec;204(6):1382-1383. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000001283.02. Epub 2020 Sep 23. J Urol. 2020. PMID: 32960703 No abstract available.
- Biopsy in Prostate Cancer. More Is Better.Ibarra-Rovira JJ, Kundra V. Ibarra-Rovira JJ, et al. Radiol Imaging Cancer. 2020 Jul 31;2(4):e204019. doi: 10.1148/rycan.2020204019. eCollection 2020 Jul. Radiol Imaging Cancer. 2020. PMID: 33778726 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
- Pre-biopsy 3-Tesla MRI and targeted biopsy of the index prostate cancer: correlation with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.Patel U, Dasgupta P, Challacombe B, Cahill D, Brown C, Patel R, Kirby R. Patel U, et al. BJU Int. 2017 Jan;119(1):82-90. doi: 10.1111/bju.13525. Epub 2016 Jun 3. BJU Int. 2017. PMID: 27153933
- Prostate cancer screening using a combination of risk-prediction, MRI, and targeted prostate biopsies (STHLM3-MRI): a prospective, population-based, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial.Nordström T, Discacciati A, Bergman M, Clements M, Aly M, Annerstedt M, Glaessgen A, Carlsson S, Jäderling F, Eklund M, Grönberg H; STHLM3 study group. Nordström T, et al. Lancet Oncol. 2021 Sep;22(9):1240-1249. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00348-X. Epub 2021 Aug 13. Lancet Oncol. 2021. PMID: 34391509 Clinical Trial.
- The Key Combined Value of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging, and Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted and Concomitant Systematic Biopsies for the Prediction of Adverse Pathological Features in Prostate Cancer Patients Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy.Gandaglia G, Ploussard G, Valerio M, Mattei A, Fiori C, Roumiguié M, Fossati N, Stabile A, Beauval JB, Malavaud B, Scuderi S, Barletta F, Moschini M, Zamboni S, Rakauskas A, Tian Z, Karakiewicz PI, De Cobelli F, Porpiglia F, Montorsi F, Briganti A. Gandaglia G, et al. Eur Urol. 2020 Jun;77(6):733-741. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.09.005. Epub 2019 Sep 21. Eur Urol. 2020. PMID: 31547938
- Impact of prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging on biopsy and radical prostatectomy grade concordance.Shoag JE, Cai PY, Gross MD, Gaffney C, Li D, Mao J, Nowels M, Scherr DS, Sedrakyan A, Hu JC. Shoag JE, et al. Cancer. 2020 Jul 1;126(13):2986-2990. doi: 10.1002/cncr.32821. Epub 2020 Apr 22. Cancer. 2020. PMID: 32320063
- Magnetic resonance imaging in active surveillance of prostate cancer: a systematic review.Schoots IG, Petrides N, Giganti F, Bokhorst LP, Rannikko A, Klotz L, Villers A, Hugosson J, Moore CM. Schoots IG, et al. Eur Urol. 2015 Apr;67(4):627-36. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.10.050. Epub 2014 Nov 15. Eur Urol. 2015. PMID: 25511988 Review.
- Review of Active Surveillance in Underrepresented and High-Risk Populations: Feasibility and Safety.Fastenau J, Jain K, Popovic A, Kovac E. Fastenau J, et al. Curr Urol Rep. 2023 Mar 30. doi: 10.1007/s11934-023-01158-5. Online ahead of print. Curr Urol Rep. 2023. PMID: 36995563 Review.
- Incidence and Predicting Factors of Histopathological Features at Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy in the mpMRI Era: Results of a Single Tertiary Referral Center.Di Mauro E, Di Bello F, Califano G, Morra S, Creta M, Celentano G, Abate M, Fraia A, Pezone G, Marino C, Cilio S, Capece M, La Rocca R, Imbimbo C, Longo N, Colla' Ruvolo C. Di Mauro E, et al. Medicina (Kaunas). 2023 Mar 21;59(3):625. doi: 10.3390/medicina59030625. Medicina (Kaunas). 2023. PMID: 36984626 Free PMC article.
- [Multiparametric MRI of the prostate: requirements and principles regarding diagnostic reporting].Ursprung S, Herrmann J, Nikolaou K, Harland N, Bedke J, Seith F, Zinsser D. Ursprung S, et al. Urologie. 2023 Mar 20. doi: 10.1007/s00120-023-02064-x. Online ahead of print. Urologie. 2023. PMID: 36941383 Review. German.
- [Systematic or targeted fusion-guided biopsy].Handke AE, Albers P, Schimmöller L, Bonekamp D, Asbach P, Schlemmer HP, Hadaschik BA, Radtke JP. Handke AE, et al. Urologie. 2023 Mar 20. doi: 10.1007/s00120-023-02062-z. Online ahead of print. Urologie. 2023. PMID: 36941382 Review. German.
- Does deep learning software improve the consistency and performance of radiologists with various levels of experience in assessing bi-parametric prostate MRI?Arslan A, Alis D, Erdemli S, Seker ME, Zeybel G, Sirolu S, Kurtcan S, Karaarslan E. Arslan A, et al. Insights Imaging. 2023 Mar 20;14(1):48. doi: 10.1186/s13244-023-01386-w. Insights Imaging. 2023. PMID: 36939953 Free PMC article.
- Clinical Trial
- Comparative Study
- Multicenter Study
- Research Support, N.I.H., Intramural
- Adult
- Aged
- Biopsy / methods*
- Humans
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging*
- Male
- Middle Aged
- Neoplasm Grading
- Prostate / pathology*
- Prostate-Specific Antigen / blood
- Prostatectomy
- Prostatic Neoplasms / diagnosis*
- Prostatic Neoplasms / pathology*
- Prostatic Neoplasms / surgery
- Prostate-Specific Antigen
- ClinicalTrials.gov/NCT00102544
- Full Text Sources
- Medical
![Figure 3.. Cross-Tabulation of Highest Grade Group…](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/7323919/bin/nihms-1590450-f0003.jpg)
![Figure 4.. Downgrading and Upgrading of Cancer…](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/7323919/bin/nihms-1590450-f0004.jpg)
Source: PubMed