Performance of cognitive vs. image-guided fusion biopsy for detection of overall and clinically significant prostate cancer in a multiethnic population

Abstract

PurposeTransrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy remains the most used method for the detection of prostate cancer. We recently reported that detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (cs-CaP) using image-guided fusion biopsies (IGFB) varied by race/ethnicity, which calls for further comparison between cognitive fusion biopsy (CFB) and IGFB among non-Hispanic black and Hispanic populations. Therefore, the aim of our study is to compare the rates of detection of cs-CaP and overall CaP by CFB and IGFB in a multiethnic community. Material and methodsWe performed a retrospective, cross-sectional review of men who underwent MRI-transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy at our diverse, urban academic medical center. Agreement and discordance between fusion biopsies and systematic biopsies for detection of cs-CaP and overall CaP were determined using Kappa statistics. Univariate and multivariate mixed-effects logistic regression models were used to find associations between fusion modalities and prostate cancer detection. ResultsIn total, 710 men underwent fusion prostate biopsies between December 2015 and June 2021. Upon univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis, there was no significant association between IGFB vs. CFB and risk of overall CaP (OR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.36–1.21, P = 0.18) or cs-CaP (OR = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.30–1.08, P = 0.09). We found moderate agreement between fusion and systematic biopsies for both CFB (κ = 0.56) and IGFB (κ = 0.52) in cs-CaP. ConclusionsCFB and IGFB offer similar detection rates of cs-CaP in a multiethnic population. CFB represents an effective and accessible means of accurately diagnosing prostate cancer.