Magnetic Resonance Imaging-ultrasound Fusion Biopsy Research Articles

Yield of second-round MRI targeted ultrasound-guided fusion prostate biopsy after initial first-round targeted biopsy.

We aimed to determine the yield of second-round magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound (MRI-US) fusion biopsy and factors that may predict eventual clinically significant (CS) prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis. From 2013 to 2021, 85 men underwent second-round MRI-US fusion biopsy of 92 lesions (47.8% [44/92] peripheral zone and 52.2% [48/92] transition zone). Patient age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), PSA density (PSAD), size/location of lesions, ADC value, Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS), and PRECISE scores were recorded and compared to histopathological diagnosis (International Society of Urological Pathology [ISUP] grade-group 1 PCa, CS PCa=ISUP grade group ≥2 PCa) using logistic regression. Mean patient age, PSA, and PSAD were 64±7 years, 8.5±7.0 ng/ml, and 0.17±0.11, respectively. Results from first-round targeted biopsy were 63% (58/92) negative and 37% (34/92) clinically insignificant (grade group 1) PCa. Overall, second-round targeted biopsy identified 25% (23/92) CS PCa (grade group 2, n=19; grade group 3, n=4). Considering only lesions with initial negative targeted-biopsy results (n=58), 21% (12/58; grade group 2, n=8; grade group 3, n=4) CS PCa and 13 grade group 1 PCa were diagnosed at second-round biopsy. There was no difference in PSA (p=0.564), size (p=0.595), location (p=0.293), or PI-RADS score (p=0.342) of lesions by eventual CS PCa diagnosis. PSAD (0.2±1.4 vs. 0.16±0.10, p=0.167), ADC (0.748±0.199 vs. 0.833±0.257, p=0.151), and PRECISE score (p<0.01) showed a trend towards association or association with eventual CS PCa diagnosis. Repeat second-round targeted MRI-US fusion biopsy yielded CS PCa diagnosis in the targeted biopsy specimen in approximately 20% of patients in our study. PRECISE score may be a useful marker to help predict which patients require second-round biopsy.

Predictors of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in Patients with PIRADS Categories 3-5 Undergoing Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy of the Prostate.

Prostate biopsy is recommended in cases of positive magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), defined as Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) category ≥ 3. However, most men with positive MRIs will not be diagnosed with clinically significant prostate cancer (csPC). Our goal was to evaluate pre-biopsy characteristics that influence the probability of a csPC diagnosis in these patients. We retrospectively analyzed 740 consecutive men with a positive MRI and no prior PC diagnosis who underwent MRI-ultrasound fusion biopsies of the prostate in three centers. csPC detection rates (CDRs) for each PIRADS category were calculated. Patient, disease, and lesion characteristics were studied for interdependencies with the csPC diagnosis. The CDR in patients with PIRADS categories 3, 4, and 5 was 10.5%, 30.7%, and 54.6%, respectively. On both uni- and multivariable regression models, older age, being biopsy-naïve, prostate specific antigen ≥ 10 ng/mL, smaller prostate volume, PIRADS > 3, a larger maximum lesion size, a lesion in the peripheral zone, and a positive digital rectal examination were associated with csPC. In this large, multicenter study, we provide new data regarding CDRs in particular PIRADS categories. In addition, we present several strong predictors that further alter the risk of csPC in MRI-positive patients. Our results could help in refining individual risk assessment, especially in PIRADS 3 patients, in whom the risk of csPC is substantially low.

Comparative Effectiveness of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Versus In-bore Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsy

ObjectiveTo examine the comparative effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound (MRI-U/S) fusion biopsy and in-bore MRI-targeted biopsy. MethodsWe identified men aged 18-89 with a diagnosis of elevated prostate specific antigen (PSA) or Gleason 6 prostate cancer on active surveillance who underwent MRI-U/S fusion prostate biopsy (12-core + targeted) in the office or in-bore MRI-targeted biopsy (MRI-IB; targeted only). The cancer detection rate (CDR; Gleason 6-10) and clinically significant CDR (csCDR; Gleason 7-10) were compared across biopsy techniques, adjusted for patient and radiographic features. ResultsA total of 280 patients (346 lesions) were included, of whom 23.9% were on active surveillance for Gleason 6 prostate cancer. In the per-patient analyses, there was no statistically significant difference in adjusted overall CDR (64.1% vs 54.2%; P = .24) or csCDR (36.5% vs 37.9%; P = .85) between MRI-U/S and MRI-IB biopsy. In the per-lesion analyses, there was no statistically significant difference in adjusted overall CDR (45.7% vs 50.1%; P = .49) between MRI-U/S and MRI-IB biopsy, but MRI-IB biopsy was associated with a higher csCDR than MRI-U/S biopsy (32.8% vs 21.4%; P = .02). ConclusionWe observed no statistically significant differences in cancer detection rates between MRI-U/S fusion biopsy and MRI-IB biopsy in per-patient analyses. However, MRI-IB biopsy was associated with higher csCDR when considering targeted biopsy cores only. These results suggest that systematic cores should be obtained when performing MRI-U/S fusion biopsy.

Optimal PSA Threshold for Obtaining MRI-Fusion Biopsy in Biopsy-Naïve Patients.

Objective The study investigates the prostate-specific antigen threshold for adding targeted, software-based, magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion biopsy during a standard 12-core biopsy in biopsy-naïve patients. It secondarily explores whether the targeted biopsy is necessary in setting of abnormal digital rectal examination. Methods 260 patients with suspected localized prostate cancer with no prior biopsy underwent prostate magnetic resonance imaging and were found to have Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System score ≥ 3 lesion(s). All 260 patients underwent standard 12-core biopsy and targeted biopsy during the same session. Clinically significant cancer was Gleason ≥3 + 4. Results Percentages of patients with prostate-specific antigen 0–1.99, 2–3.99, 4–4.99, 5–5.99, 6–9.99, and ≥10 were 3.0%, 4.7%, 20.8%, 16.9%, 37.7%, and 16.9%, respectively. Cumulative frequency of clinically significant prostate cancer increased with the addition of targeted biopsy compared with standard biopsy alone across all prostate-specific antigen ranges. The difference in clinically significant cancer detection between targeted plus standard biopsy compared to standard biopsy alone becomes statistically significant at prostate-specific antigen >4.3 (p=0.031). At this threshold, combination biopsy detected 20 clinically significant prostate cancers, while standard detected 14 with 88% sensitivity and 20% specificity. Excluding targeted biopsy in setting of a positive digital rectal exam would save 12.3% magnetic resonance imaging and miss 1.8% clinically significant cancers in our cohort. Conclusions In biopsy-naïve patients, at prostate-specific antigen >4.3, there is a significant increase in clinically significant prostate cancer detection when targeted biopsy is added to standard biopsy. Obtaining standard biopsy alone in patients with abnormal digital rectal examinations would miss 1.8% clinically significant cancers in our cohort.

Combined Systematic and MRI-US Fusion Prostate Biopsy Has the Highest Grading Accuracy When Compared to Final Pathology.

Background and objectives: Systematic prostate biopsy (SB) has a low Gleason group (GG) accuracy when compared to final pathology. This may negatively impact the inclusion of patients into specific risk groups and treatment choice. The aim of our study was to assess the GG accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound (MRI-US) fusion prostate biopsy. Materials and Methods: Of a cohort of minimally invasive radical prostatectomy (RP), we selected all patients who were diagnosed with prostate cancer (PCa) via MRI-US fusion biopsy (n = 115). Results: Combined biopsy had the highest rate for GG concordance (61.7% vs. 60.4% for SB vs. 45.3% for MRI-US fusion biopsy) and the lowest for upgrading (20.9% vs. 24.5% for SB vs. 34.9% for MRI-US fusion biopsy), p < 0.0001. No clinical data were predictive for upgrading or downgrading at final pathology. Locally advanced PCa was associated with a high Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) score (p = 0.0014) and higher percentages of positive biopsy cores (PBC)/targeted (p = 0.0002) and PBC/total (p = 0.01). Positive surgical margins were correlated with higher percentages of PBC/systematic (p = 0.003) and PBC/total (p = 0.009). Conclusions: Pre-biopsy prostate MRI improves GG concordance between biopsy and RP. Combined biopsy provides the highest grading accuracy when compared to final pathology. Targeted and systematic biopsy data are predictive for adverse pathologic outcomes.

Analyzing the learning curves of a novice and an experienced urologist for transrectal magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion prostate biopsy.

BackgroundThe aim of the current study was to evaluate and compare the learning curves of transrectal magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion biopsy for two urologists with different backgrounds (Operator 1: experienced, self-trained and Operator 2: novice, trained by a mentor/MRI reading courses).MethodsA cohort of 400 patients who underwent fusion prostate biopsy in our department was analyzed. The learning curves were assessed in terms of overall and clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa) detection rates, percentage of positive biopsy cores/targeted and the percentage of PCa tissue on positive targeted cores.ResultsIncreasing trends were observed for both urologists in terms of all biopsy outcomes during the study time. For the novice urologist, a significant increase was observed for overall PCa detection rate, but not for clinically significant disease (25.44%, P=0.04/15%, P=0.145). Operator 1 showed an increasing diagnosis yield of clinically significant disease up to 104 cases. Similar cancer detection rates were observed when comparing the first and last biopsies performed by both operators. Multivariate analysis adjusted for age, PSA, prostate volume, lesion diameter and PIRADS score showed an increase of PCa detection with 51% for every 52 biopsies performed (P=0.022).ConclusionsWhen starting with magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion prostate biopsy, mentoring and prostate magnetic resonance imaging reading training allow a novice urologist to demonstrate a good initial PCa detection rate. After about 52 cases, he reached a stable PCa and clinically significant PCa detection rate, that was similar to that of an experienced urologist.

Fourteen-Core Systematic Biopsy That Includes Two Anterior Cores in Men With PI-RADS Lesion≥ 3 is Comparable With Magnetic Resonance Imaging-ultrasound Fusion Biopsy in Detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: A Single-institution Experience.

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-ultrasound fusion targeted prostate biopsy (FB) has been advocated by many experts as a replacement for the standard template biopsy. Herein, we compared pathology results and cancer detection rates of FB with our standard 14-core systematic prostate biopsy (SB) that includes 2 anterior cores. One hundred two men with elevated prostate-specific antigen and suspicious lesions on multiparametric MRI, Prostate Imaging Reporting And Data System (PI-RADS) v2 score≥ 3, underwent FB. Each target lesion was biopsied 3 times; our SB was performed concurrently. Biopsy results were compared for overall and clinically significant (cs), defined as Gleason score≥ 7, cancer detection. Fifty-two percent of patients had positive biopsy results, and of those, 44 had cs prostate cancer (PCa). The overall detection rates for FB and SB were 39% and 50%, respectively, and there was no statistical difference in the detection rate of csPCa detection rate (P= .42). Of 17 patients diagnosed with a high-risk PCa, defined as Gleason score≥ 8, SB identified 15, whereas FB identified 10. Within the SB group, 21 had positive anterior core biopsies, of which 11 were cs. Expanding the standard template prostate biopsies to include 2 anterior horn sampling may be just as effective as FB in men with PI-RADS lesion ≥ 3, thereby mitigating the increased cost associated with FB.

Racial disparity in the utilization of multiparametric MRI-ultrasound fusion biopsy for the detection of prostate cancer.

Black men have significantly higher incidence and are up to three times more likely to die of prostate cancer (PCa) than White men. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion biopsy (FBx) has emerged as a promising modality for the detection of PCa. The goal of our study is to identify differences in utilization of FBx between Black and White men presenting with suspicion of PCa. We performed a retrospective review of Black and White men who presented with suspicion of PCa and required biopsy from January 2014 to December 2018. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was done to study the influence of race on the utilization of FBx. Six hundred nineteen (Black: 182, White: 437) men were included in the study. Forty-one out of 182 (22.5%) Black men underwent FBx compared with 225/437 (51.5%) of White men (P < 0.001). After adjusting for age, race, prostate-specific antigenlevel, digital rectal exam, family history of PCa and health insurance provider, Black race was found to be a significant negative predictor of obtaining FBx (OR:0.32, 95% CI: 0.21-0.51, P < 0.001). Black race stayed an independent negative predictor (OR: 0.36, 95% CI: 0.20-0.64, P < 0.001) in the cohort of patients who were biopsy naïve; however, although reduced, there was no significant difference in the cohort with a prior negative biopsy (OR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.19-1.36, P = 0.179). Although FBx is a superior modality for early detection of PCa, we found that Black men were less likely to undergo FBx when presenting with PCa suspicion. Further investigation is needed to evaluate if this difference is patient preference or if there are underlying socioeconomic, cultural or provider biases influencing this disparity.

Is A Systematic Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Biopsy Required When a Targeted Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy is Performed?

Is A Systematic Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Biopsy Required When a Targeted Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy is Performed?

Role of Core Number and Location in Targeted Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Prostate Biopsy

The optimal method of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-ultrasound (US) fusion biopsy to adequately sample regions of interest (ROIs) remains unknown. We sought to determine the number and location of cores needed to adequately detect clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa). We identified patients undergoing MRI-US fusion prostate biopsy at our institution for known history or clinical suspicion of PCa. Multiparametric MRI studies were reviewed using Likert and Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) v2 schema. Multiple targeted cores were taken from each ROI followed by 12-core systematic biopsy. In a distinct cohort of patients, lesions were targeted using a predetermined five-core template. We estimated cancers detected through sampling of five or fewer cores, assessed by core number and core location. We identified 744 patients with 581 lesions with PCa. Seventy-seven percent (279/361) of Gleason (G) ≥3+4 tumors and 72% (137/189) of G >3+4 tumors were detected on two-core sampling. Relative to all targeted cores, a two-core approach missed 16% of clinically significant cancers at first biopsy, 27% in prior negative, and 32% in active surveillance patients. Detection of G ≥3+4 cancers did not differ by core location. Sampling of two cores of ROIs misses nearly one-quarter of clinically significant PCa detected on additional sampling. Patient summaryWe aimed to understand how the number of cores obtained from a suspicious area during prostate magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion biopsy affects cancer detection. We found that sampling of five cores missed substantially fewer cancers compared to two cores.

PI-RADSv2 Category on 3 Tesla Multiparametric Prostate MRI Predicts Oncologic Outcomes in Gleason 3+4 Prostate Cancer on Biopsy

Three Tesla multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging with PI-RADS™ (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System) version 2 scoring is a common tool in prostate cancer diagnosis which informs the likelihood of a cancerous lesion. We investigated whether PI-RADS version 2 also predicts adverse pathology features mainly in patients with biopsy Gleason score 3 + 4 disease. We reviewed the records of 326 consecutive men with a preoperative template and/or magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion biopsy Gleason score of 6-7 from a prospectively maintained database of men who underwent robotic radical prostatectomy. The primary analysis was done in patients with biopsy Gleason score 3 + 4 to assess the primary outcome of adverse pathology features on univariate and multivariate logistic regression. The secondary outcome was biochemical recurrence-free survival using the Kaplan-Meier method. Similar analysis was done in patients with a biopsy Gleason score of 6-7. Of men with Gleason score 3 + 4 findings 27%, 15%, 36% and 23% showed a PI-RADS version 2 score of 0-2, 3, 4 and 5, respectively. On univariate analysis PI-RADS version 2 category 5 predicted adverse pathology features vs categories 0-2 (OR 10.7, 95% CI 3.7-31, p ≤0.001). On multivariate analysis the PI-RADS version 2 category 5 was associated with adverse pathology when adjusting for preoperative magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy (OR 11.4, 95% CI 3.7-35, p ≤0.0001). In men with a targeted biopsy Gleason score of 3 + 4 prostate cancer PI-RADS version 2 category 5 was associated with adverse pathology (OR 14.7, 95% CI 1.5-146.9, p = 0.02). Of men with biopsy Gleason score 3 + 4 disease 92% and 58% with a PI-RADS version 2 score of 4 and 5, respectively, had 2-year biochemical recurrence-free survival. A PI-RADS version 2 category 5 lesion in patients with a biopsy Gleason score 3 + 4 lesion predicted adverse pathology features and biochemical recurrence-free survival. These findings suggest that preoperative 3 Tesla multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging may serve as a prognostic marker of treatment outcomes independently of biopsy Gleason score or biopsy type.

Multiple Regions of Interest on Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging are Not Associated with Increased Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer on Fusion Biopsy

We sought to determine the association between multiple regions of interest on prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging and the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer in men undergoing magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion biopsy. We performed a retrospective, single institution analysis of men who underwent fusion biopsy. Men with prior positive biopsies, magnetic resonance imaging performed elsewhere and/or magnetic resonance imaging prior to release of the PI-RADS™ (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System) version 2 were excluded from study, resulting in 381 participants. Modeled independent variables included patient age, number of regions of interest with a PI-RADS categorization of 3 or greater, body mass index, prostate specific antigen, prostate volume and PI-RADS categorization. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine factors associated with finding clinically significant prostate cancer (Gleason 7 or greater) on biopsy. Median age was 67.2 years (IQR (61.6-73.0) and median prostate specific antigen was 6.6 ng/ml (5.0-10.0). Adjusted analysis demonstrated that age (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.06-1.15, p ≤0.001), body mass index (OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.01-1.16, p = 0.038) and prostate specific antigen (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01-1.10, p= 0.015) were associated with detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. PI-RADS categories 4 (OR 4.62, 95% CI 2.23-9.33) and 5 (OR 6.75, 95% CI 2.72-16.71, each p <0.001) were associated with greater odds of clinically significant prostate cancer. Multiple regions of interest were not associated with thedetection of clinically significant prostate cancer (OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.60-1.84, p = 0.857). Multiple regions of interest do not portend a greater likelihood of finding clinically significant prostate cancer. Physicians should recognize that multiple regions of interest should not influence the decision to perform fusion biopsy. Our findings may ease patient anxiety concerning these findings.

Reclassification Rates of Patients Eligible for Active Surveillance After the Addition of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy: An Analysis of 7 Widely Used Eligibility Criteria

To evaluate the impact of adding magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound (MRI-US) fusion biopsy cores to standard 12-core biopsy in selecting men for active surveillance (AS). Among men undergoing a fusion biopsy for evaluation of prostate cancer, we selected men who were eligible for at least 1 of 7 different AS criteria based on the standard biopsy alone. We assessed each patient's eligibility for each AS criterion with and without the inclusion of fusion biopsy cores. The primary end point was the proportion of men who were initially eligible for AS but became ineligible after addition of the fusion biopsy cores. A total of 100 men were eligible for at least 1 AS criterion. After addition of fusion biopsy cores, the proportion of men who became ineligible for AS varied from 10.3% to 40.7%. Criteria that incorporated an absolute maximum number of cores positive had the highest rates of ineligibility. Using a percentage of cores positive helped to reduce the number of patients who would have been excluded. Combining the targeted biopsy cores into one, or taking the single core with the highest grade or volume did not appear to reduce the proportion of men who became ineligible. The addition of fusion biopsy to standard 12-core biopsy significantly increased the number of men who became ineligible for AS. Using the percent of cores positive, instead of an absolute number, allowed fewer exclusions. AS criteria may need to be updated to prevent the unnecessary exclusion of men due to an oversampling of low-risk disease.

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

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. 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. 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. 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.

Focal Laser Ablation of Prostate Cancer: Feasibility of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion for Guidance

Focal laser ablation is a potential treatment in some men with prostate cancer. Currently focal laser ablation is performed by radiologists in a magnetic resonance imaging unit (in bore). We evaluated the safety and feasibility of performing focal laser ablation in a urology clinic (out of bore) using magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion for guidance. A total of 11 men with intermediate risk prostate cancer were enrolled in this prospective, institutional review board approved pilot study. Magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion was used to guide laser fibers transrectally into regions of interest harboring intermediate risk prostate cancer. Thermal probes were inserted for real-time monitoring of intraprostatic temperatures during laser activation. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (3 Tesla) was done immediately after treatment and at 6 months along with comprehensive fusion biopsy. Ten of 11 patients were successfully treated while under local anesthesia. Mean procedure time was 95 minutes (range 71 to 105). Posttreatment magnetic resonance imaging revealed a confined zone of nonperfusion in all 10men. Mean zone volume was 4.3 cc (range 2.1 to 6.0). No CTCAE grade 3 or greater adverse events developed and no changes were observed in urinary or sexual function. At 6 months magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion biopsy of the treatment site showed no cancer in 3 patients, microfocal Gleason 3+ 3 in another 3 and persistent intermediate risk prostate cancer in 4. Focal laser ablation of prostate cancer appears safe and feasible with the patient under local anesthesia in a urology clinic using magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion for guidance and thermal probes for monitoring. Further development is necessary to refine out of bore focal laserablation and additional studies are needed to determine appropriate treatment margins and oncologic efficacy.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion biopsy versus systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy in diagnosing prostate cancer.

25 Background: We sought to determine if the reported improved performance of magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound (MRI-US) fusion biopsy over systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS) in the detection of prostate cancer justifies the added cost of the MR imaging. Methods: A decision-analytic Markov model with a lifetime horizon of 10 years was developed to evaluate diagnostic accuracy, long-term health outcomes, costs, and quality-of-life of two strategies (i.e., TRUS versus MRI-US fusion biopsy [prostate MRI followed potentially by MRI-US fusion biopsy]) as the initial diagnostic test in men with elevated prostate-specific antigen ( &gt; 4 ng/ml) without prior evaluation. Probabilities of clinical events were obtained from published literature. Direct medical costs, including diagnostic and treatment-related costs, were derived from the Premier Hospital Database. Costs were inflated to 2015 US dollars and discounted at an annual rate of 3%. Health outcomes were measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), which were determined based on published literature and expert opinion. We calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and performed sensitivity analyses to assess uncertainty. Results: The MRI-US fusion biopsy strategy yielded a lower average discounted cost ($5,358 versus $6,372) and higher total QALYs-gained (7.21 versus 7.19) than TRUS. The reduced expenditures associated with MRI-US fusion biopsy was primarily due to avoiding intervention for clinically insignificant prostate cancer. The results were robust with the sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: For men in the United States with an elevated PSA, the use of MRI-US fusion biopsy in the evaluation for prostate cancer represents a greater value than TRUS, the standard of care option. Widespread adoption of MRI-US fusion biopsy may serve to reduce the economic burden of prostate cancer.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging–Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy During Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance

BackgroundFusion biopsy using multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and transrectal ultrasound has demonstrated favorable detection rates of high-grade prostate cancer (PCa) among previously undiagnosed men. However, the diagnostic yield among men with active surveillance (AS) remains undefined. ObjectiveTo determine the utility of MRI-ultrasound fusion biopsy during AS by reporting rates of PCa upgrading and comparing findings with systematic biopsy. Design, setting, and participantsWe identified patients with low- and intermediate-risk PCa enrolled in AS who received MRI-ultrasound fusion surveillance biopsies. All completed prostate multiparametric MRI with 3-T and endorectal coil reviewed by radiologists selecting regions of interest, and all underwent MRI-ultrasound fusion biopsy with concurrent systematic biopsy. Outcome measurements and statistical analysisWe report MRI-ultrasound fusion biopsy findings, rates of Gleason score (GS) upgrading to ≥3 + 4 (any upgrading) and to ≥4 + 3 (major upgrading), tumor involvement estimates using descriptive statistics, McNemar's test of symmetry, and multivariate logistic regression. Results and limitationsOverall, 207 men underwent MRI-ultrasound fusion biopsy following radiologic suspicion on multiparametric MRI and met inclusion criteria. Agreement between systematic and MRI-ultrasound fusion biopsy GS was borderline statistically significant (p<0.047). In total, 83 men (40%) experienced any upgrading, including 49 (24%) on systematic sampling, 30 (14%) on MRI-targeted cores, and four (2%) on both. Among those with negative results on MRI-ultrasound fusion biopsy, seven (9%) exhibited major upgrading with systematic biopsy. MRI suspicion scores were high (4/5) for all but two patients with any upgrading and for all who experienced major upgrading. On multivariate analysis, older age was associated with higher odds of any upgrading for men with GS ≤3 + 3 on previous biopsy (odds ratio: 1.10; 95% confidence interval, 1.01–1.20; p=0.03). ConclusionsMRI-ultrasound fusion biopsy resulted in upgrading otherwise undetected by systematic biopsy among a proportion of men with PCa managed with AS. However, upgrading also occurred in areas outside targeted biopsy, suggesting that systematic sampling should be offered to men with AS even with history of extended sextant biopsy. Patient summaryThis study examined the role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)–ultrasound fusion biopsy for men with prostate cancer managed with active surveillance (AS). In some patients, MRI-ultrasound fusion biopsy resulted in the detection of upgrade otherwise missed with systematic sampling. The findings indicate that MRI-ultrasound fusion biopsy may help with better sampling during AS.

Magnetic resonance imaging - ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy outperforms standard approaches in detecting prostate cancer: A meta-analysis.

The aim of the present study was to determine whether magnetic resonance imaging - ultrasound (MRI-US) fusion prostate biopsy is superior to systematic biopsy for making a definitive diagnosis of prostate cancer. The two strategies were also compared regarding their ability to detect clinically significant and insignificant prostate cancer. A literature search was conducted through the PubMed, EMBASE and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases using appropriate search terms. A total of 3,415 cases from 21 studies were included in the present meta-analysis. Data were expressed as relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval. The results revealed that MRI-US fusion biopsy achieved a higher rate of overall prostate cancer detection compared with systematic biopsy (RR=1.09; P=0.047). Moreover, MRI-US fusion biopsy detected more clinically significant cancers compared with systematic biopsy (RR=1.22; P<0.01). It is therefore recommended that multi-parametric MRI-US is performed in men suspected of having prostate cancer to optimize the detection of clinically significant disease, while reducing the burden of biopsies.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy for Prediction of Final Prostate Pathology

We explored the impact of magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion prostate biopsy on the prediction of final surgical pathology. A total of 54 consecutive men undergoing radical prostatectomy at UCLA after fusion biopsy were included in this prospective, institutional review board approved pilot study. Using magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion, tissue was obtained from a 12-point systematic grid (mapping biopsy) and from regions of interest detected by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (targeted biopsy). A single radiologist read all magnetic resonance imaging, and a single pathologist independently rereviewed all biopsy and whole mount pathology, blinded to prior interpretation and matched specimen. Gleason score concordance between biopsy and prostatectomy was the primary end point. Mean patient age was 62 years and median prostate specific antigen was 6.2 ng/ml. Final Gleason score at prostatectomy was 6 (13%), 7 (70%) and 8-9 (17%). A tertiary pattern was detected in 17 (31%) men. Of 45 high suspicion (image grade 4-5) magnetic resonance imaging targets 32 (71%) contained prostate cancer. The per core cancer detection rate was 20% by systematic mapping biopsy and 42% by targeted biopsy. The highest Gleason pattern at prostatectomy was detected by systematic mapping biopsy in 54%, targeted biopsy in 54% and a combination in 81% of cases. Overall 17% of cases were upgraded from fusion biopsy to final pathology and 1 (2%) was downgraded. Thecombination of targeted biopsy and systematic mapping biopsy was needed to obtain the best predictive accuracy. In this pilot study magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion biopsy allowed for the prediction of final prostate pathology with greater accuracy than that reported previously using conventional methods (81% vs 40% to65%). If confirmed, these results will have important clinical implications.