Negative Predictive Value Of mpMRI Research Articles

Surveillance one year post focal cryotherapy for clinically significant prostate cancer using mpMRI and PIRADS v2.1: An initial experience from a prospective phase II mandatory biopsy study

ObjectivesMultiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) surveillance post focal cryotherapy (FT) of prostate cancer is challenging as post treatment artefacts alter mpMRI findings. In this initial experience, we assessed diagnostic performance of mpMRI in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) after FT. Materials and methodsThis single-centre phase II prospective clinical trial recruited 28 men with localized csPCa for FT between October 2019 and April 2021. 12-months post FT mpMRI were performed prior to biopsy and sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of all mpMRI positive subjects were analysed. Chi square goodness of fit test correlated biopsy positive PIRADS3 (P3) and PIRADS4/5 lesions with histology grade group. One way ANOVA test assessed performance of ADC values in differentiating csPCa, non csPCa and benign lesions. ResultsSensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of mpMRI were 100%, 14.28%, 53.84% and 100% for subjects with histologically proven cancer. Correlation of PIRADS v2.1 scores with histologically proven prostate cancer was statistically significant (p < 0.5). Correlation of P3 lesions with non-csPCa was statistically significant (p < 0.02535). Higher ADC value was associated with benign histology (adjusted odds ratio OR 0.97, 95% confidence interval: 0.94, 0.99) (p = 0.008). Among the malignant lesions, higher ADC value was associated with non-csPCa (adjusted OR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.95, 0.99) (p = 0.032). ConclusionmpMRI is highly sensitive in detecting residual cancer. ADC values and PIRADS scores may be of value in differentiating csPCa from non-csPCa with a potential for risk stratification of men requiring re-biopsy versus non-invasive surveillance of remnant prostate.

Reliability of prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2.1 for excluding clinically significant prostate cancer using a 1.5 tesla scanner

IntroductionMultiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) of the prostate gland is now the recommended initial investigation of choice for the detection of Prostate cancer (PCa). It effectively identifies patients who require prostate biopsies due to the risk of clinically significant PCa. It helps patients with clinically insignificant PCa avoid the invasive biopsies and possible accompanying complications. Large clinical trials have investigated the accuracy of mpMRI in detecting PCa. We performed a local review to examine the reliability of omitting tissue sampling in men with a negative (PIRADS 2 (P2) or less) mpMRI in the primary diagnostic setting.MethodsThis was a retrospective study of patients with clinical suspicion of PCa within a 2-year period. Patients had a mpMRI prior to having trans-perineal prostate gland biopsies. Clinically significant disease was defined as Gleason 7 and above. The descriptive data was analysed using contingency table methods. A p-value less than 0.05 was statistically significant.ResultsOut of 700 patients 90 had an mpMRI score of PIRADS 2. Seventy-seven (85.5%) of these patients had a negative biopsy, 9(10%) showed Gleason 6, 4 patients showed Gleason 7 or above. 78 patients with PIRADS 2 had a PSA density of < 0.15, none of which had a clinically significant biopsy result. The negative predictive value of mpMRI from this study is 95%.ConclusionOur results are in line with negative predictive values demonstrated in the current literature. This local study, likely applicable to other district general hospitals, shows that mpMRI is a safe and reliable initial investigation to aid decisions on which patients require biopsies.

A risk-organised model for clinically significant prostate cancer early detection.

A risk-organised model for clinically significant prostate cancer early detection.

Can multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging and prostate-specific antigen density accurately stratify patients prior to prostate biopsy?

Objective: This study examines the diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in a high-volume centre to potentially stratify patients prior to prostate biopsy. Methods: All biopsy naïve patients who had mpMRI prostate and transperineal biopsy of prostate (TPBx) in 2017 and 2018 were included. There were no exclusion criteria. All patients, regardless of the mpMRI result, underwent systematic template biopsy under general anaesthesia with cognitive target biopsy if indicated. Clinicopathological data were extracted from medical records. The primary outcome was the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of mpMRI prostate in the detection of prostate cancer (PCa) compared with template TPBx. Results: In total, 140 patients were included. Overall, 57.1% had a positive biopsy. A higher Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data Systems (PI-RADS) score was associated with a higher risk of diagnosing clinically significant PCa (International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) ⩾ 2) ( p &lt; 0.001). The sensitivity, specificity, NPV, and PPV of mpMRI in detecting clinically significant PCa with a PI-RADS ⩾ 3 lesion, was 95% (95% confidence interval (CI) 83.0–99.3%), 41% (95% CI 31.3–51.3%), 95.3% (95% CI 84.2–99.4%) and 39.2% (95% CI 29.4–49.6%), respectively. Combining this with prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) of &lt;0.15 further improved the NPV to 100% (86.3–100). Binomial logistic regression to understand the effects of PSA, DRE and PI-RADS score on predicting clinically significant PCa (ISUP ⩾ 2) found increasing PSA (odds ratio (OR) 1.06, (95% CI 1.00–1.11, p = 0.022)) and PI-RADS (OR 3.17, (95% CI 1.94–5.18, p &lt; 0.001)) to be significant predictors. Malignant DRE was not a significant predictor ( p = 0.087). Conclusion: This study demonstrates that the high sensitivity and NPV of mpMRI combined with PSAD may play a pivotal role in stratifying men for prostate biopsy and help avoid biopsy and its associated morbidity in select patients. Level of Evidence: 2b (Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine: Levels of Evidence)

The impact of health-policy-driven subsidisation of prostate magnetic resonance imaging on transperineal prostate biopsy practice and outcomes.

BackgroundFrom 1 July 2018, the Australian Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) introduced rebates for multi‐parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) for the workup for prostate cancer (PCa). We aimed to determine if subsidisation of mpMRI prior to transperineal biopsy altered our institution's prostate biopsy practice patterns and outcomes.MethodsAll patients who underwent transperineal prostate biopsy at an Australian tertiary institution from 1 January 2017 to 1 January 2020 were identified. Patients with known PCa were excluded. Patients were stratified into two groups: a pre‐subsidisation cohort comprising patients biopsied prior to the introduction of mpMRI subsidisation on 1 July 2018 and a post‐subsidisation cohort comprising patients biopsied after 1 July 2018. Histopathological results were compared with further stratification based on mpMRI results. Clinically significant cancer was defined as ISUP Grade Group ≥ 2.ResultsSix hundred and fifty men fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Three hundred and sixty‐one patients were in the pre‐subsidisation cohort and 289 in the post‐subsidisation cohort. Of the patients in the pre‐subsidisation group, 36.3% underwent a pre‐biopsy mpMRI compared with 77.5% in the post‐subsidisation group. Of the patients in the pre‐subsidisation group, 59.6% had positive biopsies (p = 0.024) compared with 68.2% in the post‐subsidisation group. The rate of clinically significant PCa was lower in the pre‐subsidisation group (39.1%) compared with the post‐subsidisation (49.5%, p = 0.008). The negative predictive value of mpMRI for clinically significant PCa was 86.5%.ConclusionOur institution experienced a reduction of negative prostate biopsies and an increase in clinically significant PCa within transperineal biopsy specimens after the Australian healthcare system introduced financial subsidisation of mpMRI.

Nomogram predicting prostate cancer in patients with negative prebiopsy multiparametric magnetic resonance.

Aim: To build two nomograms for predicting the possibilities of prostate cancer (PCa) and clinically significant PCa (csPCa) in patients with negative prebiopsy multiparametric MRI (mpMRI). Methods: The independent predictors associated with PCa or csPCa in patients with negative mpMRI were determined and served in the construction of the two nomograms. Results: The nomogram predicting PCa consisted of age, positive digital rectal examination, free/total prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ratio and PSA density, while age, positive digital rectal examination and PSA density comprised the nomogram predicting csPCa. The negative predictive value of mpMRI for PCa and csPCa improved from 77.1 and 87.5% to 90.4 and 96.1%, respectively, in the training cohort (n=376) and from 81.9 and 89.0% to 91.8 and 96.5%, respectively, in the validation cohort (n=127) when combined with the two nomograms. Conclusion: The negative predictive value of negative mpMRI for the detection of PCa or csPCa was improved with the results of the nomograms.

Diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer after negative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging.

The diagnostic pathway after a negative magnetic resonance imaging (nMRI) exam is not clearly defined. The aim of the present study is to define the risk of prostate adenocarcinoma (PCa) at the prostate biopsy after a negative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) exam. Patients with nMRI Prostate Imaging Reporting & Data System (PI-RADS) ≤2 and without a previous diagnosis of PCa were identified among all patients undergoing mpMRI in a single referral center between 01/2016-12/2019. Detailed data about prostate biopsy after nMRI were collected, including any PCa diagnosis and clinically significant PCa diagnosis. [Gleason score (GS) ≥7]. In addition to descriptive statistics, uni and multivariable logistic regression assessed the potential predictors of any PCa and clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) at the biopsy after a negative mpMRI. Of 410 patients with nMRI, 73 underwent saturation biopsy. Only prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels were significantly higher in patients undergoing biopsy (5.2 ng/ml vs 6.4, p <0.001), while Prostate Cancer Research Foundation (SWOP - Stichting Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek Prostaatkanker) risk score and other variables did not differ. A total of 22 biopsies (30.1%) were positive for PCa, GS 6 was diagnosed in 14 patients, GS 7 in 3, GS 8 in 1 and GS 9-10 in 4. csPCa was found in 8 (11%) patients. No significant predictors of any PCa or csPCa were identified at multivariate regression analysis. Despite the good negative predictive value of mpMRI in the diagnosis of prostate cancer, 11% of the patients had csPCa. Specific predictive models addressing this setting would be useful.

Multiparametric MRI with in-bore targeted biopsy in the diagnostic pathway of prostate cancer: Data from a single institution experience

BackgroundAccuracy of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) for the detection of significant prostate cancer (CaP) varies in the literature as only few studies use radical prostatectomy specimens as their gold standard. On another hand, MRI-targeted prostate biopsy is emerging as an alternative to the traditional randomized biopsy, with a higher detection rate of high-grade cancers. However, data on MRI guided in bore biopsy is lacking. Material and methodsWe reviewed every patient that had his mpMRI, MRI guided in bore biopsy and radical prostatectomy performed in our hospital between November 2015 and December 2020. The diagnostic performances of both mpMRI and MRI targeted biopsy in sampling PIRADS index lesions were studied, using radical prostatectomy specimens as the gold standard. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of mpMRI for detecting T3 stage, extra-capsular extension, seminal vesicles involvement and lymph node disease were also evaluated. ResultsSixty-two met our inclusion criteria. For PIRADS≥3 lesions, sensitivity and positive predictive value for detecting clinically significant CaP were of 83.5% and 94.7%. A total of 32.2% prostate cancers on targeted biopsy were upgraded on final pathology, with an upgrading to ISUP≥2 in 3.2% and to ISUP≥3 in 14.5%. A total of 20.9% of cancers were downgraded but without any downgrading to ISUP 1. When final pathology is taken as a gold standard, sensitivity of mpMRI was 31.8% for T3 staging prediction, 30.0% for extra-capsular extension, 28.7% for seminal vesicles involvement and 66.7% for lymph node disease prediction. Specificity was 89.3%, 93.1%, 95.3%, and 92.7%, respectively. ConclusionmpMRI has an acceptable accuracy for the prediction of significant CaP and index lesion detection but is unreliable for CaP staging. Comparison between pathology and biopsy results revealed that the in-bore biopsy technique has an upgrading and downgrading rate comparable in the literature to fusion biopsy, but higher than the combined biopsy approach.

Abstract 2301: Indications for systematic prostate biopsy in men with negative multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging

Abstract Introduction: Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (mpMRI) is a valuable tool in the prostate cancer diagnostic pathway, and MRI-influenced biopsy has been shown to be superior to systematic biopsy alone for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa), defined as the presence of any Gleason ≥ 4. Negative predictive value of mpMRI for csPCa varies widely in published reports, with a median of approximately 88%. Counselling patients with negative mpMRI (PIRADS score &amp;lt;3)to decide whether or not to proceed with systematic biopsy or PSA monitoring could be challenging. Several studies have shown that a PSA density (PSAD) ≥ 0.15 is an indication for systematic biopsy. We analysed the clinical, radiological and pathological features of patients with negative mpMRI but csPca on systematic biopsy to identify other criteria that may inform the need for systematic biopsy when mpMRI is negative. Methods: For 18 months between Nov 2017 and May 2019, all men on our prostate diagnostic pathway with negative mpMRI were offered systematic biopsy. The criteria for pre-biopsy mpMRI was any man suitable for radical surgery or radiotherapy, plus one or more of PSA ≥ 3, palpable lesion on digital rectal examination, or family history of PCa in a first degree relative (father or brother). mpMRI was performed with a 1.5-Tesla magnet and included T2, DWI and DCE sequences. Systematic biopsy was TRUS-guided, with 8-16 biopsy cores. Results: Of 589 mpMRI scans in 573 men, 216 (37%) had negative mpMRI. Of these, 141 (65%) proceeded with systematic biopsy. Among the men that had biopsy, Gleason 3+3 was detected in 12 men (9%) and Gleason ≥ 4 in six (4%). Important pre-biopsy features in men with Gleason ≥ 4 were PSAD ≥ 0.15 (n=3), artefact on MRI from hip joint prosthesis (n=1), and family history (n=2). There were no unusual histological variants seen on the positive biopsy cores. Conclusion: Most men with negative mpMRI can avoid prostate biopsy and be managed with PSA monitoring. Based on our experience, we recommend systematic biopsy in men with negative mpMRI who have PSAD ≥ 1.5, family history or any imaging artifact that may alter image interpretation. Citation Format: Chidi N. Molokwu, Christos Gkikas, Harry Bardgett, Nicola Lee, Faisal Ali, Rohit Chahal, Rajindra Singh. Indications for systematic prostate biopsy in men with negative multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research 2020; 2020 Apr 27-28 and Jun 22-24. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(16 Suppl):Abstract nr 2301.

A comparison between 68Ga-labeled prostate-specific membrane antigen-PET/CT and multiparametric MRI for excluding regional metastases prior to radical prostatectomy.

To compare the ability of 68Ga -PSMA PET/CT (PSMA PET/CT) and multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) to exclude lymph node invasion (LNI) in patients who undergo radical prostatectomy (RP). A multicenter cohort of patients who underwent PSMA PET/CT and pelvic mpMRI prior to RP with pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) was analyzed. Increased Ga68-PSMA uptake on PET/CT and enlarged (> 10mm) or abnormal lymph nodes on mpMRI were considered positive findings. The final surgical pathology served as the standard of reference. The negative predictive value (NPV) was calculated for each modality separately, as well as the combined value. Included were 89 patients with D'Amico intermediate (45%) or high-risk (55%) prostate cancer. The median number of extracted LN was 9 (IQR 6-14). LNI was found in 12 (13.5%) patients. The NPV of mpMRI, PSMA PET/CT, and the two tests combined were 87%, 89%, and 90%, in the entire cohort, 95%, 97%, and 97% in patients with intermediate-risk disease, and 80%, 82%, and 83% in patients with high-risk disease, respectively. The median diameter of LN missed by both imaging and the median intranodal tumor diameter was 5.5 (IQR 3-10) mm and 1 (IQR 1-3) mm, respectively. PSMA PET/CT and mpMRI demonstrated similar performance in excluding pelvic LNI with NPV of approximately 90%. The combination of both tests does not improve NPV significantly. Therefore, even in the era of advanced imaging, PLND is still recommended for accurate staging, especially in the high-risk population.

Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Alone is Insufficient to Detect Grade Reclassification in Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has improved the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. It remains unclear, however, whether mpMRI can safely replace confirmatory or surveillance biopsies in men with low-risk disease managed with active surveillance (AS). Overall, 166 men were upgraded at a median of 29 mo (interquartile range 13–54). The overall negative predictive value (NPV) of mpMRI was 79.5% and ranged from 74.4% to 84.6% for all AS biopsies up to the fourth surveillance biopsy. In men with prostate-specific antigen density ≥0.15 ng/ml/cm3, the overall NPV of mpMRI was 65.5% and ranged from 57.1% to 73.3% across serial mpMRI scans. These findings support the hypothesis that mpMRI is helpful but insufficient to rule out pathological reclassification, especially at confirmatory biopsy or in the presence of other risk factors. Patient summaryMultiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) alone misses a considerable percentage of clinically significant prostate cancers (Gleason grade group ≥2) in men on active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer. We conclude that mpMRI alone cannot safely replace surveillance prostate biopsies, particularly at confirmatory biopsy or in the presence of other risk factors.

MP42-15 WHICH IS THE VALUE OF A NEGATIVE MPMRI IN RULING OUT ADVERSE PATHOLOGICAL OUTCOMES AT RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY? A RETROSPECTIVE ANALYSIS ON 212 PROSTATIC LOBES

You have accessJournal of UrologyImaging/Radiology: Uroradiology II (MP42)1 Apr 2020MP42-15 WHICH IS THE VALUE OF A NEGATIVE MPMRI IN RULING OUT ADVERSE PATHOLOGICAL OUTCOMES AT RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY? A RETROSPECTIVE ANALYSIS ON 212 PROSTATIC LOBES Andrea Iseppi*, Raffaele Inzillo, Chiara Del Prete, Luca Sarchi, Beatrice Filippi, Stefano Toso, Guarino Giulio, Ahmed Eissa, Maria Chiara Sighinolfi, Stefano Puliatti, Giampaolo Bianchi, Salvatore Micali, and Bernardo Rocco Andrea Iseppi*Andrea Iseppi* More articles by this author , Raffaele InzilloRaffaele Inzillo More articles by this author , Chiara Del PreteChiara Del Prete More articles by this author , Luca SarchiLuca Sarchi More articles by this author , Beatrice FilippiBeatrice Filippi More articles by this author , Stefano TosoStefano Toso More articles by this author , Guarino GiulioGuarino Giulio More articles by this author , Ahmed EissaAhmed Eissa More articles by this author , Maria Chiara SighinolfiMaria Chiara Sighinolfi More articles by this author , Stefano PuliattiStefano Puliatti More articles by this author , Giampaolo BianchiGiampaolo Bianchi More articles by this author , Salvatore MicaliSalvatore Micali More articles by this author , and Bernardo RoccoBernardo Rocco More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000000891.015AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Multiparametric Magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has gained increasingly acceptance for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa). Targeting approaches using mpMRI directed biopsies are currently under investigation. The aim of the current study is to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy to detect csPCa of mpMRI targeted plus saturation sampling compared to saturation sampling alone; furthermore, we aim to assess the value of a negative mpMRI to rule out adverse pathological outcomes at radical prostatectomy (RP). To that purpose, we performed a side specific analysis of prostatic lobes from RP specimens METHODS: From our prospectively collected data base of > 500 mpMRI-targeted plus saturation prostate biopsy, 106 men with a PCa diagnosis who underwent radical prostatectomy were considered. mpMRI were performed at 3 different radiological centres; in case of a PIRADS >=3 lesion a targeted sampling was carried out, whereas systematic saturation sampling was performed for each lobe in all cases. 212 prostatic lobes were definitely available for analysis with respect to mpMRI findings. The primary outcome was the detection rate of csPCa at RP (ISUP >=2) for targeted plus saturation sampling compared to saturation sampling alone. As secondary endpoints, the positive predictive value and negative predictive value of mpMRI were calculated with regards to csPCa detection RESULTS: A total of 111 lobes had a csPCa, whereas 101 lobes had an ISUP 1. 163 lobes were pT2, 49 had extracapsular extension of PCa. 63,6% (135/212) prostatic lobes had a positive mpMRI and underwent targeted + saturation sampling, whereas the remaining 77 lobes (36,4%) were negative and had only saturation biopsy. The detection rate of csPCA was 55% (75/135) for mpMRI positive lobes and 46,7% (36/77) for mpMRI negative lobes (p=0,217). A pT3 was evident in 5 lobes with a negative mpMRI (6,4%). Positive predictive value of mpMRI was 55,5%; negative predictive value to rule out csPCa was 53,2%. Targeted biopsy of a single mpMRI-positive lobe would have missed 36/111 (32,4%) lobes with csPCa CONCLUSIONS: In our subgroups of patients with PCa managed with RP, the detection rate of csPCa did not differ significantly between targeted plus saturation and saturation sampling alone. If only a targeted approach is performed, the low predictive value of a negative mpMRI may account for an underestimation of tumor burden and extension. Since surgical tailoring is based on pre-operative assessment of local staging and the dissection relies on the knowledge of the side specific amount of PCa, mpMRI with targeted sampling alone can adversely affect surgical success and oncologic outcome Source of Funding: No © 2020 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 203Issue Supplement 4April 2020Page: e609-e609 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2020 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Andrea Iseppi* More articles by this author Raffaele Inzillo More articles by this author Chiara Del Prete More articles by this author Luca Sarchi More articles by this author Beatrice Filippi More articles by this author Stefano Toso More articles by this author Guarino Giulio More articles by this author Ahmed Eissa More articles by this author Maria Chiara Sighinolfi More articles by this author Stefano Puliatti More articles by this author Giampaolo Bianchi More articles by this author Salvatore Micali More articles by this author Bernardo Rocco More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...

Prospective evaluation of using multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in cognitive fusion prostate biopsy compared to the standard systematic 12-core biopsy in the detection of prostate cancer.

Purpose:There is mounting evidence to suggest that multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-guided biopsy is better than systematic biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa). Cognitive fusion biopsy (CFB) involves targeted biopsies of areas of suspicious lesions noted on the mpMRI by transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) operator. This study was undertaken to determine the accuracy of mpMRI of the prostate with Prostate Imaging–Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2 in detecting PCa. We also compare the cancer detection rates between systematic 12-core TRUS biopsy and CFB.Materials and Methods:Sixty-nine men underwent mpMRI of the prostate followed by TRUS biopsy. In addition to 12-core biopsy, CFB was performed on abnormal lesions detected on MRI.Results:Abnormal lesions were identified in 98.6% of the patients, and 59.4% had the highest PI-RADS score of 3 or more. With the use of PI-RADS 3 as cutoff, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of MRI for the detection of PCa were 91.7%, 57.8%, 53.7%, and 92.8%, respectively. With the use of PI-RADS 4 as cutoff, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of mpMRI were 66.7%, 91.1%, 80%, and 83.7%, respectively. Systematic biopsy detected more PCa compared to CFB (29% vs. 26.1%), but CFB detected more significant (Gleason grade ≥7) PCa (17.4% vs. 14.5%) (P < 0.01). CFB cores have a higher PCa detection rate as compared to systematic cores (P < 0.01).Conclusions:mpMRI has a good predictive ability for PCa. CFB is superior to systematic biopsy in the detection of the significant PCa.

One-Stop MRI and MRI/transrectal ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy: an expedited pathway for prostate cancer diagnosis.

To assess the feasibility, safety, and outcomes of an expedited One-Stop prostate cancer (PCa) diagnostic pathway. We identified 370 consecutive patients who underwent multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and transrectal ultrasound fusion prostate biopsy (MRI/TRUS-PBx) from our institutional review board-approved database. Patients were divided according to diagnostic pathway: One-Stop (n = 74), with mpMRI and same-day PBx, or Standard (n = 296), with mpMRI followed by a second visit for PBx. mpMRIs were performed and interpreted according to Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS v2). Grade group ≥ 2 PCa defined clinically significant PCa (csPCa). Statistical significance was considered when p < 0.05. Age (66 vs 66years, p = 0.59) and PSA density (0.1 vs 0.1ng/mL2, p = 0.26) were not different between One-Stop vs Standard pathway, respectively. One-Stop patients lived further away from the hospital than Standard patients (163 vs 31km; p < 0.01), and experienced shorter time from mpMRI to PBx (0 vs 7days; p < 0.01). The number (p = 0.56) and distribution of PI-RADS lesions (p = 0.67) were not different between the groups. All procedures were completed successfully with similar perioperative complications rate (p = 0.24). For patients with PI-RADS 3-5 lesions, the csPCa detection rate (49% vs 41%, p = 0.55) was similar for One-Stop vs Standard, respectively. The negative predictive value of mpMRI (PI-RADS 1-2) for csPCa was 78% for One-Stop vs 83% for Standard (p = 0.99). On multivariate analysis, age, prostate volume and PI-RADS score (p < 0.01), but not diagnostic pathway, predicted csPCa detection. A One-Stop PCa diagnostic pathway is feasible, safe, and provides similar outcomes in a shorter time compared to the Standard two-visit diagnostic pathway.

Oncological and Quality-of-life Outcomes Following Focal Irreversible Electroporation as Primary Treatment for Localised Prostate Cancer: A Biopsy-monitored Prospective Cohort

BackgroundFocal irreversible electroporation (IRE) can be used to treat men with localised prostate cancer (PCa) with reduced impact on quality of life (QoL). ObjectiveTo assess oncological and functional outcomes. Design, setting, and participantsTo report on a prospective database of patients undergoing primary IRE between February 2013 and August 2018. A minimum of 12-mo follow-up was available for 123 patients. Median follow-up was 36 mo (interquartile range [IQR] 24–52 mo). A total of 112 (91%) patients had National Comprehensive Cancer Network intermediate risk and 11 (9%) had low risk. A total of 12 (9.8%) had International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade 1, 88 (71.5%) had ISUP 2, and 23 (18.7%) had ISUP 3. InterventionFocal IRE ablation of PCa lesions. Outcome measurements and statistical analysisFollow-up involved serial prostate-specific antigen (PSA), multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), and transperineal template mapping biopsy (TTMB) at 12 mo. Failure-free survival (FFS) was defined as progression to whole-gland or systemic treatment or metastasis/death. Functional outcomes were assessed. Results and limitationsMedian age was 68yr (IQR 62–73yr). Median preoperative PSA was 5.7ng/ml (IQR 3.8–8.0ng/ml). On post-treatment TTMB, in-field recurrence was present in 2.7–9.8% of patients. FFS at 3yr was 96.75%, metastasis-free survival 99%, and overall survival 100%. A total of 18 patients required salvage treatment (12 had repeat IRE; six had whole-gland treatment). The negative predictive value of mpMRI was 94% and sensitivity 40% for detecting in-field residual disease 6 mo after treatment. Among patients who returned questionnaires, 80/81 (98.8%) remained pad free and 40/53 (76%) had no change in erectile function. ConclusionsFocal IRE in select patients with localised clinically significant PCa has satisfactory short-term oncological outcomes with a minimal impact on patient QoL. Patient summaryIn this study, 123 patients underwent focal therapy using irreversible electroporation. Follow-up biopsy was clear of residual disease in 90.2–97.3% of patients. Of patients, 96.75% avoided whole gland treatment at 3yr.

Observed racial disparity in the negative predictive value of multi-parametric MRI for the diagnosis for prostate cancer.

To evaluate the trend that despite recent advances in the screening, diagnosis, and management of prostate cancer (PCa), African-Americans (AAs) continue to have poorer outcomes compared to their Caucasian (CAU) counterparts. The reason for this may be rooted in biological differences in the cancer between the two groups; however, there may be some inherent disparities within the efficacy of the screening modalities. In this study, we aim to evaluate the negative predictive value (NPV) of multi-parametric MRI (mpMRI) between AA compared to CAUs. All mpMRI between January 2014 and June 2017 were evaluated. The MRIs were read by dedicated genitourinary radiologists. Subsequently, the readings were correlated to final pathology after the patients underwent radical prostatectomy. The NPV and negative likelihood ratios (-LR) of mpMRI were evaluated in AAs versus CAUs based on four cutoffs (≥ Grade I, ≥ Grade II, ≥ Grade III and ≥ Grade IV). The mpMRI was almost equally as effective between AAs and CAUs in excluding Grade III (NPV = 89 and 94, respectively), and Grade IV or above (NPV = 96 and 98, respectively) PCa; however, the NPV of mpMRI was significantly lower for Grade I (NPV = 32 and 52, respectively) and Grade II (NPV = 50 and 79, respectively) PCa. Despite advances in the screening for PCa, there are disparities noted in the efficacy of screening tools between AAs and CAUs. For this reason, patients should be risk stratified and their screening results should be evaluated with consideration given to their baseline risk.

Role of Multiparametric MRI in Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer

Aims: The main objectives of our study were to evaluate the role of Multiparametric MRI (mp-MRI) in diagnosis of carcinoma prostate and to compare the various MRI sequences used in MRI in evaluating carcinoma prostate with histopathological diagnosis kept as reference standard. Materials and Methods: This prospective cross-sectional study of 40 patients was performed by using various sequences used in mp-MRI i.e. T2 weighted imaging (T2WI), Diffusion Weighted Imaging (DWI), Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS) and Dynamic Contrast Enhanced study (DCE). Findings of mp-MRI sequences were compared with histopathological diagnosis. Statistical analysiswasperformed using SPSS computer statistical program for window release 16. Results: Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) of DCE in diagnosing carcinoma prostate were 88.89%, 50.00%, 94.12% and 33.33% respectively where assensitivities, specificities, PPVs, NPVs of DWI and MRS were same in our study i.e. 94.44%, 75.00%, 97.14% and 60.00%respectively. Overall sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV of mp-MRI by combining these sequences were found to be 97.22%, 75%, 97.22% and 75% respectively. Diagnostic accuracies of DWI, DCE and MRS were 92.5%, 85% and 92.5% respectively and overall diagnostic accuracy after combining these sequences in mp-MRI was 95%. Conclusions: mp-MRI including all the sequences has very good role in evaluation of carcinoma prostate. Diagnostic accuracy of mp-MRI increases when all sequences used together to assess prostatic lesions, so all the sequences should be used together in prostate cancer evaluation rather than using individual sequences.

Use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer active surveillance.

To review the role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) for active surveillance (AS) of prostate cancer. We performed a comprehensive search of Medline and Embase databases for relevant articles in the English language. Search terms included 'prostate cancer', 'active surveillance' or 'monitoring', 'expectant management', and 'MRI'. We also reviewed practice guidelines from recognized international associations or societies involved in prostate cancer care. Articles were selected by both authors for relevance to the subject matter. The ability of mpMRI to visualize primarily high-grade tumours within the prostate may improve risk stratification for men considering AS for prostate cancer. Multiple mostly single-institution studies have found that the addition of mpMRI and a targeted biopsy strategy can improve AS patient selection over standard TRUS biopsy alone. The high negative predictive value of mpMRI may allow men to avoid early repeat biopsy and may offer the possibility to tailor biopsy strategies. The presence of a radiographically positive lesion on mpMRI at baseline is predictive of higher likelihood of radiographic progression over time while on AS. MRI has shown promise in both patient selection and monitoring for men who undergo AS for prostate cancer. There are multiple barriers to the widespread use of mpMRI for AS including quality, cost and access to care.

A negative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging finding does not guarantee the absence of significant cancer among biopsy-proven prostate cancer patients: a real-life clinical experience.

We analyzed the data of consecutive patients who had preoperative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) to evaluate the actual performance of mpMRI among biopsy-proven prostate cancer (PCa) patients in predicting favorable pathology in the real-life clinical setting. Among a total 730 biopsy-proven PCa patients underwent RP, the preoperative mpMRIs of 534 patients were positive, demonstrating one or more PI-RADs V2 grade ≥ 2 lesion(s). Other 196 mpMRIs were classified as negative, without any suspicious lesion. Pathology was classified to be unfavorable when showing Gleason score (GS) 4/5 or pT3/N1 features. Significant cancer was defined as non-organ-confined, GS 4/5, or cancer volume of ≥ 0.5mL. Among a total 196 negative preoperative mpMRI patients, final RP pathology showed that 20 (10.2%) had pT3 disease and 2 (1.0%) had pN1 disease. Regarding the pathologic Gleason score, 117 (59.7%) had GS 3 + 4 and 44 (22.4%) had GS ≥ 4 + 3. The rate of a favorable PCa and an insignificant cancer was as low as 14.3% and 10.2%. Even among only the 101 D'Amico low-risk patients with negative MRI, the rates of a favorable pathology and an insignificant cancer were only 18.2% and 12.7%. The sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive value of mpMRI to predict a significant cancer were 74.3%, 45.5%, 95.5%, and 10.2%, respectively. In the real-life clinical setting, mpMRI demonstrated limited performance in the prediction of favorable and insignificant prostate cancer as a negative mpMRI could not guarantee the absence of unfavorable pathology among PCa patients.

Which Patients with Negative Magnetic Resonance Imaging Can Safely Avoid Biopsy for Prostate Cancer?

PurposeTo determine if there is a sub-set of men who can avoid prostate biopsy (PBx), based on multi-parametric MRI (mpMRI) and clinical characteristics. Materials and MethodsOf 1,149 consecutive men undergoing PBx (10/2011–03/2017), 135 had a pre-biopsy negative mpMRI (Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System score<3). Detection rates of clinically-significant prostate cancer (CSPCa) were evaluated according to PSA density (PSAD) and prior biopsy history. CSPCa was defined as Grade Group ≥ 2. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify predictors for non-CSPCa on biopsy. ResultsPCa and CSPCa detection rates were 38% and 18%, respectively. Men with biopsy-detected CSPCa had smaller prostates (p=0.004), higher PSAD (p=0.02) and no history of prior negative biopsy (p=0.01) compared to the non-CSPCa cohort. PSAD<0.15ng/mL/cc (p<0.001) and prior negative biopsy (p=0.005) were independent predictors of absence of CSPCa on biopsy. Negative predictive value of mpMRI for biopsy-detection of CSPCa improved with decreasing PSAD, primarily in men with prior negative biopsy (p=0.001), but not for biopsy-naïve men. Thirty-two percent of men had the combination of negative mpMRI, PSAD<0.15ng/mL/cc and negative prior biopsy; none had CSPCa on repeat biopsy. Incidence of biopsy-identified CSPCa in men with negative mpMRI only; men with negative mpMRI and PSAD<0.15ng/mL/cc; and men with negative mpMRI, PSAD <0.15ng/mL/cc and negative prior biopsy was 18%, 10% and 0%, respectively. ConclusionWe propose a sub-set of men (with negative mpMRI, PSAD<0.15ng/mL/cc and prior negative biopsy) who may safely avoid re-biopsy. Conversely, PBx should be considered in biopsy-naïve men, regardless of negative mpMRI, particularly those with PSAD>0.15ng/mL/cc.