ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Active surveillance (AS) is commonly based on standard 10-12-core prostate biopsies, which misclassify ~50% of cases compared with radical prostatectomy. We assessed the value of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-targeted transperineal fusion-biopsies in men under AS. METHODS: In all, 149 low-risk prostate cancer (PC) patients were included in AS between 2010 and 2015. Forty-five patients were initially diagnosed by combined 24-core systematic transperineal saturation biopsy (SB) and MRI/transurethral ultrasound (TRUS)-fusion targeted lesion biopsy (TB). A total of 104 patients first underwent 12-core TRUS-biopsy. All patients were followed-up by combined SB and TB for restratification after 1 and 2 years. All mpMRI examinations were analyzed using PIRADS. AS was performed according to PRIAS-criteria and a NIH-nomogram for AS-disqualification was investigated. AS-disqualification rates for men initially diagnosed by standard or fusion biopsy were compared using Kaplan-Meier estimates and log-rank tests. Differences in detection rates of the SB and TB components were evaluated with a paired-sample analysis. Regression analyses were performed to predict AS-disqualification. RESULTS: A total of, 48.1% of patients diagnosed by 12-core TRUS-biopsy were disqualified from AS based on the MRI/TRUS-fusion biopsy results. In the initial fusion-biopsy cohort, upgrading occurred significantly less frequently during 2-year follow-up (20%, P<0.001). TBs alone were significantly superior compared with SBs alone to detect Gleason-score-upgrading. NPV for Gleason-upgrading was 93.5% for PIRADS⩽2. PSA level, PSA density, NIH-nomogram, initial PIRADS score (P<0.001 each) and PIRADS-progression on consecutive MRI (P=0.007) were significant predictors of AS-disqualification. CONCLUSIONS: Standard TRUS-biopsies lead to significant underestimation of PC under AS. MRI/TRUS-fusion biopsies, and especially the TB component allow more reliable risk classification, leading to a significantly decreased chance of subsequent AS-disqualification. Cancer detection with mpMRI alone is not yet sensitive enough to omit SB on follow-up after initial 12-core TRUS-biopsy. After MRI/TRUS-fusion biopsy confirmed AS, it may be appropriate to biopsy only those men with suspected progression on MRI.
Subject(s)
Biopsy , Image-Guided Biopsy , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , Watchful Waiting , Aged , Biopsy/methods , Disease Progression , Humans , Image-Guided Biopsy/methods , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Grading , Prognosis , Prostatic Neoplasms/mortality , Reproducibility of Results , Sensitivity and SpecificityABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) is a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) technique that was established in the clinical routine primarily for the detection of brain ischemia. In the past 15 years its clinical use has been extended to oncological radiology, as tumor and metastases can be depicted in DWI due to their hypercellular nature. PRINCIPLES: The basis of DWI is the Stejskal-Tanner experiment. The diffusion properties of tissue can be visualized after acquisition of at least two diffusion-weighted series using echo planar imaging and a specific sequence of gradient pulses. CLINICAL APPLICATIONS: The use of DWI in prostate MRI was reported to be one of the first established applications that found its way into internationally recognized clinical guidelines of the European Society of Urological Radiology (ESUR) and the prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) scale. Due to recently reported high specificity and negative predictive values of 94% and 92%, respectively, its regular use for breast MRI is expected in the near future. Furthermore, DWI can also reliably be used for whole-body imaging in patients with multiple myeloma or for measuring the extent of bone metastases. OUTLOOK: New techniques in DWI, such as intravoxel incoherent motion imaging, diffusion kurtosis imaging and histogram-based analyses represent promising approaches to achieve a more quantitative evaluation for tumor detection and therapy response.
