Standardized Magnetic Resonance Imaging Reporting Using the Prostate Cancer Radiological Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation Criteria and Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion with Transperineal Saturation Biopsy to Select Men on Active Surveillance.


Journal

European urology focus
ISSN: 2405-4569
Titre abrégé: Eur Urol Focus
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101665661

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 2021
Historique:
received: 11 12 2018
revised: 04 02 2019
accepted: 01 03 2019
pubmed: 18 3 2019
medline: 29 3 2022
entrez: 18 3 2019
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Contemporary selection criteria for men with prostate cancer (PC) suitable for active surveillance (AS) are unsatisfactory, leading to high disqualification rates based on tumor misclassification. Conventional biopsy protocols are based on standard 12-core transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) biopsy. To assess the value of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/TRUS fusion biopsy over 4-yr follow-up in men on AS for low-risk PC. Between 2010 and 2018, a total of 273 men were included. Of them, 157 men with initial 12-core TRUS biopsy and 116 with initial MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy were followed by systematic and targeted transperineal MRI/TRUS fusion biopsies based on Prostate Cancer Research International Active Surveillance criteria. MRI from follow-up MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy was assessed using the Prostate Cancer Radiological Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation (PRECISE) scoring system. AS-disqualification rates for patients on AS initially diagnosed by either 12-core TRUS biopsy or by MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy were compared using Kaplan-Meier estimates, log-rank tests, and regression analyses. We also analyzed the influence of negative primary MRI and PRECISE scoring to predict AS disqualification using Kaplan-Meier estimates, log-rank tests, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Of men diagnosed by 12-core TRUS biopsy, 59% were disqualified from AS based on the results of subsequent MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy. In the initial MRI fusion biopsy cohort, upgrading occurred significantly less frequently (19%, p<0.001). ROC curve analyses demonstrated good discrimination for the PRECISE score with an area under the curve of 0.83. No men with a PRECISE score of 1 or 2 (demonstrating absence or downgrading of lesions in follow-up MRI) were disqualified from AS. In our cohort, a negative baseline MRI scan was not a predictor of nondisqualification from AS. Limitations include transperineal approach and extended systematic biopsies used with MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy, which may not be representative of other centers. MRI/TRUS fusion biopsies allow a reliable risk classification for patients who are candidates for AS. The application of the PRECISE scoring system demonstrated good discrimination. In this study, we investigated the value of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and MRI/transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) fusion biopsies for the assessment of active surveillance (AS) reliability using the Prostate Cancer Radiological Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation criteria. Standard TRUS biopsies lead to significant underestimation of prostate cancer. In contrast, MRI/TRUS fusion biopsies allowed for a more reliable risk classification. For appropriate inclusion into AS, men should receive either an initial or a confirmatory MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Contemporary selection criteria for men with prostate cancer (PC) suitable for active surveillance (AS) are unsatisfactory, leading to high disqualification rates based on tumor misclassification. Conventional biopsy protocols are based on standard 12-core transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) biopsy.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the value of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/TRUS fusion biopsy over 4-yr follow-up in men on AS for low-risk PC.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
Between 2010 and 2018, a total of 273 men were included. Of them, 157 men with initial 12-core TRUS biopsy and 116 with initial MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy were followed by systematic and targeted transperineal MRI/TRUS fusion biopsies based on Prostate Cancer Research International Active Surveillance criteria. MRI from follow-up MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy was assessed using the Prostate Cancer Radiological Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation (PRECISE) scoring system.
OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
AS-disqualification rates for patients on AS initially diagnosed by either 12-core TRUS biopsy or by MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy were compared using Kaplan-Meier estimates, log-rank tests, and regression analyses. We also analyzed the influence of negative primary MRI and PRECISE scoring to predict AS disqualification using Kaplan-Meier estimates, log-rank tests, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.
RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS
Of men diagnosed by 12-core TRUS biopsy, 59% were disqualified from AS based on the results of subsequent MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy. In the initial MRI fusion biopsy cohort, upgrading occurred significantly less frequently (19%, p<0.001). ROC curve analyses demonstrated good discrimination for the PRECISE score with an area under the curve of 0.83. No men with a PRECISE score of 1 or 2 (demonstrating absence or downgrading of lesions in follow-up MRI) were disqualified from AS. In our cohort, a negative baseline MRI scan was not a predictor of nondisqualification from AS. Limitations include transperineal approach and extended systematic biopsies used with MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy, which may not be representative of other centers.
CONCLUSIONS
MRI/TRUS fusion biopsies allow a reliable risk classification for patients who are candidates for AS. The application of the PRECISE scoring system demonstrated good discrimination.
PATIENT SUMMARY
In this study, we investigated the value of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and MRI/transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) fusion biopsies for the assessment of active surveillance (AS) reliability using the Prostate Cancer Radiological Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation criteria. Standard TRUS biopsies lead to significant underestimation of prostate cancer. In contrast, MRI/TRUS fusion biopsies allowed for a more reliable risk classification. For appropriate inclusion into AS, men should receive either an initial or a confirmatory MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy.

Identifiants

pubmed: 30878348
pii: S2405-4569(19)30076-8
doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2019.03.001
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

102-110

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2019 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Svenja Dieffenbacher (S)

Department of Urology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.

Joanne Nyarangi-Dix (J)

Department of Urology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.

Francesco Giganti (F)

Department of Radiology, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; Division of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.

David Bonekamp (D)

Department of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.

Claudia Kesch (C)

Department of Urology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Vancouver Prostate Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

Maya B Müller-Wolf (MB)

Department of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.

Viktoria Schütz (V)

Department of Urology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.

Claudia Gasch (C)

Department of Urology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.

Gencay Hatiboglu (G)

Department of Urology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.

Marcus Hauffe (M)

Department of Urology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.

Albrecht Stenzinger (A)

Institute of Pathology, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.

Stefan Duensing (S)

Department of Urology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.

Heinz-Peter Schlemmer (HP)

Department of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.

Caroline M Moore (CM)

Division of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK; Department of Urology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.

Markus Hohenfellner (M)

Department of Urology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.

Jan Philipp Radtke (JP)

Department of Urology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany. Electronic address: JanPhilipp.Radtke@med.uni-heidelberg.de.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH