Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsy in the diagnostic pathway of prostate cancer.
Multiparametrische Magnetresonanztomographie (mpMRT) und mpMRT-gesteuerte Biopsie bei der Diagnostik des Prostatakarzinoms.
Clinical decision-making
Imaging
PI-RADS classification
Prostatectomy
Tissue
Journal
Der Radiologe
ISSN: 1432-2102
Titre abrégé: Radiologe
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 0401257
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Nov 2020
Nov 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
16
7
2020
medline:
26
1
2021
entrez:
16
7
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) of the prostate and mpMRI-guided biopsy have proved to be a valuable part of the diagnostic pathway for prostate cancer. This review reports on the current results in terms of clinical performance of these diagnostic tools and their role in clinical decision-making. Die multiparametrische Magnetresonanztomographie (mpMRT) der Prostata und die mpMRT-gesteuerte Biopsie sind ein wichtiger Bestandteil der Diagnostik des Prostatakarzinoms. In dieser Übersichtsarbeit berichten wir über die aktuelle Studienlage zur klinischen Anwendung dieser diagnostischen Mittel und bewerten deren Stellenwert in der klinischen Entscheidungsfindung.
Autres résumés
Type: Publisher
(ger)
Die multiparametrische Magnetresonanztomographie (mpMRT) der Prostata und die mpMRT-gesteuerte Biopsie sind ein wichtiger Bestandteil der Diagnostik des Prostatakarzinoms. In dieser Übersichtsarbeit berichten wir über die aktuelle Studienlage zur klinischen Anwendung dieser diagnostischen Mittel und bewerten deren Stellenwert in der klinischen Entscheidungsfindung.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32666150
doi: 10.1007/s00117-020-00716-z
pii: 10.1007/s00117-020-00716-z
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
63-69Références
Robert-Koch-Institut (2017) Krebs in Deutschland, Prostata. Zentrum für Krebsregisterdaten
D’Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, Schultz D, Blank K, Broderick GA, Tomaszewski JE, Renshaw AA, Kaplan I, Beard CJ et al (1998) Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 280:969–974
pubmed: 9749478
doi: 10.1001/jama.280.11.969
pmcid: 9749478
Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Garmo H, Taari K, Busch C, Nordling S, Haggman M, Andersson SO, Andren O, Steineck G et al (2018) Radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting in prostate cancer—29-year follow-up. N Engl J Med 379:2319–2329
pubmed: 30575473
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1807801
pmcid: 30575473
Neal DE, Metcalfe C, Donovan JL, Lane JA, Davis M, Young GJ, Dutton SJ, Walsh EI, Martin RM, Peters TJ et al (2019) Ten-year mortality, disease progression, and treatment-related side effects in men with localised prostate cancer from the ProtecT randomised controlled trial according to treatment received. Eur Urol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2019.10.030
Futterer JJ, Briganti A, De Visschere P, Emberton M, Giannarini G, Kirkham A, Taneja SS, Thoeny H, Villeirs G, Villers A (2015) Can clinically significant prostate cancer be detected with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging? A systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol 68:1045–1053
pubmed: 25656808
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.01.013
pmcid: 25656808
de Gorski A, Roupret M, Peyronnet B, Le Cossec C, Granger B, Comperat E, Cussenot O, Renard-Penna R, Mozer P (2015) Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion targeted biopsies to diagnose clinically significant prostate cancer in enlarged compared to smaller prostates. J Urol 194:669–673
pubmed: 25784374
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.03.025
pmcid: 25784374
Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Briers E, Cumberbatch MG, De Santis M, Fossati N, Gross T, Henry AM, Joniau S et al (2017) EAU-ESTRO-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol 71:618–629
pubmed: 27568654
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.08.003
pmcid: 27568654
Giganti F, Rosenkrantz AB, Villeirs G, Panebianco V, Stabile A, Emberton M, Moore CM (2019) The evolution of MRI of the prostate: the past, the present, and the future. Ajr Am J Roentgenol 213:384–396
pubmed: 31039022
doi: 10.2214/AJR.18.20796
pmcid: 31039022
Sinnott JA, Rider JR, Carlsson J, Gerke T, Tyekucheva S, Penney KL, Sesso HD, Loda M, Fall K, Stampfer MJ et al (2015) Molecular differences in transition zone and peripheral zone prostate tumors. Carcinogenesis 36:632–638
pubmed: 25870172
pmcid: 4572920
doi: 10.1093/carcin/bgv051
Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL, Cornud F, Haider MA, Macura KJ, Margolis D, Schnall MD, Shtern F, Tempany CM et al (2016) PI-RADS prostate imaging—reporting and data system: 2015, version 2. Eur Urol 69:16–40
pubmed: 26427566
pmcid: 26427566
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.08.052
Somford DM, Futterer JJ, Hambrock T, Barentsz JO (2008) Diffusion and perfusion MR imaging of the prostate. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 16:685–695 (ix)
pubmed: 18926431
doi: 10.1016/j.mric.2008.07.002
pmcid: 18926431
Turkbey B, Rosenkrantz AB, Haider MA, Padhani AR, Villeirs G, Macura KJ, Tempany CM, Choyke PL, Cornud F, Margolis DJ et al (2019) Prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2.1: 2019 update of prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2. Eur Urol 76:340–351
pubmed: 30898406
pmcid: 30898406
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.02.033
Hambrock T, Somford DM, Huisman HJ, van Oort IM, Witjes JA, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa CA, Scheenen T, Barentsz JO (2011) Relationship between apparent diffusion coefficients at 3.0‑T MR imaging and Gleason grade in peripheral zone prostate cancer. Radiology 259:453–461
pubmed: 21502392
doi: 10.1148/radiol.11091409
pmcid: 21502392
Wu LM, Xu JR, Ye YQ, Lu Q, Hu JN (2012) The clinical value of diffusion-weighted imaging in combination with T2-weighted imaging in diagnosing prostate carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ajr Am J Roentgenol 199:103–110
pubmed: 22733900
doi: 10.2214/AJR.11.7634
pmcid: 22733900
Niu XK, Chen XH, Chen ZF, Chen L, Li J, Peng T (2018) Diagnostic performance of biparametric MRI for detection of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ajr Am J Roentgenol 211:369–378
pubmed: 29894216
doi: 10.2214/AJR.17.18946
pmcid: 29894216
Scialpi M, Prosperi E, D’Andrea A, Martorana E, Malaspina C, Palumbo B, Orlandi A, Falcone G, Milizia M, Mearini L et al (2017) Biparametric versus multiparametric MRI with non-endorectal coil at 3T in the detection and localization of prostate cancer. Anticancer Res 37:1263–1271
pubmed: 28314291
doi: 10.21873/anticanres.11443
pmcid: 28314291
van der Leest M, Israel B, Cornel EB, Zamecnik P, Schoots IG, van der Lelij H, Padhani AR, Rovers M, van Oort I, Sedelaar M et al (2019) High diagnostic performance of short magnetic resonance imaging protocols for prostate cancer detection in biopsy-naive men: the next step in magnetic resonance imaging accessibility. Eur Urol 76:574–581
pubmed: 31167748
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.05.029
pmcid: 31167748
Ullrich T, Quentin M, Arsov C, Laqua N, Abrar D, Hiester A, Albers P, Antoch G, Schimmoller L (2019) Value of dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MR imaging in peripheral lesions in PI-RADS‑4 patients. Rofo. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1020-4026
Greer MD, Shih JH, Lay N, Barrett T, Kayat Bittencourt L, Borofsky S, Kabakus IM, Law YM, Marko J, Shebel H et al (2017) Validation of the dominant sequence paradigm and role of dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging in PI-RADS version 2. Radiology 285:859–869
pubmed: 28727501
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017161316
pmcid: 28727501
Del Vescovo R, Pisanti F, Russo V, Battisti S, Cazzato RL, D’Agostino F, Giurazza F, Quattrocchi CC, Faiella E, Setola R et al (2013) Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR evaluation of prostate cancer before and after endorectal high-intensity focused ultrasound. Radiol Med 118:851–862
pubmed: 22986696
doi: 10.1007/s11547-012-0876-9
pmcid: 22986696
Kuhl CK, Bruhn R, Kramer N, Nebelung S, Heidenreich A, Schrading S (2017) Abbreviated biparametric prostate MR imaging in men with elevated prostate-specific antigen. Radiology 285:493–505
pubmed: 28727544
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017170129
pmcid: 28727544
Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R, Choyke P, Verma S, Villeirs G, Rouviere O, Logager V, Futterer JJ, European Society of Urogenital R (2012) ESUR prostate MR guidelines. Eur Radiol 22(2012):746–757
pubmed: 22322308
pmcid: 3297750
doi: 10.1007/s00330-011-2377-y
de Rooij M, Hamoen EH, Futterer JJ, Barentsz JO, Rovers MM (2014) Accuracy of multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer detection: a meta-analysis. Ajr Am J Roentgenol 202:343–351
pubmed: 24450675
doi: 10.2214/AJR.13.11046
pmcid: 24450675
Woo S, Suh CH, Kim SY, Cho JY, Kim SH (2017) Diagnostic performance of prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 for detection of prostate cancer: a systematic review and diagnostic meta-analysis. Eur Urol 72:177–188
pubmed: 28196723
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.01.042
pmcid: 28196723
Ahmed HU, El-Shater Bosaily A, Brown LC, Gabe R, Kaplan R, Parmar MK, Collaco-Moraes Y, Ward K, Hindley RG, Freeman A et al (2017) Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet 389:815–822
pubmed: 28110982
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32401-1
pmcid: 28110982
Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft (DK), AWMF (2019) Leitlinienprogramm Onkologie: Interdisziplininäre Leitlinie der Qualität S3 zur Führerkennung, Diagnose und Therapie der verschiedenen Stadien des Prostatakarzinom
Valerio M, Donaldson I, Emberton M, Ehdaie B, Hadaschik BA, Marks LS, Mozer P, Rastinehad AR, Ahmed HU (2015) Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer using magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy: a systematic review. Eur Urol 68:8–19
pubmed: 25454618
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.10.026
pmcid: 25454618
Kasivisvanathan V, Emberton M, Moore CM (2018) MRI-targeted biopsy for prostate-cancer diagnosis. N Engl J Med 379:589–590
pubmed: 30089067
doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1807507
pmcid: 30089067
Venderink W, van Luijtelaar A, van der Leest M, Barentsz JO, Jenniskens SFM, Sedelaar MJP, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa C, Overduin CG, Futterer JJ (2019) Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and follow-up to avoid prostate biopsy in 4259 men. BJU Int 124:775–784
pubmed: 31237388
doi: 10.1111/bju.14853
pmcid: 31237388
Mottet N (Chair) RCNvdB, Briers E (Patient Representative), Cornford P (Vice-chair), De Santis M, Fanti S, Gillessen S, Grummet J, Henry AM, Lam TB, Mason MD, van der Kwast TH, van der Poel HG, Rouvière O, Tilki D, Wiegel T, & Guidelines Associates: Van den Broeck TMC, Fossati N, Gross T, Lardas M, Liew M, Moris L, Schoots IG, Willemse P‑PM (2019) EAU Guidelines. Edn. presented at the EAU Annual Congress Barcelona 2019
Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Turkbey B, George AK, Rothwax J, Shakir N, Okoro C, Raskolnikov D, Parnes HL, Linehan WM et al (2015) Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. JAMA 313:390–397
pubmed: 25626035
pmcid: 4572575
doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.17942
Filson CP, Natarajan S, Margolis DJ, Huang J, Lieu P, Dorey FJ, Reiter RE, Marks LS (2016) Prostate cancer detection with magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion biopsy: The role of systematic and targeted biopsies. Cancer 122:884–892
pubmed: 26749141
doi: 10.1002/cncr.29874
pmcid: 26749141
Delongchamps NB, Portalez D, Bruguiere E, Rouviere O, Malavaud B, Mozer P, Fiard G, Cornud F and Group MS (2016) Are magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound guided targeted biopsies noninferior to transrectal ultrasound guided systematic biopsies for the detection of prostate cancer? J Urol 196:1069–1075
pubmed: 27079582
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.04.003
pmcid: 27079582
Peltier A, Aoun F, Lemort M, Kwizera F, Paesmans M, Van Velthoven R (2015) MRI-targeted biopsies versus systematic transrectal ultrasound guided biopsies for the diagnosis of localized prostate cancer in biopsy naive men. Biomed Res Int 2015:571708
pubmed: 25692142
pmcid: 4323072
doi: 10.1155/2015/571708
Baco E, Rud E, Eri LM, Moen G, Vlatkovic L, Svindland A, Eggesbo HB, Ukimura O (2016) A randomized controlled trial to assess and compare the outcomes of two-core prostate biopsy guided by fused magnetic resonance and transrectal ultrasound images and traditional 12-core systematic biopsy. Eur Urol 69:149–156
pubmed: 25862143
pmcid: 25862143
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.03.041
Rouviere O, Puech P, Renard-Penna R, Claudon M, Roy C, Mege-Lechevallier F, Decaussin-Petrucci M, Dubreuil-Chambardel M, Magaud L, Remontet L et al (2019) Use of prostate systematic and targeted biopsy on the basis of multiparametric MRI in biopsy-naive patients (MRI-FIRST): a prospective, multicentre, paired diagnostic study. Lancet Oncol 20:100–109
pubmed: 30470502
pmcid: 30470502
doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30569-2
Ploussard G, Beauval JB, Lesourd M, Almeras C, Assoun J, Aziza R, Gautier JR, Loison G, Portalez D, Salin A et al (2019) Added value of concomitant systematic and fusion targeted biopsies for grade group prediction based on radical prostatectomy final pathology on positive magnetic resonance imaging. J Urol 202:1182–1187
pubmed: 31246548
doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000000418
pmcid: 31246548
Stabile A, Dell’Oglio P, Gandaglia G, Fossati N, Brembilla G, Cristel G, Deho F, Scattoni V, Maga T, Losa A et al (2018) Not all multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsies are equal: the impact of the type of approach and operator expertise on the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. Eur Urol Oncol 1:120–128
pubmed: 31100235
doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2018.02.002
pmcid: 31100235
Pokorny M, Kua B, Esler R, Yaxley J, Samaratunga H, Dunglison N, Gianduzzo T, Coughlin G, Holt R, Laing B et al (2019) MRI-guided in-bore biopsy for prostate cancer: what does the evidence say? A case series of 554 patients and a review of the current literature. World J Urol 37:1263–1279
pubmed: 30255394
doi: 10.1007/s00345-018-2497-y
pmcid: 30255394
Wegelin O, Exterkate L, van der Leest M, Kummer JA, Vreuls W, de Bruin PC, Bosch J, Barentsz JO, Somford DM, van Melick HHE (2019) The FUTURE Trial: a multicenter randomised controlled trial on target biopsy techniques based on magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer in patients with prior negative biopsies. Eur Urol 75:582–590
pubmed: 30522912
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.11.040
pmcid: 30522912
Wegelin O, van Melick HHE, Hooft L, Bosch J, Reitsma HB, Barentsz JO, Somford DM (2017) Comparing three different techniques for magnetic resonance imaging-targeted prostate biopsies: a systematic review of in-bore versus magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound fusion versus cognitive registration. Is there a preferred technique? Eur Urol 71:517–531
pubmed: 27568655
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.07.041
pmcid: 27568655
Hamid S, Donaldson IA, Hu Y, Rodell R, Villarini B, Bonmati E, Tranter P, Punwani S, Sidhu HS, Willis S et al (2019) The SmartTarget Biopsy Trial: a prospective, within-person randomised, blinded trial comparing the accuracy of visual-registration and magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound image-fusion targeted biopsies for prostate cancer risk stratification. Eur Urol 75:733–740
pubmed: 30527787
pmcid: 30527787
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.08.007
The Royal College of Surgeons of England BAoUSB, British Uro-Oncology (BUG) (2019) National Prostate Cancer Audit - Fifth Year Annua Report-Results of the NPCA Prospective Audit in England and Wales for men diagnosed 1 April 2016-Mach 2017
Stefanova V, Buckley R, Flax S, Spevack L, Hajek D, Tunis A, Lai E, Loblaw A, Collaborators (2019) Transperineal prostate biopsies using local anesthesia: experience with 1,287 patients. Prostate cancer detection rate, complications and patient tolerability. J Urol 201:1121–1126
pubmed: 30835607
doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000000156
pmcid: 30835607
Borghesi M, Ahmed H, Nam R, Schaeffer E, Schiavina R, Taneja S, Weidner W, Loeb S (2017) Complications after systematic, random, and image-guided prostate biopsy. Eur Urol 71:353–365
pubmed: 27543165
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.08.004
pmcid: 27543165
Xiang J, Yan H, Li J, Wang X, Chen H, Zheng X (2019) Transperineal versus transrectal prostate biopsy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Surg Oncol 17:31
pubmed: 30760274
pmcid: 6375152
doi: 10.1186/s12957-019-1573-0
Johnson DC, Raman SS, Mirak SA, Kwan L, Bajgiran AM, Hsu W, Maehara CK, Ahuja P, Faiena I, Pooli A et al (2019) Detection of individual prostate cancer foci via multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Urol 75:712–720
pubmed: 30509763
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.11.031
pmcid: 30509763
Branger N, Maubon T, Traumann M, Thomassin-Piana J, Brandone N, Taix S, Touzlian J, Brunelle S, Pignot G, Salem N et al (2017) Is negative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging really able to exclude significant prostate cancer? The real-life experience. BJU Int 119:449–455
pubmed: 27618134
doi: 10.1111/bju.13657
pmcid: 27618134
Muller S, Lilleaasen G, Sand TE, Lofsgaard L, Estop-Garanto M, Helgo D, Sund P, Mygland V (2018) Poor reproducibility of PIRADS score in two multiparametric MRIs before biopsy in men with elevated PSA. World J Urol 36:687–691
pubmed: 29508048
pmcid: 5916982
doi: 10.1007/s00345-018-2252-4
Greer MD, Brown AM, Shih JH, Summers RM, Marko J, Law YM, Sankineni S, George AK, Merino MJ, Pinto PA et al (2017) Accuracy and agreement of PIRADSv2 for prostate cancer mpMRI: a multireader study. J Magn Reson Imaging 45:579–585
pubmed: 27391860
doi: 10.1002/jmri.25372
pmcid: 27391860
van der Leest M, Cornel E, Israel B, Hendriks R, Padhani AR, Hoogenboom M, Zamecnik P, Bakker D, Setiasti AY, Veltman J et al (2019) Head-to-head Comparison of Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Prostate Biopsy Versus Multiparametric Prostate Resonance Imaging with Subsequent Magnetic Resonance-guided Biopsy in Biopsy-naive Men with Elevated Prostate-specific Antigen: A Large Prospective Multicenter Clinical Study. Eur Urol 75:570–578
pubmed: 30477981
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.11.023
pmcid: 30477981