Comparison of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted Biopsy With Systematic Transrectal Ultrasonography Biopsy for Biopsy-Naive Men at Risk for Prostate Cancer: A Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial.


Journal

JAMA oncology
ISSN: 2374-2445
Titre abrégé: JAMA Oncol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101652861

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 04 2021
Historique:
pubmed: 5 2 2021
medline: 12 3 2022
entrez: 4 2 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with targeted biopsy is an appealing alternative to systematic 12-core transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) biopsy for prostate cancer diagnosis, but has yet to be widely adopted. To determine whether MRI with only targeted biopsy was noninferior to systematic TRUS biopsies in the detection of International Society of Urological Pathology grade group (GG) 2 or greater prostate cancer. This multicenter, prospective randomized clinical trial was conducted in 5 Canadian academic health sciences centers between January 2017 and November 2019, and data were analyzed between January and March 2020. Participants included biopsy-naive men with a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer who were advised to undergo a prostate biopsy. Clinical suspicion was defined as a 5% or greater chance of GG2 or greater prostate cancer using the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Risk Calculator, version 2. Additional criteria were serum prostate-specific antigen levels of 20 ng/mL or less (to convert to micrograms per liter, multiply by 1) and no contraindication to MRI. Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy (MRI-TB) only if a lesion with a Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS), v 2.0, score of 3 or greater was identified vs 12-core systematic TRUS biopsy. The proportion of men with a diagnosis of GG2 or greater cancer. Secondary outcomes included the proportion who received a diagnosis of GG1 prostate cancer; GG3 or greater cancer; no significant cancer but subsequent positive MRI results and/or GG2 or greater cancer detected on a repeated biopsy by 2 years; and adverse events. The intention-to-treat population comprised 453 patients (367 [81.0%] White, 19 [4.2%] African Canadian, 32 [7.1%] Asian, and 10 [2.2%] Hispanic) who were randomized to undergo TRUS biopsy (226 [49.9%]) or MRI-TB (227 [51.1%]), of which 421 (93.0%) were evaluable per protocol. A lesion with a PI-RADS score of 3 or greater was detected in 138 of 221 men (62.4%) who underwent MRI, with 26 (12.1%), 82 (38.1%), and 30 (14.0%) having maximum PI-RADS scores of 3, 4, and 5, respectively. Eighty-three of 221 men who underwent MRI-TB (37%) had a negative MRI result and avoided biopsy. Cancers GG2 and greater were identified in 67 of 225 men (30%) who underwent TRUS biopsy vs 79 of 227 (35%) allocated to MRI-TB (absolute difference, 5%, 97.5% 1-sided CI, -3.4% to ∞; noninferiority margin, -5%). Adverse events were less common in the MRI-TB arm. Grade group 1 cancer detection was reduced by more than half in the MRI arm (from 22% to 10%; risk difference, -11.6%; 95% CI, -18.2% to -4.9%). Magnetic resonance imaging followed by selected targeted biopsy is noninferior to initial systematic biopsy in men at risk for prostate cancer in detecting GG2 or greater cancers. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02936258.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33538782
pii: 2775932
doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.7589
pmc: PMC7863017
doi:

Banques de données

ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT02936258']

Types de publication

Clinical Trial, Phase III Journal Article Multicenter Study Randomized Controlled Trial Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

534-542

Commentaires et corrections

Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Type : ErratumIn
Type : CommentIn
Type : ErratumIn

Auteurs

Laurence Klotz (L)

Division of Urology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Joseph Chin (J)

London Health Sciences Centre, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada.

Peter C Black (PC)

Vancouver Prostate Centre, Department of Urologic Sciences, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

Antonio Finelli (A)

Princess Margaret Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Maurice Anidjar (M)

Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, Québec, Canada.

Franck Bladou (F)

Division of Urology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Universite de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France.

Ashley Mercado (A)

Vancouver Prostate Centre, Department of Urologic Sciences, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

Mark Levental (M)

Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, Québec, Canada.

Sangeet Ghai (S)

Princess Margaret Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Silvia D Chang (SD)

Department of Radiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

Laurent Milot (L)

Body and VIR Radiology Department, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Hospital Edouard Herriot, Lyon, France.

Chirag Patel (C)

Division of Urology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Zahra Kassam (Z)

London Health Sciences Centre, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada.

Caroline Moore (C)

University College London, London, England.

Veeru Kasivisvanathan (V)

University College London, London, England.

Andrew Loblaw (A)

Institute of Healthcare Policy and Management, Department of Radiation Oncology, Ontario Institute of Cancer Research, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Marlene Kebabdjian (M)

Division of Urology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Craig C Earle (CC)

Ontario Institute of Cancer Research, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Greg R Pond (GR)

Department of Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

Masoom A Haider (MA)

Toronto General Hospital, Department of Radiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

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