Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Abdominal Radiology 5/2016

01-05-2016

In-bore magnetic resonance-guided transrectal biopsy for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer

Authors: Ely R. Felker, Stephanie A. Lee-Felker, John Feller, Daniel J. Margolis, David S. Lu, Robert Princenthal, Stuart May, Martin Cohen, Jiaoti Huang, Jeffrey Yoshida, Bernadette Greenwood, Hyun J. Kim, Steven S. Raman

Published in: Abdominal Radiology | Issue 5/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

To determine the safety and efficacy of in-bore magnetic resonance-guided prostate biopsy (MRGB) for detection of clinically significant disease (CSD) in untreated men with known or suspected prostate cancer (PCa).

Methods

512 patients underwent multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (Mp-MRI) followed by MRGB at one of three centers in this IRB-approved, HIPAA-compliant, retrospective study. Exclusion criteria were prior prostate cancer therapy and incomplete Mp-MRI (n = 51). Patients (n = 461) were analyzed in two subcohorts: no prior PCa (NP) (n = 381) and active surveillance (AS) (n = 80). Detection rates of PCa and CSD (Gleason Score ≥3 + 4) were calculated and compared among subcohorts and by Mp-MRI assessment grade. Logistic regression was performed to identify predictors for detection of PCa and CSD.

Results

Mean patient age was 66 years, median prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was 7.5 ng/mL, and median prostate volume was 54 cc. A mean of 1.7 targets was sampled per gland. Significant adverse events (urosepsis and hematuria with obstruction) occurred in 1% (5/461). Overall PCa detection rates were 51% per patient (233/461) and 37% per lesion (282/757). 65% (151/233) of men with detected PCa had CSD. Per-patient PCa detection rates in the NP and AS subcohorts were 47% (178/381) and 69% (55/80), respectively, significantly higher in the AS group (p < 0.001). CSD was detected in 10% (47/451), 43% (96/225) and 84% (68/81) of lesions with Mp-MRI assessment grades of 3, 4, and 5, respectively. Older age, higher PSA, and lower prostate volume predicted MRGB detection of CSD (OR 1.07 and p = 0.003, OR 1.1 and p = 0.014, and OR 0.98 and p = 0.032, respectively).

Conclusions

In-bore MRGB is safe and high yield for detection of CSD.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, et al. (2009) Cancer statistics, 2009. CA Cancer J Clin. 59(4):225–249CrossRefPubMed Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, et al. (2009) Cancer statistics, 2009. CA Cancer J Clin. 59(4):225–249CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Loeb S, Carter HB, Berndt SI, Ricker W, Schaeffer EM (2011) Complications after prostate biopsy: data from SEER-Medicare. J Urol. 186(5):1830–1834CrossRefPubMed Loeb S, Carter HB, Berndt SI, Ricker W, Schaeffer EM (2011) Complications after prostate biopsy: data from SEER-Medicare. J Urol. 186(5):1830–1834CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Hodge KK, McNeal JE, Stamey TA (1989) Ultrasound guided transrectal core biopsies of the palpably abnormal prostate. J Urol. 142(1):66–70PubMed Hodge KK, McNeal JE, Stamey TA (1989) Ultrasound guided transrectal core biopsies of the palpably abnormal prostate. J Urol. 142(1):66–70PubMed
4.
go back to reference Djavan B, Ravery V, Zlotta A, et al. (2001) Prospective evaluation of prostate cancer detected on biopsies 1, 2, 3 and 4: when should we stop? J Urol. 166(5):1679–1683CrossRefPubMed Djavan B, Ravery V, Zlotta A, et al. (2001) Prospective evaluation of prostate cancer detected on biopsies 1, 2, 3 and 4: when should we stop? J Urol. 166(5):1679–1683CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Dall’Era MA, Cooperberg MR, Chan JM, et al. (2008) Active surveillance for early-stage prostate cancer: review of the current literature. Cancer. 112(8):1650–1659CrossRefPubMed Dall’Era MA, Cooperberg MR, Chan JM, et al. (2008) Active surveillance for early-stage prostate cancer: review of the current literature. Cancer. 112(8):1650–1659CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Nam RK, Saskin R, Lee Y, et al. (2013) Increasing hospital admission rates for urological complications after transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. J Urol. 189(1 Suppl):S12–S17 (discussion S7–8)CrossRefPubMed Nam RK, Saskin R, Lee Y, et al. (2013) Increasing hospital admission rates for urological complications after transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. J Urol. 189(1 Suppl):S12–S17 (discussion S7–8)CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Hegde JV, Mulkern RV, Panych LP, et al. (2013) Multiparametric MRI of prostate cancer: an update on state-of-the-art techniques and their performance in detecting and localizing prostate cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging. 37(5):1035–1054CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hegde JV, Mulkern RV, Panych LP, et al. (2013) Multiparametric MRI of prostate cancer: an update on state-of-the-art techniques and their performance in detecting and localizing prostate cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging. 37(5):1035–1054CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
go back to reference Shukla-Dave A, Hricak H, Kattan MW, et al. (2007) The utility of magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy for predicting insignificant prostate cancer: an initial analysis. BJU Int. 99(4):786–793CrossRefPubMed Shukla-Dave A, Hricak H, Kattan MW, et al. (2007) The utility of magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy for predicting insignificant prostate cancer: an initial analysis. BJU Int. 99(4):786–793CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Kurhanewicz J, Vigneron D, Carroll P, Coakley F (2008) Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer: present and future. Curr Opin Urol. 18(1):71CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Kurhanewicz J, Vigneron D, Carroll P, Coakley F (2008) Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer: present and future. Curr Opin Urol. 18(1):71CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
go back to reference Villers A, Puech P, Mouton D, et al. (2006) Dynamic contrast enhanced, pelvic phased array magnetic resonance imaging of localized prostate cancer for predicting tumor volume: correlation with radical prostatectomy findings. J Urol. 176(6 Pt 1):2432–2437CrossRefPubMed Villers A, Puech P, Mouton D, et al. (2006) Dynamic contrast enhanced, pelvic phased array magnetic resonance imaging of localized prostate cancer for predicting tumor volume: correlation with radical prostatectomy findings. J Urol. 176(6 Pt 1):2432–2437CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Fütterer JJ, Heijmink SW, Scheenen TW, et al. (2006) Prostate cancer localization with dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging and proton MR spectroscopic imaging. Radiology. 241(2):449–458CrossRefPubMed Fütterer JJ, Heijmink SW, Scheenen TW, et al. (2006) Prostate cancer localization with dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging and proton MR spectroscopic imaging. Radiology. 241(2):449–458CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Haker SJ, Mulkern RV, Roebuck JR, et al. (2005) Magnetic resonance-guided prostate interventions. Top Magn Reson Imaging. 16(5):355–368CrossRefPubMed Haker SJ, Mulkern RV, Roebuck JR, et al. (2005) Magnetic resonance-guided prostate interventions. Top Magn Reson Imaging. 16(5):355–368CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Beyersdorff D, Winkel A, Hamm B, et al. (2005) MR imaging-guided prostate biopsy with a closed MR unit at 1.5 T: initial results. Radiology. 234(2):576–581CrossRefPubMed Beyersdorff D, Winkel A, Hamm B, et al. (2005) MR imaging-guided prostate biopsy with a closed MR unit at 1.5 T: initial results. Radiology. 234(2):576–581CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Pinto PA, Chung PH, Rastinehad AR, et al. (2011) Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion guided prostate biopsy improves cancer detection following transrectal ultrasound biopsy and correlates with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. J Urol. 186(4):1281–1285CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Pinto PA, Chung PH, Rastinehad AR, et al. (2011) Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion guided prostate biopsy improves cancer detection following transrectal ultrasound biopsy and correlates with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. J Urol. 186(4):1281–1285CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
17.
go back to reference Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Turkbey B, et al. (2015) Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. JAMA. 313(4):390–397CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Turkbey B, et al. (2015) Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. JAMA. 313(4):390–397CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
go back to reference Kasivisvanathan V, Dufour R, Moore CM, et al. (2013) Transperineal magnetic resonance image targeted prostate biopsy versus transperineal template prostate biopsy in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. J Urol. 189(3):860–866CrossRefPubMed Kasivisvanathan V, Dufour R, Moore CM, et al. (2013) Transperineal magnetic resonance image targeted prostate biopsy versus transperineal template prostate biopsy in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. J Urol. 189(3):860–866CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Nelson AW, Harvey RC, Parker RA, et al. (2013) Repeat prostate biopsy strategies after initial negative biopsy: meta-regression comparing cancer detection of transperineal, transrectal saturation and MRI guided biopsy. PLoS One. 8(2):e57480CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Nelson AW, Harvey RC, Parker RA, et al. (2013) Repeat prostate biopsy strategies after initial negative biopsy: meta-regression comparing cancer detection of transperineal, transrectal saturation and MRI guided biopsy. PLoS One. 8(2):e57480CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
go back to reference Valerio M, Donaldson I, Emberton M, et al. (2014) Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer using magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy: a systematic review. Eur Urol. 68:8–19CrossRefPubMed Valerio M, Donaldson I, Emberton M, et al. (2014) Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer using magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy: a systematic review. Eur Urol. 68:8–19CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Abdi H, Pourmalek F, Zargar H, et al. (2015) Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging enhances detection of significant tumor in patients on active surveillance for prostate cancer. Urology. 85(2):423–428CrossRefPubMed Abdi H, Pourmalek F, Zargar H, et al. (2015) Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging enhances detection of significant tumor in patients on active surveillance for prostate cancer. Urology. 85(2):423–428CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Hu JC, Chang E, Natarajan S, et al. (2014) Targeted prostate biopsy in select men for active surveillance: do the Epstein criteria still apply? J Urol. 192(2):385–390CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hu JC, Chang E, Natarajan S, et al. (2014) Targeted prostate biopsy in select men for active surveillance: do the Epstein criteria still apply? J Urol. 192(2):385–390CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
go back to reference Hoeks CM, Somford DM, van Oort IM, et al. (2014) Value of 3-T multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance-guided biopsy for early risk restratification in active surveillance of low-risk prostate cancer: a prospective multicenter cohort study. Invest Radiol. 49(3):165–172CrossRefPubMed Hoeks CM, Somford DM, van Oort IM, et al. (2014) Value of 3-T multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance-guided biopsy for early risk restratification in active surveillance of low-risk prostate cancer: a prospective multicenter cohort study. Invest Radiol. 49(3):165–172CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL, et al. (2015) PI-RADS prostate imaging—reporting and data system: 2015, Version 2. Eur Urol. 69:16–40CrossRefPubMed Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL, et al. (2015) PI-RADS prostate imaging—reporting and data system: 2015, Version 2. Eur Urol. 69:16–40CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Sonn GA, Natarajan S, Margolis DJ, et al. (2013) Targeted biopsy in the detection of prostate cancer using an office based magnetic resonance ultrasound fusion device. J Urol. 189(1):86–91CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Sonn GA, Natarajan S, Margolis DJ, et al. (2013) Targeted biopsy in the detection of prostate cancer using an office based magnetic resonance ultrasound fusion device. J Urol. 189(1):86–91CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
27.
go back to reference Bastian PJ, Mangold LA, Epstein JI, Partin AW (2004) Characteristics of insignificant clinical T1c prostate tumors. A contemporary analysis. Cancer. 101(9):2001–2005PubMed Bastian PJ, Mangold LA, Epstein JI, Partin AW (2004) Characteristics of insignificant clinical T1c prostate tumors. A contemporary analysis. Cancer. 101(9):2001–2005PubMed
28.
go back to reference Partin AW, Yoo J, Carter HB, et al. (1993) The use of prostate specific antigen, clinical stage and Gleason score to predict pathological stage in men with localized prostate cancer. J Urol. 150(1):110–114PubMed Partin AW, Yoo J, Carter HB, et al. (1993) The use of prostate specific antigen, clinical stage and Gleason score to predict pathological stage in men with localized prostate cancer. J Urol. 150(1):110–114PubMed
29.
go back to reference Ahmed HU, Hu Y, Carter T, et al. (2011) Characterizing clinically significant prostate cancer using template prostate mapping biopsy. J Urol. 186(2):458–464CrossRefPubMed Ahmed HU, Hu Y, Carter T, et al. (2011) Characterizing clinically significant prostate cancer using template prostate mapping biopsy. J Urol. 186(2):458–464CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference D’Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, et al. (2002) Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy or external beam radiation therapy for patients with clinically localized prostate carcinoma in the prostate specific antigen era. Cancer. 95(2):281CrossRefPubMed D’Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, et al. (2002) Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy or external beam radiation therapy for patients with clinically localized prostate carcinoma in the prostate specific antigen era. Cancer. 95(2):281CrossRefPubMed
31.
go back to reference Moore CM, Kasivisvanathan V, Eggener S, et al. (2013) Standards of reporting for MRI-targeted biopsy studies (START) of the prostate: recommendations from an International Working Group. Eur Urol. 64(4):544–552CrossRefPubMed Moore CM, Kasivisvanathan V, Eggener S, et al. (2013) Standards of reporting for MRI-targeted biopsy studies (START) of the prostate: recommendations from an International Working Group. Eur Urol. 64(4):544–552CrossRefPubMed
32.
go back to reference Schouten MG, Hoeks CM, Bomers JG, et al. (2015) Location of prostate cancers determined by multiparametric and mri-guided biopsy in patients with elevated prostate-specific antigen level and at least one negative transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 205(1):57–63CrossRefPubMed Schouten MG, Hoeks CM, Bomers JG, et al. (2015) Location of prostate cancers determined by multiparametric and mri-guided biopsy in patients with elevated prostate-specific antigen level and at least one negative transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 205(1):57–63CrossRefPubMed
33.
go back to reference Franiel T, Stephan C, Erbersdobler A, et al. (2011) Areas suspicious for prostate cancer: MR-guided biopsy in patients with at least one transrectal US-guided biopsy with a negative finding–multiparametric MR imaging for detection and biopsy planning. Radiology. 259(1):162–172CrossRefPubMed Franiel T, Stephan C, Erbersdobler A, et al. (2011) Areas suspicious for prostate cancer: MR-guided biopsy in patients with at least one transrectal US-guided biopsy with a negative finding–multiparametric MR imaging for detection and biopsy planning. Radiology. 259(1):162–172CrossRefPubMed
34.
go back to reference Hambrock T, Somford DM, Hoeks C, et al. (2010) Magnetic resonance imaging guided prostate biopsy in men with repeat negative biopsies and increased prostate specific antigen. J Urol. 183(2):520–527CrossRefPubMed Hambrock T, Somford DM, Hoeks C, et al. (2010) Magnetic resonance imaging guided prostate biopsy in men with repeat negative biopsies and increased prostate specific antigen. J Urol. 183(2):520–527CrossRefPubMed
35.
go back to reference de Rooij M, Crienen S, Witjes JA, et al. (2014) Cost-effectiveness of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and MR-guided targeted biopsy versus systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy in diagnosing prostate cancer: a modelling study from a health care perspective. Eur Urol. 66(3):430–436CrossRefPubMed de Rooij M, Crienen S, Witjes JA, et al. (2014) Cost-effectiveness of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and MR-guided targeted biopsy versus systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy in diagnosing prostate cancer: a modelling study from a health care perspective. Eur Urol. 66(3):430–436CrossRefPubMed
36.
go back to reference Roethke M, Anastasiadis AG, Lichy M, et al. (2012) MRI-guided prostate biopsy detects clinically significant cancer: analysis of a cohort of 100 patients after previous negative TRUS biopsy. World J Urol. 30(2):213–218CrossRefPubMed Roethke M, Anastasiadis AG, Lichy M, et al. (2012) MRI-guided prostate biopsy detects clinically significant cancer: analysis of a cohort of 100 patients after previous negative TRUS biopsy. World J Urol. 30(2):213–218CrossRefPubMed
37.
go back to reference Anastasiadis AG, Lichy MP, Nagele U, et al. (2006) MRI-guided biopsy of the prostate increases diagnostic performance in men with elevated or increasing PSA levels after previous negative TRUS biopsies. Eur Urol. 50(4):738–748CrossRefPubMed Anastasiadis AG, Lichy MP, Nagele U, et al. (2006) MRI-guided biopsy of the prostate increases diagnostic performance in men with elevated or increasing PSA levels after previous negative TRUS biopsies. Eur Urol. 50(4):738–748CrossRefPubMed
38.
go back to reference Engelhard K, Hollenbach HP, Kiefer B, et al. (2006) Prostate biopsy in the supine position in a standard 1.5-T scanner under real time MR-imaging control using a MR-compatible endorectal biopsy device. Eur Radiol. 16(6):1237–1243CrossRefPubMed Engelhard K, Hollenbach HP, Kiefer B, et al. (2006) Prostate biopsy in the supine position in a standard 1.5-T scanner under real time MR-imaging control using a MR-compatible endorectal biopsy device. Eur Radiol. 16(6):1237–1243CrossRefPubMed
39.
go back to reference Hoeks CM, Schouten MG, Bomers JG, et al. (2012) Three-Tesla magnetic resonance-guided prostate biopsy in men with increased prostate-specific antigen and repeated, negative, random, systematic, transrectal ultrasound biopsies: detection of clinically significant prostate cancers. Eur Urol. 62(5):902–909CrossRefPubMed Hoeks CM, Schouten MG, Bomers JG, et al. (2012) Three-Tesla magnetic resonance-guided prostate biopsy in men with increased prostate-specific antigen and repeated, negative, random, systematic, transrectal ultrasound biopsies: detection of clinically significant prostate cancers. Eur Urol. 62(5):902–909CrossRefPubMed
40.
go back to reference Penzkofer T, Tuncali K, Fedorov A, et al. (2015) Transperineal in-bore 3-T MR imaging-guided prostate biopsy: a prospective clinical observational study. Radiology. 274(1):170–180CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Penzkofer T, Tuncali K, Fedorov A, et al. (2015) Transperineal in-bore 3-T MR imaging-guided prostate biopsy: a prospective clinical observational study. Radiology. 274(1):170–180CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
In-bore magnetic resonance-guided transrectal biopsy for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer
Authors
Ely R. Felker
Stephanie A. Lee-Felker
John Feller
Daniel J. Margolis
David S. Lu
Robert Princenthal
Stuart May
Martin Cohen
Jiaoti Huang
Jeffrey Yoshida
Bernadette Greenwood
Hyun J. Kim
Steven S. Raman
Publication date
01-05-2016
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Abdominal Radiology / Issue 5/2016
Print ISSN: 2366-004X
Electronic ISSN: 2366-0058
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-016-0750-7

Other articles of this Issue 5/2016

Abdominal Radiology 5/2016 Go to the issue
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.