Top

World Journal of Urology

Published in:

01-02-2017 | Original Article

Prostate cancer detection rates of magnetic resonance imaging-guided prostate biopsy related to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System score

Authors: Daniël F. Osses, Joost J. van Asten, Gerard J. Kieft, Jasper D. Tijsterman

Published in: World Journal of Urology | Issue 2/2017

Abstract

Purpose

Recent studies have shown that multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance imaging-guided prostate biopsy in patients with suspected prostate cancer increase detection rate and clinical significance of diagnosed tumors. Purpose of this study is to evaluate the detection rates of prostate cancer for magnetic resonance imaging-guided prostate biopsy related to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System score.

Methods

We included all patients with cancer-suspicious lesions on 3-Tesla multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-prostate who underwent magnetic resonance imaging-guided prostate biopsy in Haga Teaching Hospital between January 2013 and January 2015.

Results

In total, 155 patients were included. In 100 of 155 (65 %) men, MRI-guided prostate biopsy was positive for prostate cancer. No biopsy of PI-RADS 2-lesions was positive. PI-RADS 3- and 4-lesions were, respectively, in 10 and 77 % prostate cancer positive. Biopsies of PI-RADS 5-lesions were in 89 % of the cases positive. The majority of detected cancers (63 %) were Gleason score ≥ 7, and this number increases to 75 % in positive PI-RADS 5-lesions.

Conclusions

Magnetic resonance imaging-guided prostate biopsy has a high detection rate of prostate cancer in men with cancer-suspicious lesions on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-prostate, and this rate (65 %) increases with the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System score (81 % in PI-RADS 4- and 5-lesions).

Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Briers E et al (2015) Guidelines on prostate cancer. European Association of Urology, Arnhem, The Netherlands

http://eco.iarc.fr/eucan/CancerOne.aspx?Cancer=29&Gender=1

Willis SR, Ahmed HU, Moore CM et al (2014) Multiparametric MRI followed by targeted prostate biopsy for men with suspected prostate cancer: a clinical decision analysis. BMJ Open 4:e004895CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Noguchi M, Stamey TA, McNeal JE, Yemoto CM (2001) Relationship between systematic biopsies and histological features of 222 radical prostatectomy specimens: lack of prediction of tumor significance for men with nonpalpable prostate cancer. J Urol 166:104–109CrossRefPubMed

Hambrock T, Hoeks C, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa C et al (2012) Prospective assessment of prostate cancer aggressiveness using 3-T diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsies versus a systematic 10-core transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsy cohort. Eur Urol 61:177–184CrossRefPubMed

Kvåle R, Møller B, Wahlqvist R et al (2009) Concordance between Gleason score of needle biopsies and radical prostatectomy specimens: a population-based study. BJU Int 103:1647–1654CrossRefPubMed

Serefoglu EC, Altinova S, Ugras NS et al (2013) How reliable is 12-core prostate biopsy procedure in the detection of prostate cancer? Can Urol Assoc J 7:293–298CrossRef

Hoeks CM, Barentsz JO, Hambrock T et al (2011) Prostate cancer: multiparametric MR imaging for detection, localization, and staging. Radiology 261:46–66CrossRefPubMed

Kim CK, Park BK (2008) Update of prostate magnetic resonance imaging at 3 T. J Comput Assist Tomogr 32:163–172CrossRefPubMed

10.

Kim CK (2015) Magnetic resonance imaging-guided prostate biopsy: present and future. Korean J Radiol 16(1):90–98CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Bjurlin MA, Meng X, Le Nobin J et al (2014) Optimization of prostate biopsy: the role of magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy in detection, localization and risk assessment. J Urol 192(3):648–658CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

12.

Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R et al (2012) ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol 22(4):746–757CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Puech P, Rouviere O, Renard-Penna R et al (2013) Prostate cancer diagnosis: multiparametric MR-targeted biopsy with cognitive and transrectal US-MR fusion guidance versus systematic biopsy-prospective multicenter study. Radiology 268(2):461–469CrossRefPubMed

14.

Haffner J, Lemaitre L, Puech P et al (2011) Role of magnetic resonance imaging before initial biopsy: comparison of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted and systematic biopsy for significant prostate cancer detection. BJU Int 108(8 Pt 2):171–178CrossRef

15.

Park BK, Park JW, Park SY et al (2011) Prospective evalutation of 3-T MRI performed before initial transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in patients with high prostate-specific antigen and no previous biopsy. Am J Roentgenol 197(5):876–881CrossRef

16.

Delongchamps NB, Peyromaure M, Schull A et al (2013) Prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging and prostate cancer detection: comparison of random and targeted biopsies. J Urol 189:493CrossRefPubMed

17.

Röthke M, Blondin D, Schlemmer HP, Franiel T (2013) PI-RADS Classification: structured Reporting for MRI of the Prostate. Clin Men’s Health 185:253–261

18.

Pokorny MR, de Rooij M, Duncan E et al (2014) Prospective study of diagnostic accuracy comparing prostate cancer detection by transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy versus magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with subsequent MR-guided biopsy in men without previous prostate biopsies. Eur Urol 66:22–29CrossRefPubMed

19.

Kuru TH, Roethke MC, Rieker P et al (2013) Histology core-specific evaluation of the european society of urogenital radiology (ESUR) standardised scoring system of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) of the prostate. BJU Int 112:1080–1087CrossRefPubMed

20.

Roethke MC, Kuru TH, Schultze S et al (2014) Evaluation of the ESUR PI-RADS scoring system for multiparametric MRI of the prostate with targeted MR/TRUS fusion-guided biopsy at 3.0 Tesla. Eur Radiol 24:344–352CrossRefPubMed

21.

Engehausen DG, Engelhard K, Schwab SA et al (2012) Magnetic resonance image-guided biopsies with a high detection rate of prostate cancer. sci world J 2012:971–979CrossRef

22.

Hoeks CMA, Schouten MG, Bomers JGR 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 62:902–909CrossRefPubMed

23.

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 30:213–218CrossRefPubMed

24.

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 183:520–527CrossRefPubMed

25.

Campos-Fernandes JL, Bastien L, Nicolaiew N et al (2009) Prostate cancer detection rate in patients with repeated extended 21-sample needle biopsy. Eur Urol 55:600–609CrossRefPubMed

26.

Loeb S, Vellekoop A, Ahmed HU et al (2013) Systematic review of Complications of Prostate Biopsy. Eur Urol 64:876–892CrossRefPubMed

27.

Stamey TA, Freiha FS, McNeal JE, Redwine EA, Whittemore AS, Schmid HP (1993) Localized prostate cancer. Relationschip of tumor volume to clinical significance for treatment of prostate cancer. Cancer 71:933–938CrossRefPubMed

28.

Gleason DF, Mellinger GT (1974) Prediction of prognosis for prostatic adenocarcinoma by combined histological grading and clinical staging. J Urol 111:58–64PubMed

Title: Prostate cancer detection rates of magnetic resonance imaging-guided prostate biopsy related to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System score
Authors: Daniël F. Osses
Joost J. van Asten
Gerard J. Kieft
Jasper D. Tijsterman
Publication date: 01-02-2017
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: World Journal of Urology / Issue 2/2017
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Electronic ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-016-1874-7

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Prostate cancer detection rates of magnetic resonance imaging-guided prostate biopsy related to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System score

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 2/2017

Role of flexible uretero-renoscopy in management of renal calculi in anomalous kidneys: single-center experience

Evolving patterns of care in the management of stage I non-seminomatous germ cell tumors: data from the California Cancer Registry

Real-life clinical practice of onabotulinum toxin A intravesical injections for overactive bladder wet: an Italian consensus statement

Systemic therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma

Correlation between prostate volume and single nucleotide polymorphisms implicated in the steroid pathway

Prognostic value of preoperative NLR, dNLR, PLR and CRP in surgical renal cell carcinoma patients