Prebiopsy Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis in Biopsy-naive Men with Suspected Prostate Cancer Based on Elevated Prostate-specific Antigen Values: Results from a Randomized Prospective Blinded Controlled Trial - PubMed (original) (raw)
Randomized Controlled Trial
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.05.024. Epub 2015 May 29.
Affiliations
- PMID: 26033153
- DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.05.024
Randomized Controlled Trial
Prebiopsy Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis in Biopsy-naive Men with Suspected Prostate Cancer Based on Elevated Prostate-specific Antigen Values: Results from a Randomized Prospective Blinded Controlled Trial
Panu P Tonttila et al. Eur Urol. 2016 Mar.
Abstract
Background: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MP-MRI) may improve the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa).
Objective: To compare MP-MRI transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-fusion targeted biopsy with routine TRUS-guided random biopsy for overall and clinically significant PCa detection among patients with suspected PCa based on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values.
Design, setting, and participants: This institutional review board-approved, single-center, prospective, randomized controlled trial (April 2011 to December 2014) included 130 biopsy-naive patients referred for prostate biopsy based on PSA values (PSA <20 ng/ml or free-to-total PSA ratio ≤0.15 and PSA <10 ng/ml). Patients were randomized 1:1 to the MP-MRI or control group. Patients in the MP-MRI group underwent prebiopsy MP-MRI followed by 10- to 12-core TRUS-guided random biopsy and cognitive MRI/TRUS fusion targeted biopsy. The control group underwent TRUS-guided random biopsy alone.
Intervention: MP-MRI 3-T phased-array surface coil.
Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The primary outcome was the number of patients with biopsy-proven PCa in the MP-MRI and control groups. Secondary outcome measures included the number of positive prostate biopsies and the proportion of clinically significant PCa in the MP-MRI and control groups. Between-group analyses were performed.
Results and limitations: Overall, 53 and 60 patients were evaluable in the MP-MRI and control groups, respectively. The overall PCa detection rate and the clinically significant cancer detection rate were similar between the MP-MRI and control groups, respectively (64% [34 of 53] vs 57% [34 of 60]; 7.5% difference [95% confidence interval (CI), -10 to 25], p=0.5, and 55% [29 of 53] vs 45% [27 of 60]; 9.7% difference [95% CI, -8.5 to 27], p=0.8). The PCa detection rate was higher than assumed during the planning of this single-center trial.
Conclusions: MP-MRI/TRUS-fusion targeted biopsy did not improve PCa detection rate compared with TRUS-guided biopsy alone in patients with suspected PCa based on PSA values.
Patient summary: In this randomized clinical trial, additional prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) before prostate biopsy appeared to offer similar diagnostic accuracy compared with routine transrectal ultrasound-guided random biopsy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Similar numbers of cancers were detected with and without MRI.
Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01357512.
Keywords: Biopsy; Diagnosis; Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging; Prostate cancer; Prostate-specific antigen.
Copyright © 2015 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Comment in
- Should Prebiopsy Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging be Offered to All Biopsy-naïve Men Undergoing Prostate Biopsy?
Ahmad AE, Finelli A. Ahmad AE, et al. Eur Urol. 2016 Mar;69(3):426-7. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.10.018. Epub 2015 Oct 21. Eur Urol. 2016. PMID: 26497921 No abstract available.
Similar articles
- 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.
Hoeks CM, Schouten MG, Bomers JG, Hoogendoorn SP, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa CA, Hambrock T, Vergunst H, Sedelaar JP, Fütterer JJ, Barentsz JO. Hoeks CM, et al. Eur Urol. 2012 Nov;62(5):902-9. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.01.047. Epub 2012 Feb 1. Eur Urol. 2012. PMID: 22325447 - Prospective randomized trial comparing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided in-bore biopsy to MRI-ultrasound fusion and transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in patients with prior negative biopsies.
Arsov C, Rabenalt R, Blondin D, Quentin M, Hiester A, Godehardt E, Gabbert HE, Becker N, Antoch G, Albers P, Schimmöller L. Arsov C, et al. Eur Urol. 2015 Oct;68(4):713-20. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.008. Epub 2015 Jun 23. Eur Urol. 2015. PMID: 26116294 Clinical Trial. - Head-to-head Comparison of Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Prostate Biopsy Versus Multiparametric Prostate Resonance Imaging with Subsequent Magnetic Resonance-guided Biopsy in Biopsy-naïve Men with Elevated Prostate-specific Antigen: A Large Prospective Multicenter Clinical Study.
van der Leest M, Cornel E, Israël B, Hendriks R, Padhani AR, Hoogenboom M, Zamecnik P, Bakker D, Setiasti AY, Veltman J, van den Hout H, van der Lelij H, van Oort I, Klaver S, Debruyne F, Sedelaar M, Hannink G, Rovers M, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa C, Barentsz JO. van der Leest M, et al. Eur Urol. 2019 Apr;75(4):570-578. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.11.023. Epub 2018 Nov 23. Eur Urol. 2019. PMID: 30477981 - Multiparametric MRI in detection and staging of prostate cancer.
Boesen L. Boesen L. Dan Med J. 2017 Feb;64(2):B5327. Dan Med J. 2017. PMID: 28157066 Review.
Cited by
- Moving away from systematic biopsies: image-guided prostate biopsy (in-bore biopsy, cognitive fusion biopsy, MRUS fusion biopsy) -literature review.
Yamada Y, Ukimura O, Kaneko M, Matsugasumi T, Fujihara A, Vourganti S, Marks L, Sidana A, Klotz L, Salomon G, de la Rosette J. Yamada Y, et al. World J Urol. 2021 Mar;39(3):677-686. doi: 10.1007/s00345-020-03366-x. Epub 2020 Jul 29. World J Urol. 2021. PMID: 32728885 Review. - Comparison of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Targeted Biopsy With Systematic Biopsy Alone for the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Elwenspoek MMC, Sheppard AL, McInnes MDF, Merriel SWD, Rowe EWJ, Bryant RJ, Donovan JL, Whiting P. Elwenspoek MMC, et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2019 Aug 2;2(8):e198427. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.8427. JAMA Netw Open. 2019. PMID: 31390032 Free PMC article. - Multicentre clinical evaluation of the safety and performance of a simple transperineal access system for prostate biopsies for suspected prostate cancer: The CAMbridge PROstate Biopsy DevicE (CamPROBE) study.
Gnanapragasam VJ, Leonard K, Sut M, Ilie C, Ord J, Roux J, Prieto MCH, Warren A, Tamer P. Gnanapragasam VJ, et al. J Clin Urol. 2020 Sep;13(5):364-370. doi: 10.1177/2051415820932773. Epub 2020 Jun 12. J Clin Urol. 2020. PMID: 33072331 Free PMC article. - Arguments against using an abbreviated or biparametric prostate MRI protocol.
Franco FB, Fennessy FM. Franco FB, et al. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2020 Dec;45(12):3982-3989. doi: 10.1007/s00261-020-02474-x. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2020. PMID: 32170336 Review. - Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System Steering Committee: PI-RADS v2 Status Update and Future Directions.
Padhani AR, Weinreb J, Rosenkrantz AB, Villeirs G, Turkbey B, Barentsz J. Padhani AR, et al. Eur Urol. 2019 Mar;75(3):385-396. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.05.035. Epub 2018 Jun 13. Eur Urol. 2019. PMID: 29908876 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Research Materials
Miscellaneous