Assessment of the Diagnostic Accuracy of Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Cancer in Biopsy-Naive Men: The Biparametric MRI for Detection of Prostate Cancer (BIDOC) Study - PubMed (original) (raw)

Comparative Study

Assessment of the Diagnostic Accuracy of Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Cancer in Biopsy-Naive Men: The Biparametric MRI for Detection of Prostate Cancer (BIDOC) Study

Lars Boesen et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2018.

Abstract

Importance: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) enhances detection and risk stratification for significant prostate cancer but is time-consuming (approximately 40 minutes) and expensive. Rapid and simpler (approximately 15-minute) biparametric MRI (bpMRI) using fewer scan sequences could be implemented as a prostate MRI triage test on a larger scale before performing biopsies.

Objectives: To assess the diagnostic accuracy and negative predictive value (NPV) of a novel bpMRI method in biopsy-naive men in detecting and ruling out significant prostate cancer in confirmatory biopsies.

Design, setting, and participants: A single-institutional, paired, prospective cohort study of biopsy-naive men with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer from November 1, 2015, to June 15, 2017.

Interventions: All patients underwent bpMRI (T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted imaging) followed by standard transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsies (all men) and targeted biopsies of men with suspicious bpMRI findings.

Main outcomes and measures: Suspicion grades of bpMRI, biopsy results, and NPV of bpMRI were evaluated for detection of or ruling out significant prostate cancer (Gleason score ≥4 + 3 or maximum cancerous core length >50% for Gleason score 3 + 4). We compared the diagnostic performance of standard biopsies in all men vs standard plus targeted (combined) biopsies restricted to men with suspicious bpMRI findings. The reference standard was combined biopsy results from all men.

Results: A total of 1020 men were enrolled, with a median age of 67 years (interquartile range, 61-71 years) and a median prostate-specific antigen level of 8.0 ng/mL (interquartile range, 5.7-13.0 ng/mL). Combined biopsies detected any and significant prostate cancer in 655 of 1020 men (64%) and 404 of 1020 men (40%), respectively. Restricting combined biopsies to men with suspicious bpMRI findings meant 305 of 1020 men (30%) with low-suspicious bpMRIs could avoid prostate biopsies (biopsy in 715 men with suspicious bpMRIs vs all 1020 men who required standard biopsies [70%]; P < .001). Significant prostate cancer diagnoses were improved by 11% (396 vs 351 men; P < .001), and insignificant prostate cancer diagnoses were reduced by 40% (173 vs 288 men; P < .001) compared with our current diagnostic standard, standard biopsies alone in all men. The NPV of bpMRI findings in ruling out significant prostate cancer was 97% (95% CI, 95%-99%).

Conclusions and relevance: Low-suspicion bpMRI has a high NPV in ruling out significant prostate cancer in biopsy-naive men. Using a simple and rapid bpMRI method as a triage test seems to improve risk stratification and may be used to exclude aggressive disease and avoid unnecessary biopsies with its inherent risks. Future studies are needed to fully explore its role in clinical prostate cancer management.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Boesen reported receiving grants from the Beckett Foundation during the conduct of the study and receiving personal fees from Sanofi-Aventis and grants from Dr Sofus Carl Emil Friis and Olga Doris Friis outside the submitted work. Dr Jakobsen reported receiving personal fees from Astellas Pharma, Bayer, Janssen-Cilag, and Sanofi-Aventis outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported.

Figures

Figure 1.

Figure 1.. Flowchart of the Study Population

A total of 1063 men were included. However, 43 were excluded for various reasons. The final study population consisted of 1020 men who completed all examinations. MRI indicates magnetic resonance imaging; bpMRI, biparametric MRI.

Figure 2.

Figure 2.. Comparison of the Diagnostic Performances of Biopsy Strategies

The diagnostic performance consisted of standard biopsies in all men (N = 1020), combined (standard plus targeted) biopsies restricted to men with suspicious biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) findings (n = 715), and combined biopsies in all men (reference standard) (N = 1020). Biopsy results were stratified by cancer significance (primary definition). insPCa indicates insignificant prostate cancer; PCa, prostate cancer; PImod, modified Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System score; and sPCa, significant PCa.

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Eggener SE, Cifu AS, Nabhan C. Prostate cancer screening. JAMA. 2015;314(8):-. - PubMed
    1. Gandaglia G, Briganti A, Fossati N, et al. . The problem is not what to do with indolent and harmless prostate cancer—the problem is how to avoid finding these cancers. Eur Urol. 2016;70(4):547-548. - PubMed
    1. Loeb S, Vellekoop A, Ahmed HU, et al. . Systematic review of complications of prostate biopsy. Eur Urol. 2013;64(6):876-892. - PubMed
    1. Litwin MS, Tan H-J. The diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer: a review. JAMA. 2017;317(24):2532-2542. - PubMed
    1. Loeb S, Dani H. Whom to biopsy: prediagnostic risk stratification with biomarkers, nomograms, and risk calculators. Urol Clin North Am. 2017;44(4):517-524. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances

LinkOut - more resources