Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted Versus Systematic Prostate Biopsies: 2-year Follow-up of a Prospective Randomized Trial (PRECISE)

被引:3
|
作者
Klotz, Laurence [1 ]
Chin, Joseph [2 ]
Black, Peter C. [3 ]
Finelli, Antonio [4 ]
Anidjar, Maurice [5 ]
Machado, Ashley [3 ]
Levental, Mark [5 ]
Ghai, Sangeet [4 ]
Chang, Silvia D. [3 ]
Patel, Chirag [6 ]
Kassam, Zahra [2 ]
Loblaw, Andrew [4 ]
Kebabdjian, Marlene [1 ]
Pond, Greg [7 ]
Haider, Masoom A. [6 ]
机构
[1] Sunnybrook Hlth Sci Ctr, Div Urol, 2075 Bayview Ave, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada
[2] Univ Western Ontario, London Hlth Sci Ctr, London, ON, Canada
[3] Univ British Columbia, Vancouver Prostate Ctr, Vancouver, BC, Canada
[4] Univ Toronto, Princess Margaret Hosp, Temerty Fac Med, Toronto, ON, Canada
[5] McGill Univ, Jewish Gen Hosp, Montreal, PQ, Canada
[6] Univ Hlth Network, Dept Med Imaging, Toronto, ON, Canada
[7] McMaster Univ, Dept Biostat, Hamilton, ON, Canada
来源
EUROPEAN UROLOGY ONCOLOGY | 2024年 / 7卷 / 03期
关键词
Prostate cancer diagnosis; Randomized trial; Magnetic resonance imaging; Targeted biopsy; CANCER;
D O I
10.1016/j.euo.2023.09.013
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background: The prospective randomized PRECISE trial demonstrated that magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with only targeted biopsy (TBx) was noninferior to systematic transrectal ultrasound biopsy (SBx) in the detection of International Society of Urological Pathology grade group (GG) >= 2 prostate cancer (PC). An unanswered question is the outcome for patients who avoided a biopsy because of negative MRI findings. Objective: To explore the rate of PC diagnosis based on 2-yr MRI for PRECISE participants who had no biopsy and for patients who had a negative result or GG 1 on TBx in comparison to those with a negative result or GG 1 on SBx. Design, setting,and participants: The PRECISE prospective trial was conducted at five Canadian academic centers. The present analysis was for trial participants who were not diagnosed with clinically significant PC (csPC) at baseline. Of 453 randomized patients, 146 were diagnosed with GG >= 2 at baseline and were excluded. Eligible patients for this study included 83 men from the MRI arm who had negative MRI findings and no biopsy, 120 from the overall cohort who had a negative SBx or TBx, and 72 from the overall cohort who were diagnosed with GG 1 disease. Intervention: MRI at 2 yr in all men in the MRI and SBx arms and TBx for lesions with a Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System score of >= 3 or on the basis of clinical suspicion. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The primary outcome was the proportion of men diagnosed with GG >= 2 cancer. Secondary outcomes included the MRI outcome and the proportion of men diagnosed with GG 1 PC. Results and limitations: Evaluable 2-yr MRI scans were available for 75 (56%) eligible patients in the MRI arm and 69 (49%) in the SBx arm. Of these patients, 55 (73%) in the MRI arm and 51 (67%) SBx arm had negative 2-yr MRI. Of the 76 patients in the SBx arm with 2-yr MRI, 16 (21%) had a biopsy, for which the result was negative in eight (10%), GG1 in two (2.6%), and GG >= 2 in six (7.9%) cases. Of the 75 men in the MRI arm with 2-yr MRI, eight (11%) were biopsied, for which the result was negative in four cases (5%) and GG >= 2 in the other four (5%). At 2 yr, including baseline biopsy results, 116/221 (52.5%) in the MRI arm and 113/204 (55%) in the SBx arm were free of GG >2 disease, treatment, death from any cause, or progression (OR 1.08; p = 0.66). Conclusions: After 2-yr follow-up including MRI for patients in both arms of PRECISE, there was no difference in the rate of csPC diagnosis between the MRI and SBx groups, even though 38% of men in the MRI group avoided an initial biopsy. Patient summary: The PRECISE trial compared systematic biopsy of the prostate to a strategy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with targeted biopsy of any lesions suspicious for cancer on the scan. After 2 years of follow-up that included 2 -year MRI with or without biopsy in both groups, there was no difference in the rate of diagnosis of significant cancer, even though 38% of men in the initial MRI arm avoided an initial biopsy, and 30% avoided biopsy altogether. The PRECISE trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02936258. (c) 2023 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:456 / 461
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Randomized Study of Systematic Biopsy Versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Targeted and Systematic Biopsy in Men on Active Surveillance (ASIST): 2-year Postbiopsy Follow-up
    Klotz, Laurence
    Pond, Greg
    Loblaw, Andrew
    Sugar, Linda
    Moussa, Madeline
    Berman, David
    Van Der Kwast, Theo
    Vesprini, Danny
    Milot, Laurent
    Kebabdjian, Marlene
    Fleshner, Neil
    Ghai, Sangheet
    Chin, Joseph
    Haider, Masoom
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2020, 77 (03) : 311 - 317
  • [2] ROUTINE SYSTEMATIC PROSTATE BIOPSIES NOT REPLACED BY MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING-TARGETED BIOPSY
    Gomez-Ortiz, David
    Garza-Gangemi, Adrian M.
    Oropeza-Aguilar, Mariano
    Rangel-Suarez, Sergio
    Espinosa-Cruz, Veronica
    Villegas-Hernandez, Antonio C.
    Martinez-Martinez, Ricardo
    Castillejos-Molina, Ricardo A.
    REVISTA DE INVESTIGACION CLINICA-CLINICAL AND TRANSLATIONAL INVESTIGATION, 2022, 74 (04): : 212 - 218
  • [3] Transperineal Versus Transrectal Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prospective Studies
    Zattoni, Fabio
    Rajwa, Pawel
    Miszczyk, Marcin
    Fazekas, Tamas
    Carletti, Filippo
    Carrozza, Salvatore
    Sattin, Francesca
    Reitano, Giuseppe
    Botti, Simone
    Matsukawa, Akihiro
    Dal Moro, Fabrizio
    Karnes, R. Jeffrey
    Briganti, Alberto
    Novara, Giacomo
    Shariat, Shahrokh F.
    Ploussard, Guillaume
    Gandaglia, Giorgio
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY ONCOLOGY, 2024, 7 (06): : 1303 - 1312
  • [4] Transperineal Versus Transrectal Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted and Systematic Prostate Biopsy to Prevent Infectious Complications: The PREVENT Randomized Trial
    Hu, Jim C.
    Assel, Melissa
    Allaf, Mohamad E.
    Ehdaie, Behfar
    Vickers, Andrew J.
    Cohen, Andrew J.
    Ristau, Benjamin T.
    Green, David A.
    Han, Misop
    Rezaee, Michael E.
    Pavlovich, Christian P.
    Montgomery, Jeffrey S.
    Kowalczyk, Keith J.
    Ross, Ashley E.
    Kundu, Shilajit D.
    Patel, Hiten D.
    Wang, Gerald J.
    Graham, John N.
    Shoag, Jonathan E.
    Ghazi, Ahmed
    Singla, Nirmish
    Gorin, Michael A.
    Schaeffer, Anthony J.
    Schaeffer, Edward M.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2024, 86 (01) : 61 - 68
  • [5] Magnetic Resonance Imaging Follow-up of Targeted Biopsy-negative Prostate Lesions
    Stavrinides, Vasilis
    Eksi, Ece
    Finn, Ron
    Texeira-Mendes, Larissa
    Rana, Sarina
    Trahearn, Nick
    Grey, Alistair
    Giganti, Francesco
    Huet, Eric
    Fiard, Gaelle
    Freeman, Alex
    Haider, Aiman
    Allen, Clare
    Kirkham, Alex
    Cole, Alexander P.
    Collins, Tom
    Pendse, Douglas
    Dickinson, Louise
    Punwani, Shonit
    Pashayan, Nora
    Emberton, Mark
    Moore, Caroline M.
    Orczyk, Clement
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY FOCUS, 2023, 9 (05): : 781 - 787
  • [6] Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsies: Is the Right Technique the Right Question?
    Cooperberg, Matthew R.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2017, 71 (04) : 532 - 533
  • [7] Transperineal Versus Transrectal Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsies for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: Final Results of the Randomized PERFECT trial (CCAFU-PR1)
    Ploussard, Guillaume
    Barret, Eric
    Fiard, Gaelle
    Lenfant, Louis
    Malavaud, Bernard
    Giannarini, Gianluca
    Almeras, Christophe
    Aziza, Richard
    Renard-Penna, Raphaele
    Descotes, Jean-Luc
    Beauval, Jean-Baptiste
    Salin, Ambroise
    Roupret, Morgan
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY ONCOLOGY, 2024, 7 (05): : 1080 - 1087
  • [8] The Added Value of Side-specific Systematic Biopsy in Patients Diagnosed by Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsy
    Bourgeno, Henri-Alexandre
    Jabbour, Teddy
    Baudewyns, Arthur
    Ferriero, Mariaconsiglia
    Simone, Giuseppe
    Fourcade, Alexandre
    Fournier, Georges
    Oderda, Marco
    Gontero, Paolo
    Bernal-Gomez, Adrian
    Mastrorosa, Alessandro
    Roche, Jean-Baptiste
    Abou Zahr, Rawad
    Ploussard, Guillaume
    Fiard, Gaelle
    Halinski, Adam
    Rysankova, Katerina
    Dariane, Charles
    Delavar, Gina
    Anract, Julien
    Delongchamps, Nicolas Barry
    Bui, Alexandre Patrick
    Taha, Fayek
    Windisch, Olivier
    Benamran, Daniel
    Assenmacher, Gregoire
    Vlahopoulos, Leonidas
    Guenzel, Karsten
    Roumeguere, Thierry
    Peltier, Alexandre
    Diamand, Romain
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY ONCOLOGY, 2024, 7 (06): : 1320 - 1326
  • [9] Robot-Assisted Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted versus Systematic Prostate Biopsy; Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Petov, Vladislav
    Azilgareeva, Camilla
    Shpikina, Anastasia
    Morozov, Andrey
    Krupinov, German
    Kozlov, Vasiliy
    Singla, Nirmish
    Gomez Rivas, Juan
    Jesus, Moreno-Sierra
    Puliatti, Stefano
    Checcucci, Enrico
    Rodler, Severin
    Belenchon, Ines Rivero
    Kowalewski, Karl-Friedrich
    Veccia, Alessandro
    Mcfarland, Jonathan
    Cacciamani, Giovanni E.
    Taratkin, Mark
    Enikeev, Dmitry
    CANCERS, 2023, 15 (04)
  • [10] Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsy Compared with Systematic Prostate Biopsy in Biopsy-naive Patients with Suspected Prostate Cancer
    Alkema, Nicolette G.
    Hoogeveen, Sebastiaan F. J. S.
    Cauberg, Evelyne C. C.
    Witte, Lambertus P. W.
    van't Veer-ten Kate, Miranda
    de Boer, Erwin
    Hoogland, Marije A. M.
    Blanker, Marco H.
    Boomsma, Martijn F.
    Steffens, Martijn G.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY OPEN SCIENCE, 2022, 44 : 125 - 130