Is There Still a Need for Repeated Systematic Biopsies in Patients with Previous Negative Biopsies in the Era of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsies of the Prostate?

被引:56
作者
Exterkate, Leonie [1 ]
Wegelin, Olivier [2 ]
Barentsz, Jelle O. [3 ]
van der Leest, Marloes G. [3 ]
Kummer, J. Alain [4 ]
Vreuls, Willem [5 ]
de Bruin, Peter C. [4 ]
Bosch, J. L. H. Ruud [6 ]
van Melick, Harm H. E. [2 ]
Somford, Diederik M. [1 ]
机构
[1] Canisius Wilhelmina Hosp, Dept Urol, Weg Door Jonkerbos 100, NL-6532 SZ Nijmegen, Netherlands
[2] St Antonius Hosp, Dept Urol, Nieuwegein, Netherlands
[3] Radboudumc Nijmegen, Dept Radiol & Nucl Med, Nijmegen, Netherlands
[4] St Antonius Hosp, Dept Pathol, Nieuwegein, Netherlands
[5] Canisius Wilhelmina Hosp, Dept Pathol, Nijmegen, Netherlands
[6] UMC, Dept Oncol Urol, Utrecht, Netherlands
关键词
Diagnosis; Image-guided biopsy; Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging; Prostatic neoplasms; ULTRASOUND FUSION BIOPSY; CANCER DETECTION; GUIDED BIOPSY; GLEASON SCORE; DIAGNOSTIC-ACCURACY; IN-BORE; MRI; MEN; PATHOLOGY; TRANSPERINEAL;
D O I
10.1016/j.euo.2019.06.005
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background: The role of targeted prostate biopsies (TBs) in patients with cancer suspicious lesions on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) following negative systematic biopsies (SBs) is undebated. However, whether they should be combined with repeated SBs remains unclear. Objective: To evaluate the value of repeated SBs in addition toTBs in patients with a prior negative SB and a persistent suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa). Design, setting, and participants: A prospective study as part of a multicenter randomized controlled trial conducted between 2014 and 2017, including 665 men with a prior negative SB and a persistent suspicion of PCa (suspicious digital rectal examination and/or prostate-specific antigen >4.0 ng/ml). Intervention: All patients underwent 3 T mpMRI according to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) v2. Patients with PI-RADS >= 3 were randomized 1:1:1 for three TB techniques: MRI-TRUS fusion TB (FUS-TB), cognitive registration fusion TB (COG-TB), or in-bore MRI TB. FUS-TB and COG-TB were combined with repeated SBs. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) was defined as Gleason >= 3 + 4. Differences in detection rates of csPCa, clinically insignificant PCa (cisPCa), and overall PCa between TBs (FUS-TB and COG-TB) and repeated SBs were compared using McNemar's test. Results and limitations: In the 152 patients who underwent both TB and SB, PCa was detected by TB in 47% and by SB in 32% (p < 0.001, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.0-22%). TB detected significantly more csPCa than SB (32% vs 16%; p < 0.001, 95% CI: 11-25%). Clinically significant PCa was missed by TB in 1.3% (2/152). Combining SB and TB resulted in detection rate differences of 6.0% for PCa, 5.0% for cisPCa, and 1.0% for csPCa compared with TB alone. Conclusions: In case of a persistent suspicion of PCa following a negative SB, TB detected significantly more csPCa cases than SB. The additional value of SB was limited, and only 1.3% of csPCa would have been missed when SB had been omitted. Patient summary: We evaluated the role of systematic biopsies and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsies for the diagnosis of prostate cancer in patients with prior negative systematic biopsies. MRI-targeted biopsies perform better in detecting prostate cancer in these patients. The value of repeated systematic biopsies is limited. (C) 2019 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:216 / 223
页数:8
相关论文
共 39 条
[1]   Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study [J].
Ahmed, Hashim U. ;
Bosaily, Ahmed El-Shater ;
Brown, Louise C. ;
Gabe, Rhian ;
Kaplan, Richard ;
Parmar, Mahesh K. ;
Collaco-Moraes, Yolanda ;
Ward, Katie ;
Hindley, Richard G. ;
Freeman, Alex ;
Kirkham, Alex P. ;
Oldroyd, Robert ;
Parker, Chris ;
Emberton, Mark .
LANCET, 2017, 389 (10071) :815-822
[2]   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 [J].
Arsov, Christian ;
Rabenalt, Robert ;
Blondin, Dirk ;
Quentin, Michael ;
Hiester, Andreas ;
Godehardt, Erhard ;
Gabbert, Helmut E. ;
Becker, Nikolaus ;
Antoch, Gerald ;
Albers, Peter ;
Schimmoeller, Lars .
EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2015, 68 (04) :713-720
[3]   Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Transectal Ultrasound Image-fusion Biopsies Accurately Characterize the Index Tumor: Correlation with Step-sectioned Radical Prostatectomy Specimens in 135 Patients [J].
Baco, Eduard ;
Ukimura, Osamu ;
Rud, Erik ;
Vlatkovic, Ljiljana ;
Svindland, Aud ;
Aron, Manju ;
Palmer, Suzanne ;
Matsugasumi, Toru ;
Marien, Arnaud ;
Bernhard, Jean-Christophe ;
Rewcastle, John C. ;
Eggesbo, Heidi B. ;
Gill, Inderbir S. .
EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2015, 67 (04) :787-794
[4]   Direct comparison of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) results with final histopathology in patients with proven prostate cancer in MRI/ultrasonography-fusion biopsy [J].
Borkowetz, Angelika ;
Platzek, Ivan ;
Toma, Marieta ;
Renner, Theresa ;
Herout, Roman ;
Baunacke, Martin ;
Laniado, Michael ;
Baretton, Gustavo ;
Froehner, Michael ;
Zastrow, Stefan ;
Wirth, Manfred .
BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2016, 118 (02) :213-220
[5]   Comparing the Gleason prostate biopsy and Gleason prostatectomy grading system: The Lahey Clinic Medical Center experience and an international meta-analysis [J].
Cohen, Michael S. ;
Hanley, Robert S. ;
Kurteva, Teodora ;
Ruthazer, Robin ;
Silverman, Mark L. ;
Sorcini, Andrea ;
Hamawy, Karim ;
Roth, Robert A. ;
Tuerk, Ingolf ;
Libertino, John A. .
EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2008, 54 (02) :371-381
[6]   Prostate MRI, with or without MRI-targeted biopsy, and systematic biopsy for detecting prostate cancer [J].
Drost, Frank-Jan H. ;
Osses, Daniel F. ;
Nieboer, Daan ;
Steyerberg, Ewout W. ;
Bangma, Chris H. ;
Roobol, Monique J. ;
Schoots, Ivo G. .
COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2019, (04)
[7]   The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma [J].
Epstein, JI ;
Allsbrook, WC ;
Amin, MB ;
Egevad, LL ;
Bastacky, S ;
Beltrán, AL ;
Berner, A ;
Billis, A ;
Boccon-Gibod, L ;
Cheng, L ;
Civantos, F ;
Cohen, C ;
Cohen, MB ;
Datta, M ;
Davis, C ;
Delahunt, B ;
Delprado, W ;
Eble, JN ;
Foster, CS ;
Furusato, M ;
Gaudin, PB ;
Grignon, DJ ;
Humphrey, PA ;
Iczkowski, KA ;
Jones, EC ;
Lucia, S ;
McCue, PA ;
Nazeer, T ;
Oliva, E ;
Pan, CC ;
Pizov, G ;
Reuter, V ;
Samaratunga, H ;
Sebo, T ;
Sesterhenn, I ;
Shevchuk, M ;
Srigley, JR ;
Suzigan, S ;
Takahashi, H ;
Tamboli, P ;
Tan, PH ;
Têtu, B ;
Tickoo, S ;
Tomaszewski, JE ;
Troncoso, P ;
Tsuzuki, T ;
True, LD ;
van der Kwast, T ;
Wheeler, TM ;
Wojno, KJ .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGICAL PATHOLOGY, 2005, 29 (09) :1228-1242
[8]   Prostate cancer detection with magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion biopsy: The role of systematic and targeted biopsies [J].
Filson, Christopher P. ;
Natarajan, Shyam ;
Margolis, Daniel J. A. ;
Huang, Jiaoti ;
Lieu, Patricia ;
Dorey, Frederick J. ;
Reiter, Robert E. ;
Marks, Leonard S. .
CANCER, 2016, 122 (06) :884-892
[9]   Can Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Be Detected with Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging? A Systematic Review of the Literature [J].
Futterer, Jurgen J. ;
Briganti, Alberto ;
De Visschere, Pieter ;
Emberton, Mark ;
Giannarini, Gianluca ;
Kirkham, Alex ;
Taneja, Samir S. ;
Thoeny, Harriet ;
Villeirs, Geert ;
Villers, Arnauld .
EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2015, 68 (06) :1045-1053
[10]   Optimal approach for prostate cancer detection as initial biopsy: Prospective randomized study comparing transperineal versus transrectal systematic 12-core biopsy [J].
Hara, Ryoei ;
Jo, Yoshimasa ;
Fuji, Tomohiro ;
Kondo, Norio ;
Yokoyoma, Teruhiko ;
Miyaji, Yoshiyuki ;
Nagai, Atsushi .
UROLOGY, 2008, 71 (02) :191-195