Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer in biopsy-naïve men: direct comparison of systematic biopsy, multiparametric MRI- and contrast-ultrasound-dispersion imaging-targeted biopsy

Christophe K. Mannaerts (Corresponding author), Marc R.W. Engelbrecht, Arnoud W. Postema, Rob A.A. van Kollenburg, Caroline M.A. Hoeks, C Dilara Savci-Heijink, Ruud J.G. van Sloun, Rogier R. Wildeboer, Theo M. de Reijke, Massimo Mischi, Hessel Wijkstra

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To compare and evaluate a multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-targeted biopsy (TBx) strategy, contrast-ultrasound-dispersion imaging (CUDI)-TBx strategy and systematic biopsy (SBx) strategy for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in biopsy-naïve men.

PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective, single-centre paired diagnostic study included 150 biopsy-naïve men, from November 2015 to November 2018. All men underwent pre-biopsy mpMRI and CUDI followed by a 12-core SBx taken by an operator blinded from the imaging results. Men with suspicious lesions on mpMRI and/or CUDI also underwent MRI-TRUS fusion-TBx and/or cognitive CUDI-TBx after SBx by a second operator. A non-inferiority analysis of the mpMRI- and CUDI-TBx strategies in comparison with SBx for International Society of Urological Pathology Grade Group [GG] ≥2 PCa in any core with a non-inferiority margin of 1 percentage point was performed. Additional analyses for GG ≥2 PCa with cribriform growth pattern and/or intraductal carcinoma (CR/IDC), and GG ≥3 PCa were performed. Differences in detection rates were tested using McNemar's test with adjusted Wald confidence intervals.

RESULTS: After enrolment of 150 men, an interim analysis was performed. Both the mpMRI- and CUDI-TBx strategies were inferior to SBx for GG ≥2 PCa detection and the study was stopped. SBx found significantly more GG ≥2 PCa: 39% (56/142), as compared with 29% (41/142) and 28% (40/142) for mpMRI-TBx and CUDI-TBx, respectively (P < 0.05). SBx found significantly more GG = 1 PCa: 14% (20/142) compared to 1% (two of 142) and 3% (four of 142) with mpMRI-TBx and CUDI-TBx, respectively (P < 0.05). Detection of GG ≥2 PCa with CR/IDC and GG ≥3 PCa did not differ significantly between the strategies. The mpMRI- and CUDI-TBx strategies were comparable in detection but the mpMRI-TBx strategy had less false-positive findings (18% vs 53%).

CONCLUSIONS: In our study in biopsy-naïve men, the mpMRI- and CUDI-TBx strategies had comparable PCa detection rates, but the mpMRI-TBX strategy had the least false-positive findings. Both strategies were inferior to SBx for the detection of GG ≥2 PCa, despite reduced detection of insignificant GG = 1 PCa. Both strategies did not significantly differ from SBx for the detection of GG ≥2 PCa with CR/IDC and GG ≥3 PCa.

Original languageEnglish
JournalBJU International
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 21 Apr 2020

Keywords

  • detection
  • diagnosis
  • imaging
  • MRI
  • prostatic neoplasms
  • ultrasound

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer in biopsy-naïve men: direct comparison of systematic biopsy, multiparametric MRI- and contrast-ultrasound-dispersion imaging-targeted biopsy'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this