BACKGROUND: Active surveillance (AS) is commonly based on standard 10-12-core prostate biopsies, which misclassify ~50% of cases compared with radical prostatectomy. We assessed the value of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-targeted transperineal fusion-biopsies in men under AS. METHODS: In all, 149 low-risk prostate cancer (PC) patients were included in AS between 2010 and 2015. Forty-five patients were initially diagnosed by combined 24-core systematic transperineal saturation biopsy (SB) and MRI/transurethral ultrasound (TRUS)-fusion targeted lesion biopsy (TB). A total of 104 patients first underwent 12-core TRUS-biopsy. All patients were followed-up by combined SB and TB for restratification after 1 and 2 years. All mpMRI examinations were analyzed using PIRADS. AS was performed according to PRIAS-criteria and a NIH-nomogram for AS-disqualification was investigated. AS-disqualification rates for men initially diagnosed by standard or fusion biopsy were compared using Kaplan-Meier estimates and log-rank tests. Differences in detection rates of the SB and TB components were evaluated with a paired-sample analysis. Regression analyses were performed to predict AS-disqualification. RESULTS: A total of, 48.1% of patients diagnosed by 12-core TRUS-biopsy were disqualified from AS based on the MRI/TRUS-fusion biopsy results. In the initial fusion-biopsy cohort, upgrading occurred significantly less frequently during 2-year follow-up (20%, P<0.001). TBs alone were significantly superior compared with SBs alone to detect Gleason-score-upgrading. NPV for Gleason-upgrading was 93.5% for PIRADS⩽2. PSA level, PSA density, NIH-nomogram, initial PIRADS score (P<0.001 each) and PIRADS-progression on consecutive MRI (P=0.007) were significant predictors of AS-disqualification. CONCLUSIONS: Standard TRUS-biopsies lead to significant underestimation of PC under AS. MRI/TRUS-fusion biopsies, and especially the TB component allow more reliable risk classification, leading to a significantly decreased chance of subsequent AS-disqualification. Cancer detection with mpMRI alone is not yet sensitive enough to omit SB on follow-up after initial 12-core TRUS-biopsy. After MRI/TRUS-fusion biopsy confirmed AS, it may be appropriate to biopsy only those men with suspected progression on MRI.
BACKGROUND: Active surveillance (AS) is commonly based on standard 10-12-core prostate biopsies, which misclassify ~50% of cases compared with radical prostatectomy. We assessed the value of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-targeted transperineal fusion-biopsies in men under AS. METHODS: In all, 149 low-risk prostate cancer (PC) patients were included in AS between 2010 and 2015. Forty-five patients were initially diagnosed by combined 24-core systematic transperineal saturation biopsy (SB) and MRI/transurethral ultrasound (TRUS)-fusion targeted lesion biopsy (TB). A total of 104 patients first underwent 12-core TRUS-biopsy. All patients were followed-up by combined SB and TB for restratification after 1 and 2 years. All mpMRI examinations were analyzed using PIRADS. AS was performed according to PRIAS-criteria and a NIH-nomogram for AS-disqualification was investigated. AS-disqualification rates for men initially diagnosed by standard or fusion biopsy were compared using Kaplan-Meier estimates and log-rank tests. Differences in detection rates of the SB and TB components were evaluated with a paired-sample analysis. Regression analyses were performed to predict AS-disqualification. RESULTS: A total of, 48.1% of patients diagnosed by 12-core TRUS-biopsy were disqualified from AS based on the MRI/TRUS-fusion biopsy results. In the initial fusion-biopsy cohort, upgrading occurred significantly less frequently during 2-year follow-up (20%, P<0.001). TBs alone were significantly superior compared with SBs alone to detect Gleason-score-upgrading. NPV for Gleason-upgrading was 93.5% for PIRADS⩽2. PSA level, PSA density, NIH-nomogram, initial PIRADS score (P<0.001 each) and PIRADS-progression on consecutive MRI (P=0.007) were significant predictors of AS-disqualification. CONCLUSIONS: Standard TRUS-biopsies lead to significant underestimation of PC under AS. MRI/TRUS-fusion biopsies, and especially the TB component allow more reliable risk classification, leading to a significantly decreased chance of subsequent AS-disqualification. Cancer detection with mpMRI alone is not yet sensitive enough to omit SB on follow-up after initial 12-core TRUS-biopsy. After MRI/TRUS-fusion biopsy confirmed AS, it may be appropriate to biopsy only those men with suspected progression on MRI.
Authors: Roderick C N van den Bergh; Stijn Roemeling; Monique J Roobol; Wouter Roobol; Fritz H Schröder; Chris H Bangma Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2007-05-25 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Winston E Barzell; Myron R Melamed; Paul Cathcart; Caroline M Moore; Hashim U Ahmed; Mark Emberton Journal: J Urol Date: 2012-07-19 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Guillaume Ploussard; Hendrik Isbarn; Alberto Briganti; Prasanna Sooriakumaran; Christian I Surcel; Laurent Salomon; Massimo Freschi; Cristian Mirvald; Henk G van der Poel; Anna Jenkins; Piet Ost; Inge M van Oort; Ofer Yossepowitch; Gianluca Giannarini; Roderick C N van den Bergh Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2014-08-15 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: Jennifer R Rider; Fredrik Sandin; Ove Andrén; Peter Wiklund; Jonas Hugosson; Pär Stattin Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2012-08-10 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: James E Thompson; Daniel Moses; Ron Shnier; Phillip Brenner; Warick Delprado; Lee Ponsky; Marley Pulbrook; Maret Böhm; Anne-Maree Haynes; Andrew Hayen; Phillip D Stricker Journal: J Urol Date: 2014-02-08 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: G L Shaw; B C Thomas; S N Dawson; G Srivastava; S L Vowler; V J Gnanapragasam; N C Shah; A Y Warren; D E Neal Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2014-04-10 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: David Bonekamp; M B Wolf; M C Roethke; S Pahernik; B A Hadaschik; G Hatiboglu; T H Kuru; I V Popeneciu; J L Chin; M Billia; J Relle; J Hafron; K R Nandalur; R M Staruch; M Burtnyk; M Hohenfellner; H-P Schlemmer Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2018-06-25 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Vassilios M Skouteris; E David Crawford; Vladimir Mouraviev; Paul Arangua; Marios Panagiotis Metsinis; Michael Skouteris; George Zacharopoulos; Nelson N Stone Journal: Rev Urol Date: 2018
Authors: Ariel A Schulman; Christina Sze; Efrat Tsivian; Rajan T Gupta; Judd W Moul; Thomas J Polascik Journal: Curr Urol Rep Date: 2017-07 Impact factor: 3.092
Authors: Heinz-Peter Schlemmer; Bernd Joachim Krause; Viktoria Schütz; David Bonekamp; Sarah Marie Schwarzenböck; Markus Hohenfellner Journal: Dtsch Arztebl Int Date: 2021-10-22 Impact factor: 8.251
Authors: Ivo G Schoots; Daniel F Osses; Frank-Jan H Drost; Jan F M Verbeek; Sebastiaan Remmers; Geert J L H van Leenders; Chris H Bangma; Monique J Roobol Journal: Transl Androl Urol Date: 2018-02