Additional value of magnetic resonance-targeted biopsies to standard transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsies for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer

References

• Schroder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, Tammela TL, Ciatto S, Nelen V, et al. Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N Engl J Med 2009;360:1320–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilt TJ, Brawer MK, Jones KM, Barry MJ, Aronson WJ, Fox S, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2012;367:203–13.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Ruutu M, Häggman M, Andersson SO, Bratell S, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2005;352:1977–84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pienta KJ. Critical appraisal of prostate-specific antigen in prostate cancer screening: 20 years later. Urology 2009;73:S11–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Puech P, Potiron E, Lemaitre L, Leroy X, Haber GP, Crouzet S, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced-magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of intraprostatic prostate cancer: correlation with radical prostatectomy specimens. Urology 2009;74:1094–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirkham AP, Emberton M, Allen C. How good is MRI at detecting and characterising cancer within the prostate? Eur Urol 2006;50:1163–74.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoeks CM, Schouten MG, Bomers JG, Hoogendoorn SP, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa CA, Hambrock T, et al. Three-Tesla magnetic resonance-guided prostate biopsy in men with increased prostate-specific antigen and repeated, negative, random, systematic, transrectal ultrasound biopsies: detection of clinically significant prostate cancers. Eur Urol 2012;62:902–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valerio M, Donaldson I, Emberton M, Ehdaie B, Hadaschik BA, Marks LS, et al. Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer using magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy: a systematic review. Eur Urol 2015;68:8–19.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schoots IG, Roobol MJ, Nieboer D, Bangma CH, Steyerberg EW, Hunink MG. Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy may enhance the diagnostic accuracy of significant prostate cancer detection compared to standard transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 2015;68:438–50.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Futterer JJ, Briganti A, De Visschere P, Emberton M, Giannarini G, Kirkham A, et al. Can clinically significant prostate cancer be detected with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging? A systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol 2015;68:1045–53.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Turkbey B, George AK, Rothwax J, Shakir N, et al. Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. JAMA 2015;313:390–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turkbey B, Shah VP, Pang Y, Bernardo M, Xu S, Kruecker J, et al. Is apparent diffusion coefficient associated with clinical risk scores for prostate cancers that are visible on 3-T MR images? Radiology 2011;258:488–95.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hambrock T, Somford DM, Huisman HJ, van Oort IM, Witjes JA, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa CA, et al. Relationship between apparent diffusion coefficients at 3.0-T MR imaging and Gleason grade in peripheral zone prostate cancer. Radiology 2011;259:453–61.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bittencourt LK, Barentsz JO, de Miranda LC, Gasparetto EL. Prostate MRI: diffusion-weighted imaging at 1.5T correlates better with prostatectomy Gleason grades than TRUS-guided biopsies in peripheral zone tumours. Eur Radiol 2012;22:468–75.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R, Choyke P, Verma S, Villeirs G, et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol 2012;22:746–57.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heidenreich A, Bastian PJ, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, van der Kwast T, et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent-update 2013. Eur Urol 2014;65:124–37.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh H, Canto EI, Shariat SF, Kadmon D, Miles BJ, Wheeler TM, Slawin KM. Improved detection of clinically significant, curable prostate cancer with systematic 12-core biopsy. J Urol 2004;171:1089–92.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scattoni V, Zlotta A, Montironi R, Schulman C, Rigatti P, Montorsi F. Extended and saturation prostatic biopsy in the diagnosis and characterisation of prostate cancer: a critical analysis of the literature. Eur Urol 2007;52:1309–22.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D'Amico AV, Renshaw AA, Arsenault L, Schultz D, Richie JP. Clinical predictors of upgrading to Gleason grade 4 or 5 disease at radical prostatectomy: potential implications for patient selection for radiation and androgen suppression therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999;45:841–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sonn GA, Chang E, Natarajan S, Margolis DJ, Macairan M, Lieu P, et al. Value of targeted prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion in men with prior negative biopsy and elevated prostate-specific antigen. Eur Urol 2014;65:809–15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dickinson L, Ahmed HU, Allen C, Barentsz JO, Carey B, Futterer JJ, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging for the detection, localisation, and characterisation of prostate cancer: recommendations from a European consensus meeting. Eur Urol 2011;59:477–94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dickinson L, Ahmed HU, Allen C, Barentsz JO, Carey B, Futterer JJ, et al. Scoring systems used for the interpretation and reporting of multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer detection, localization, and characterization: could standardization lead to improved utilization of imaging within the diagnostic pathway? J Magn Reson Imaging 2013;37:48–58.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Epstein JI, Allsbrook WC, Jr, Amin MB, Egevad LL; ISUP Grading Committee. The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 2005;29:1228–42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bjurlin MA, Mendhiratta N, Wysock JS, Taneja SS. Multiparametric MRI and targeted prostate biopsy: improvements in cancer detection, localization, and risk assessment. Cent European J Urol 2016;69:9–18.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wysock JS, Rosenkrantz AB, Huang WC, Stifelman MD, Lepor H, Deng FM, et al. A prospective, blinded comparison of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging-ultrasound fusion and visual estimation in the performance of MR-targeted prostate biopsy: the PROFUS trial. Eur Urol 2014;66:343–51.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore CM, Kasivisvanathan V, Eggener S, Emberton M, Fütterer JJ, Gill IS, et al. Standards of reporting for MRI-targeted biopsy studies (START) of the prostate: recommendations from an International Working Group. Eur Urol 2013;64:544–52.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Puech P, Rouviere O, Renard-Penna R, Villers A, Devos P, Colombel M, et al. Prostate cancer diagnosis: multiparametric MR-targeted biopsy with cognitive and transrectal US-MR fusion guidance versus systematic biopsy-prospective multicenter study. Radiology 2013;268:461–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baco E, Rud E, Eri LM, Moen G, Vlatkovic L, Svindland A, et al. A randomized controlled trial to assess and compare the outcomes of two-core prostate biopsy guided by fused magnetic resonance and transrectal ultrasound images and traditional 12-core systematic biopsy. Eur Urol 2016;69:149–56.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haffner J, Lemaitre L, Puech P, Haber GP, Leroy X, Jones JS, Villers A. Role of magnetic resonance imaging before initial biopsy: comparison of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted and systematic biopsy for significant prostate cancer detection. BJU Int 2011;108:E171–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sengupta S, Blute ML, Bagniewski SM, Inman B, Leibovich BC, Slezak JM, et al. After radical retropubic prostatectomy 'insignificant' prostate cancer has a risk of progression similar to low-risk ’significant‘ cancer. BJU Int 2008;101:170–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Merrill MM, Lane BR, Reuther AM, Zhou M, Magi-Galluzzi C, Klein EA. Tumor volume does not predict for biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy in patients with surgical Gleason score 6 or less prostate cancer. Urology 2007;70:294–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kikuchi E, Scardino PT, Wheeler TM, Slawin KM, Ohori M. Is tumor volume an independent prognostic factor in clinically localized prostate cancer? J Urol 2004;172:508–11.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolters T, Roobol MJ, van Leeuwen PJ, van den Bergh RC, Hoedemaeker RF, van Leenders GJ, et al. Should pathologists routinely report prostate tumour volume? The prognostic value of tumour volume in prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2010;57:821–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ploussard G, Epstein JI, Montironi R, Carroll PR, Wirth M, Grimm MO, et al. The contemporary concept of significant versus insignificant prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2011;60:291–303.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenkrantz AB, Taneja SS. Radiologist, be aware: ten pitfalls that confound the interpretation of multiparametric prostate MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2014;202:109–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ouzzane A, Puech P, Lemaitre L, Leroy X, Nevoux P, Betrouni N, et al. Combined multiparametric MRI and targeted biopsies improve anterior prostate cancer detection, staging, and grading. Urology 2011;78:1356–62.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pinto PA, Chung PH, Rastinehad AR, Baccala AA, Jr, Kruecker J, Benjamin CJ, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion guided prostate biopsy improves cancer detection following transrectal ultrasound biopsy and correlates with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. J Urol 2011;186:1281–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marks L, Young S, Natarajan S. MRI-ultrasound fusion for guidance of targeted prostate biopsy. Curr Opin Urol 2013;23:43–50.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cornud F, Brolis L, Delongchamps NB, Portalez D, Malavaud B, Renard-Penna R, et al. TRUS-MRI image registration: a paradigm shift in the diagnosis of significant prostate cancer. Abdom Imaging 2013;38:1447–63.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delongchamps NB, Peyromaure M, Schull A, Beuvon F, Bouazza N, Flam T, et al. Prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging and prostate cancer detection: comparison of random and targeted biopsies. J Urol 2013;189:493–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oberlin DT, Casalino DD, Miller FH, Matulewicz RS, Perry KT, Nadler RB, et al. Diagnostic value of guided biopsies: fusion and cognitive-registration magnetic resonance imaging versus conventional ultrasound biopsy of the prostate. Urology 2016;92:75–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costa DN, Yuan Q, Xi Y, Rofsky NM, Lenkinski RE, Lotan Y, et al. Comparison of prostate cancer detection at 3-T MRI with and without an endorectal coil: a prospective, paired-patient study. Urol Oncol 2016;34:255 e7–e13.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heijmink SW, Scheenen TW, van Lin EN, Visser AG, Kiemeney LA, Witjes JA, Barentsz JO. Changes in prostate shape and volume and their implications for radiotherapy after introduction of endorectal balloon as determined by MRI at 3T. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009;73:1446–53.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hensel JM, Menard C, Chung PW, Milosevic MF, Kirilova A, Moseley JL, et al. Development of multiorgan finite element-based prostate deformation model enabling registration of endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging for radiotherapy planning. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007;68:1522–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osman M, Shebel H, Sankineni S, Bernardo ML, Daar D, Wood BJ, et al. Whole prostate volume and shape changes with the use of an inflatable and flexible endorectal coil. Radiol Res Pract 2014;2014:903747.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar