Dataset Information

Gleason Grade Group Concordance between Preoperative Targeted Biopsy and Radical Prostatectomy Histopathologic Analysis: A Comparison Between In-Bore MRI-guided and MRI-Transrectal US Fusion Prostate Biopsies.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

To determine and compare rates of grade group (GG) discrepancies between different targeted biopsy techniques (in-bore vs fusion) after propensity score weighting using whole-mount radical prostatectomy (RP) histopathologic analysis as the reference standard.

Materials and methods

This retrospective study evaluated men who underwent targeted (fusion or in-bore) biopsy between April 2017 and January 2019 followed by prostatectomy. The primary endpoint of the study was a change in GG from biopsy to RP at a patient level. For downgrade and upgrade analysis, men with biopsy GG1 (downgrade not possible) and GG5 (upgrade not possible) were excluded, respectively. GG upgrade, downgrade, and concordance rates of each targeting approach were compared using propensity score weighting and logistic regression with inverse probability of treatment weighting. Significance level was set at .05. Index lesion GG on RP specimen served as the reference standard.

Results

A total of 191 men (90 in the in-bore [mean age, 63 years ± 7 (standard deviation)] and 101 in the fusion biopsy group [mean age, 65 years ± 7]) were eligible and included. Fewer GG upgrades were noted in the in-bore biopsy group (14%; 12 of 85) compared with the fusion plus systematic biopsy group (30%; 28 of 93) (P = .012). The incidence of GG downgrade in the in-bore group (25%; 21 of 84) was higher than in the fusion group (17%; 16 of 93); however, the difference was not statistically significant (P = .2). Of the 77 men misclassified by both biopsy techniques, the majority (56%, n = 43) had a change in GG of 2 to 3 or 3 to 2.

Conclusion

Superior sampling accuracy with MRI-guided in-bore biopsies offers a lower incidence of GG upgrades compared with MRI-transrectal US fusion biopsies upon RP.Keywords: Biopsy/Needle Aspiration, MR-Imaging, Oncology, Pathology, Prostate Supplemental material is available for this article.© RSNA, 2021.

SUBMITTER: Costa DN

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8011452 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo evaluate the role of confirmatory in-bore MRI-guided biopsy in patients with low- or intermediate-risk disease diagnosed at prior transrectal US-guided biopsy and to evaluate the rate and predictors for missed cancers.Materials and methodsA retrospective evaluation of 50 consecutive men who had previously undergone transrectal US-guided biopsy with positive results and who underwent subsequent in-bore MRI-guided biopsy at our university hospital (average time interval, 11 months) between 2012 and 2016 was performed. Ten men were excluded because of a history of treatment after transrectal US-guided biopsy. A total of 40 men (mean age, 63 years; range, 47-84 years) were included in this study. Multiparametric 3-T MRI (T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted, and dynamic contrast material-enhanced) and transrectal in-bore MRI-guided biopsy were performed. Cancer detection, disease-grade changes, and cancers missed at in-bore MRI-guided biopsy were evaluated. Descriptive statistics were used to report different rates. The Fisher exact test was used for categoric variables. The Mann-Whitney U test and independent Student t test were used for nonparametric and parametric data, respectively. The McNemar test was used for paired data.ResultsThe overall cancer detection rate when using in-bore MRI-guided biopsy was 65% (26 of 40). In-bore MRI-guided biopsy detected 14 previously undiscovered cancerous lesions (clinically significant cancers [CSCs], 57.1% [eight of 14]). An overall disease upgrade by in-bore MRI-guided biopsy occurred in 40% (16 of 40) of cases (61.5% [16 of 26] of cases with positive results from in-bore MRI-guided biopsy). One case was downgraded from a Gleason score (GS) of 3 + 4 = 7 to a GS of 3 + 3 = 6. Out of 71 sextant biopsies with positive results detected by transrectal US-guided biopsy (from all 40 patients), 80% (57 of 71) were visible on MR images (in-bore MRI-guided biopsy results were positive in 52.6% [30 of 57]), and 20% (14 of 71) had no image correlates on MR images. In-bore MRI-guided biopsy upgraded 60% (18 of 30) and downgraded 3.3% (one of 30) of detected lesions. The false-negative rate was 35% (14.2% [two of 14] of patients had CSCs; GS ≥ 7), was higher in prostate volumes of greater than 40 mL, and was lower in the anterior gland location (P = .04 and .01, respectively).ConclusionPerforming confirmatory in-bore MRI-guided biopsy following positive transrectal US-guided biopsy resulted in a high disease-upgrade incidence with subsequently improved disease-risk stratification, particularly when considering patients for active surveillance or focal therapy. Supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 2020See also the commentary by Weiss and Solomon in this issue.

Project description:UnlabelledWe assessed the value of fusion (18)F-fluoromethylcholine ((18)F-choline) PET/MRI for image-guided (targeted) prostate biopsies to detect significant prostate cancer (Gleason ≥ 3 + 4) compared with standard (systematic 12-core) biopsies.MethodsWithin an ongoing prospective clinical trial, hybrid (18)F-choline PET/CT and multiparametric 3T MRI (mpMRI) of the pelvis were performed in 36 subjects with a rising prostate-specific antigen for known (n = 15) or suspected (n = 21) prostate cancer before a prostate biopsy procedure. PET and T2-weighted MR volumes of the prostate were spatially registered using commercially available software. Biopsy targets were selected on the basis of visual appearance on MRI and graded as low, intermediate, or high risk for significant disease. Volumes of interest were defined for MR-identified lesions. (18)F-choline uptake measures were obtained from the MR target and a mirrored background volume of interest. The biopsy procedure was performed after registration of real-time transrectal ultrasound with T2-weighted MR and included image-guided cores plus standard cores. Histologic results were determined from standard and targeted biopsy cores as well as prostatectomy specimens (n = 10).ResultsFifteen subjects were ultimately identified with Gleason ≥ 3 + 4 prostate cancer, of which targeted biopsy identified significantly more (n = 12) than standard biopsies (n = 5; P = 0.002). A total of 52 lesions were identified by mpMRI (19 low, 18 intermediate, 15 high risk), and mpMRI-assigned risk was a strong predictor of final pathology (area under the curve = 0.81; P < 0.001). When the mean (18)F-choline target-to-background ratio was used, the addition of (18)F-choline to mpMRI significantly improved the prediction of Gleason ≥ 3 + 4 cancers over mpMRI alone (area under the curve = 0.92; P < 0.001).ConclusionFusion PET/MRI transrectal ultrasound image registration for targeted prostate biopsies is clinically feasible and accurate. The addition of (18)F-choline PET to mpMRI improves the identification of significant prostate cancer.