Relationship between non-suspicious MRI and insignificant prostate cancer: results from a monocentric study

World Journal of Urology

Volumn 34, Issue 5, 2016, Pages 673-678

  Renard Penna, Raphaële ^a,e   Roupret, Morgan ^b,e   Compérat, Eva ^b,e   Rozet, François ^c   Granger, Benjamin ^b   Barkatz, Johann ^b   Bitker, Marc Olivier ^b   Lucidarme, Olivier ^a   Cussenot, Olivier ^d,e   Mozer, Pierre ^b,e  

^a ASSISTANCE PUBLIQUE HÔPITAUX DE PARIS   (France)

^b PITIÉ SALPÊTRIÈRE HOSPITAL   (France)

^c Montsouris Institute   (France)

^d HÔPITAL TENON   (France)

^e INSTITUT UNIVERSITAIRE DE FRANCE   (France)

Author keywords

Biopsy; Gleason score; MRI; Prostate neoplasms; Prostate specific antigen

Indexed keywords

AGED; BIOPSY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PATHOLOGY; PROSTATE TUMOR; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY;

AGED; BIOPSY; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 84944561190     PISSN: 07244983     EISSN: 14338726     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00345-015-1685-2     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Heidenreich A et al (2014) EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent-update 2013. Eur Urol 65(1):124–137
2. Heidenreich A et al (2013) Early detection of prostate cancer: European Association of Urology recommendation. Eur Urol 64(3):347–354
3. Mozer P et al (2015) First round of targeted biopsies using magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasonography fusion compared with conventional transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsies for the diagnosis of localised prostate cancer. BJU Int 115(1):50–57
4. Ridout AJ et al (2014) Role of magnetic resonance imaging in defining a biopsy strategy for detection of prostate cancer. Int J Urol 21(1):5–11
5. Barentsz JO et al (2012) ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol 22(4):746–757
6. Janssoone T et al (2011) Biopsym: a learning environment for trans-rectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsies. Stud Health Technol Inform 163:242–246
7. Moore CM et al (2013) Standards of reporting for MRI-targeted biopsy studies (START) of the prostate: recommendations from an international working group. Eur Urol 64(4):544–552
8. Puech P et al (2013) Prostate cancer diagnosis: multiparametric MR-targeted biopsy with cognitive and transrectal US–MR fusion guidance versus systematic biopsy—prospective multicenter study. Radiology 268(2):461–469
9. Renard-Penna R et al (2013) Accuracy of high resolution (1.5 tesla) pelvic phased array magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in staging prostate cancer in candidates for radical prostatectomy: results from a prospective study. Urol Oncol 31(4):448–454
10. Renard-Penna R et al (2015) Prostate Imaging reporting and data system and Likert scoring system: multiparametric MR imaging validation study to screen patients for initial biopsy. Radiology 275(2):458–468
11. Dickinson L et al (2011) Magnetic resonance imaging for the detection, localisation, and characterisation of prostate cancer: recommendations from a European consensus meeting. Eur Urol 59(4):477–494
12. Portalez D et al (2012) Validation of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology scoring system for prostate cancer diagnosis on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in a cohort of repeat biopsy patients. Eur Urol 62(6):986–996
13. Baumann M et al (2012) Prostate biopsy tracking with deformation estimation. Med Image Anal 16(3):562–576
14. Thompson JE et al (2014) Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging guided diagnostic biopsy detects significant prostate cancer and could reduce unnecessary biopsies and over detection: a prospective study. J Urol 192(1):67–74
15. Haffner J et al (2011) Role of magnetic resonance imaging before initial biopsy: comparison of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted and systematic biopsy for significant prostate cancer detection. BJU Int 108(8 Pt 2):E171–E178
16. Kirkham AP, Emberton M, Allen C (2006) How good is MRI at detecting and characterising cancer within the prostate? Eur Urol 50(6):1163–1174 (discussion 1175)
17. Abd-Alazeez M et al (2014) The accuracy of multiparametric MRI in men with negative biopsy and elevated PSA level–can it rule out clinically significant prostate cancer? Urol Oncol 32(1):45e17–45e22
18. Wolters T et al (2011) A critical analysis of the tumor volume threshold for clinically insignificant prostate cancer using a data set of a randomized screening trial. J Urol 185(1):121–125
19. Itatani R et al (2014) Negative predictive value of multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer detection: outcome of 5-year follow-up in men with negative findings on initial MRI studies. Eur J Radiol 83(10):1740–1745
20. De Visschere PJ et al (2015) What kind of prostate cancers do we miss on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging? Eur Radiol. doi:10.1007/s00330-015-3894-x
21. Arumainayagam N et al (2013) Multiparametric MR imaging for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: a validation cohort study with transperineal template prostate mapping as the reference standard. Radiology 268(3):761–769
22. Tanimoto A et al (2007) Prostate cancer screening: the clinical value of diffusion-weighted imaging and dynamic MR imaging in combination with T2-weighted imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 25(1):146–152
23. Numao N et al (2013) Usefulness of pre-biopsy multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and clinical variables to reduce initial prostate biopsy in men with suspected clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 190(2):502–508
24. Kim JY et al (2014) Low-risk prostate cancer: the accuracy of multiparametric MR imaging for detection. Radiology 271(2):435–444
25. Wefer AE et al (2000) Sextant localization of prostate cancer: comparison of sextant biopsy, magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging with step section histology. J Urol 164(2):400–404
26. Schoots IG et al (2015) Magnetic resonance imaging in active surveillance of prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol 67(4):627–636
27. Cussenot O et al (2014) Secondary chemoprevention of localized prostate cancer by short-term androgen deprivation to select indolent tumors suitable for active surveillance: a prospective pilot phase II study. World J Urol 32(2):545–550
28. Drouin SJ et al (2012) Clinical characteristics and pathologic findings in patients eligible for active surveillance who underwent radical prostatectomy. Urol Oncol 30(4):402–407
29. Ilic D et al (2013) Screening for prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 1:CD004720
30. Glaser AP, Novakovic K, Helfand BT (2012) The impact of prostate biopsy on urinary symptoms, erectile function, and anxiety. Curr Urol Rep 13(6):447–454
31. Ahmed HU et al (2009) Is it time to consider a role for MRI before prostate biopsy? Nat Rev Clin Oncol 6(4):197–206