Prostate cancer detection with magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion biopsy: The role of systematic and targeted biopsies

Cancer

Volumn 122, Issue 6, 2016, Pages 884-892

  Filson, Christopher P ^a,b   Natarajan, Shyam ^a   Margolis, Daniel J A ^a   Huang, Jiaoti ^a   Lieu, Patricia ^a   Dorey, Frederick J ^a   Reiter, Robert E ^a   Marks, Leonard S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b EMORY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

biopsy; cancer staging; diagnostic imaging; magnetic resonance imaging; prostate cancer

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; TUMOR MARKER;

ADULT; AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER GRADING; CONTROLLED STUDY; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; IMAGE GUIDED BIOPSY; MAGNETIC RESONANCE ULTRASOUND FUSION BIOPSY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEN'S HEALTH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATE VOLUME; BLOOD; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; EVALUATION STUDY; INTERVENTIONAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIMODAL IMAGING; NEEDLE BIOPSY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; ODDS RATIO; PATHOLOGY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PROCEDURES; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS;

AGED; BIOMARKERS, TUMOR; BIOPSY, NEEDLE; HUMANS; IMAGE-GUIDED BIOPSY; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIMODAL IMAGING; ODDS RATIO; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, INTERVENTIONAL;

EID: 84960357605     PISSN: 0008543X     EISSN: 10970142     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.29874     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Turkbey B, et al., Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. JAMA. 2015; 313: 390-397.
2. Natarajan S, Marks LS, Margolis DJ, et al., Clinical application of a 3D ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy system. Urol Oncol. 2011; 29: 334-342.
3. Sonn GA, Natarajan S, Margolis DJ, et al., Targeted biopsy in the detection of prostate cancer using an office based magnetic resonance ultrasound fusion device. J Urol. 2013; 189: 86-92.
4. Abd-Alazeez M, Kirkham A, Ahmed HU,. Performance of multiparametric MRI in men at risk of prostate cancer before the first biopsy: a paired validating cohort study using template prostate mapping biopsies. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2014; 17: 40-46.
5. Sonn GA, Chang E, Natarajan S, 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: 809-815.
6. Abd-Alazeez M, Ahmed HU, Arya M, et al., The accuracy of multiparametric MRI in men with negative biopsy and elevated PSA level-can it rule out clinically significant prostate cancer? Urol Oncol. 2014; 32: 45.e17-45.e22.
7. Hu JC, Chang E, Natarajan S, et al., Targeted prostate biopsy to select men for active surveillance: do the Epstein criteria still apply? J Urol. 2014; 192: 385-390.
8. Stamatakis L, Siddiqui MM, Nix JW, et al., Accuracy of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in confirming eligibility for active surveillance for men with prostate cancer. Cancer. 2013; 119: 3359-3366.
9. Acar O, Esen T, Colakoglu B, Vural M, Onay A,. Multiparametric MRI guidance in first-time prostate biopsies: what is the real benefit? Diagn Interv Radiol. 2015; 21: 271-276.
10. Tonttila PP, Lantto J, Paakko E, et al., Prebiopsy multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer diagnosis in biopsy-naive men with suspected prostate cancer based on elevated prostate-specific antigen values: results from a randomized prospective blinded controlled trial [published online ahead of print May 29, 2015]. Eur Urol. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.05.024.
11. Giannarini G, Briganti A, Crestani A, Rossanese M, Montorsi F, Ficarra V,. Dismiss systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided and embrace targeted magnetic resonance imaging-informed prostate biopsy: is the paradigm ready to shift [published online ahead of print June 9, 2015]? Eur Urol. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.05.049.
12. Itatani R, Namimoto T, Atsuji S, et al., 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. 2014; 83: 1740-1745.
13. Le JD, Tan N, Shkolyar E, et al., Multifocality and prostate cancer detection by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging: correlation with whole-mount histopathology. Eur Urol. 2015; 67: 569-576.
14. Le JD, Stephenson S, Brugger M, et al., Magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion biopsy for prediction of final prostate pathology. J Urol. 2014; 192: 1367-1373.
15. Epstein JI, Walsh PC, Carmichael M, Brendler CB,. Pathologic and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostate cancer. JAMA. 1994; 271: 368-374.
16. Pinto PA, Chung PH, Rastinehad AR, 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: 1281-1285.
17. Bul M, Zhu X, Valdagni R, et al., Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer worldwide: the PRIAS study. Eur Urol. 2013; 63: 597-603.
18. Carter HB, Kettermann A, Warlick C, et al., Expectant management of prostate cancer with curative intent: an update of the Johns Hopkins experience. J Urol. 2007; 178: 2359-2364.
19. Abdi H, Zargar H, Goldenberg SL, et al., Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy for the detection of prostate cancer in patients with prior negative biopsy results. Urol Oncol. 2015; 33: 165.e1-165.e7.
20. Ouzzane A, Puech P, Lemaitre L, et al., Combined multiparametric MRI and targeted biopsies improve anterior prostate cancer detection, staging, and grading. Urology. 2011; 78: 1356-1362.
21. American College of Radiology. PI-RADS v 2: prostate imaging and reporting and data system, version 2. http://www.acr.org/~/media/ACR/Documents/PDF/QualitySafety/Resources/PIRADS/PIRADS%20V2.pdf. Accessed December 18, 2015.
22. Taira AV, Merrick GS, Galbreath RW, et al., Performance of transperineal template-guided mapping biopsy in detecting prostate cancer in the initial and repeat biopsy setting. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2010; 13: 71-77.
23. Han M, Chang D, Kim C, et al., Geometric evaluation of systematic transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. J Urol. 2012; 188: 2404-2409.
24. Moore CM, Petrides N, Emberton M,. Can MRI replace serial biopsies in men on active surveillance for prostate cancer? Curr Opin Urol. 2014; 24: 280-287.
25. de Rooij M, Hamoen E, Futterer JJ, Barentsz JO, Rovers MM,. Accuracy of multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer detection: a meta-analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014; 202: 343-351.
26. Sosna J, Pedrosa I, DeWolf WC, Mahallati H, Lenkinski RE, Rofsky NM,. MR imaging of the prostate at 3 Tesla: comparison of an external phased-array coil to imaging with an endorectal coil at 1.5 Tesla. Acad Radiol. 2004; 11: 857-862.
27. Park BK, Kim B, Kim CK, Lee HM, Kwon GY,. Comparison of phased-array 3.0-T and endorectal 1.5-T magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of local staging accuracy for prostate cancer. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2007; 31: 534-538.
28. Turkbey B, Merino MJ, Gallardo EC, et al., Comparison of endorectal coil and nonendorectal coil T2W and diffusion-weighted MRI at 3 Tesla for localizing prostate cancer: correlation with whole-mount histopathology. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2014; 39: 1443-1448.