Magnetic resonance imaging-transectal ultrasound image-fusion biopsies accurately characterize the index tumor: correlation with step-sectioned radical prostatectomy specimens in 135 patients.

Prostate biopsies targeted by elastic fusion of magnetic resonance (MR) and three-dimensional (3D) transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) images may allow accurate identification of the index tumor (IT), defined as the lesion with the highest Gleason score or the largest volume or extraprostatic extension. To determine the accuracy of MR-TRUS image-fusion biopsy in characterizing ITs, as confirmed by correlation with step-sectioned radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens. Retrospective analysis of 135 consecutive patients who sequentially underwent pre-biopsy MR, MR-TRUS image-fusion biopsy, and robotic RP at two centers between January 2010 and September 2013. Image-guided biopsies of MR-suspected IT lesions were performed with tracking via real-time 3D TRUS. The largest geographically distinct cancer focus (IT lesion) was independently registered on step-sectioned RP specimens. A validated schema comprising 27 regions of interest was used to identify the IT center location on MR images and in RP specimens, as well as the location of the midpoint of the biopsy trajectory, and variables were correlated. The concordance between IT location on biopsy and RP specimens was 95% (128/135). The coefficient for correlation between IT volume on MRI and histology was r=0.663 (p<0.001). The maximum cancer core length on biopsy was weakly correlated with RP tumor volume (r=0.466, p<0.001). The concordance of primary Gleason pattern between targeted biopsy and RP specimens was 90% (115/128; κ=0.76). The study limitations include retrospective evaluation of a selected patient population, which limits the generalizability of the results. Use of MR-TRUS image fusion to guide prostate biopsies reliably identified the location and primary Gleason pattern of the IT lesion in >90% of patients, but showed limited ability to predict cancer volume, as confirmed by step-sectioned RP specimens. Biopsies targeted using magnetic resonance images combined with real-time three-dimensional transrectal ultrasound allowed us to reliably identify the spatial location of the most important tumor in prostate cancer and characterize its aggressiveness.

Baco E ，Ukimura O ，Rud E ，Vlatkovic L ，Svindland A ，Aron M ，Palmer S ，Matsugasumi T ，Marien A ，Bernhard JC ，Rewcastle JC ，Eggesbø HB ，Gill IS ... -  《-》

Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and MRI-Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy for Index Tumor Detection: Correlation with Radical Prostatectomy Specimen.

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and MRI fusion targeted biopsy (FTB) detect significant prostate cancer (sPCa) more accurately than conventional biopsies alone. To evaluate the detection accuracy of mpMRI and FTB on radical prostatectomy (RP) specimen. From a cohort of 755 men who underwent transperineal MRI and transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy under general anesthesia between 2012 and 2014, we retrospectively analyzed 120 consecutive patients who had subsequent RP. All received saturation biopsy (SB) in addition to FTB of lesions with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score ≥2. The index lesion was defined as the lesion with extraprostatic extension, the highest Gleason score (GS), or the largest tumor volume (TV) if GS were the same, in order of priority. GS 3+3 and TV ≥1.3ml or GS ≥3+4 and TV ≥0.55ml were considered sPCa. We assessed the detection accuracy by mpMRI and different biopsy approaches and analyzed lesion agreement between mpMRI and RP specimen. Overall, 120 index and 71 nonindex lesions were detected. Overall, 107 (89%) index and 51 (72%) nonindex lesions harbored sPCa. MpMRI detected 110 of 120 (92%) index lesions, FTB (two cores per lesion) alone diagnosed 96 of 120 (80%) index lesions, and SB alone diagnosed 110 of 120 (92%) index lesions. Combined SB and FTB detected 115 of 120 (96%) index foci. FTB performed significantly less accurately compared with mpMRI (p=0.02) and the combination for index lesion detection (p=0.002). Combined FTB and SB detected 97% of all sPCa lesions and was superior to mpMRI (85%), FTB (79%), and SB (88%) alone (p<0.001 each). Spearman's rank correlation coefficient for index lesion agreement between mpMRI and RP was 0.87 (p<0.001). Limitations included the retrospective design, multiple operators, and nonblinding of radiologists. MpMRI identified 92% of index lesions compared with RP histopathology. The combination of FTB and SB was superior to both approaches alone, reliably detecting 97% of sPCa lesions. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging detects the index lesion accurately in 9 of 10 patients; however, the combined biopsy approach, while missing less significant cancer, comes at the cost of detecting more insignificant cancer.

Radtke JP ，Schwab C ，Wolf MB ，Freitag MT ，Alt CD ，Kesch C ，Popeneciu IV ，Huettenbrink C ，Gasch C ，Klein T ，Bonekamp D ，Duensing S ，Roth W ，Schueler S ，Stock C ，Schlemmer HP ，Roethke M ，Hohenfellner M ，Hadaschik BA ... -  《-》

Cribriform morphology predicts upstaging after radical prostatectomy in patients with Gleason score 3 + 4 = 7 prostate cancer at transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided needle biopsy.

Keefe DT ，Schieda N ，El Hallani S ，Breau RH ，Morash C ，Robertson SJ ，Mai KT ，Belanger EC ，Flood TA ... -  《-》

Transcriptome Wide Analysis of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsy and Matching Surgical Specimens from High-risk Prostate Cancer Patients Treated with Radical Prostatectomy: The Target Must Be Hit.

The most suspicious lesions on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may be representative of final pathology. We connect imaging with high-precision spatial annotation of biopsies and genomic cancer signatures to compare the genomic signals of the index lesion and biopsy cores of adjacent and far away locations. Eleven patients diagnosed with high-risk prostate cancer on MRI/transrectal ultrasound-fusion biopsy (Bx) and treated with radical prostatectomy (RP). Five tissue specimens were collected from each patient. Whole transcriptome RNA-expression was profiled for each sample. Genomic signatures were used to compare signals in MRI invisible versus visible foci using Pearson's correlation and to assess intratumoral heterogeneity using hierarchical clustering. Ten RP and 27 Bx-samples passed quality control. Gene expression between RP and index Bx, but not adjacent benign samples, was highly correlated. Genomic Gleason grade classifier features measured across the different samples showed concordant expression across Bx and RP tumor samples, while an inverse expression pattern was observed between tumor and benign samples indicating the lack of a strong field-effect. The distribution of low and high Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) samples was 10 and 11, respectively. Genomics of all low PI-RADS samples resembled benign tissue and most high PI-RADS samples resembled cancer tissue. A strong association was observed between PI-RADS version 2 and Decipher as well as the genomic Gleason grade classifier score. Clustering analysis showed that most samples cluster tightly by patient. One patient showed unique tumor biology in index versus secondary lesion suggesting the presence of intrapatient heterogeneity and the utility in profiling multiple foci identified by MRI. MRI-targeted Bx-genomics show excellent correlation with RP-genomics and confirm the information captured by PI-RADS. Sampling of the target lesion must be precise as correlation between index and benign lesions was not seen. In this report, we tested if targeted prostate sampling using magnetic resonance imaging-fusion biopsy allows to genetically describe index tumors of prostate cancer. We found that imaging genomics correlated well with final prostatectomy provided that the target is hit precisely.

Radtke JP ，Takhar M ，Bonekamp D ，Kesch C ，Erho N ，du Plessis M ，Buerki C ，Ong K ，Davicioni E ，Hohenfellner M ，Hadaschik BA ... -  《European Urology Focus》

Localising prostate cancer: comparison of endorectal magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and 3D-MR spectroscopic imaging with transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy.

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and MR spectroscopic imaging (MRSI) have been gaining acceptance as tools in the evaluation of prostate cancer. We compared the accuracy of transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided biopsy and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI combined with three-dimensional (3D) MRSI in locating prostate tumours and determined the influence of prostate weight on MRI accuracy. Between March 1999 and October 2006, 507 patients with localised prostate cancer underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) at the Jules Bordet Institute. Of these, 220 had undergone endorectal MRI (1.5 T Siemens Quantum Symphony) and 3D-MRSI prior to RP. We retrospectively reviewed data on tumour location and compared the results obtained by MRI and by TRUS-guided biopsy with those obtained on histopathology of the RP specimen. Patient data were as follows: median age 62.4 years (45-74); median PSA 6.36 ng/ml (0.5-22.6); 73.6% of patients had non-palpable disease (T1c); median biopsy Gleason score 6 (3-9); median RP specimen weight 50 g (12-172); median pathological Gleason score 7 (4-10); 68.64% of patients had organ-confined (pT2) disease. Tumour localisation was correlated with RP data in a significantly higher percentage of patients when using MRI rather than TRUS-guided biopsy (47.4 vs. 36.6%, p < 0.0001). MRI was marginally superior to TRUS-guided biopsy in detecting malignancy at the prostate apex (48.3 vs. 41.9%, p = 0.0687) and somewhat better at the prostate base (46 vs. 39.1%, p = 0.0413). It was highly significantly better at mid-gland (52 vs. 41.1%, p = 0.0015) and in the transition zone (40.1 vs. 24.3%, p < 0.0001). MRI had higher sensitivity in larger (≥50 g) than smaller (<50 g) prostates (50.3 vs. 42.2%, p = 0.0017). MRI was superior to TRUS-guided biopsy in locating prostate tumours except at the gland apex. MRI was more accurate in larger (≥50 g) than smaller prostates.

Goris Gbenou MC ，Peltier A ，Addla SK ，Lemort M ，Bollens R ，Larsimont D ，Roumeguère T ，Schulman CC ，van Velthoven R ... -  《-》