Targeted biopsy in the detection of prostate cancer using an office based magnetic resonance ultrasound fusion device.

PURPOSE Targeted biopsy of lesions identified on magnetic resonance imaging may enhance the detection of clinically relevant prostate cancers. We evaluated prostate cancer detection rates in 171 consecutive men using magnetic resonance ultrasound fusion prostate biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS Subjects underwent targeted biopsy for active surveillance (106) or persistently increased prostate specific antigen but negative prior conventional biopsy (65). Before biopsy, each man underwent multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging at 3.0 Tesla. Lesions on magnetic resonance imaging were outlined in 3 dimensions and assigned increasing cancer suspicion levels (image grade 1 to 5) by a uroradiologist. A biopsy tracking system was used to fuse the stored magnetic resonance imaging with real-time ultrasound, generating a 3-dimensional prostate model on the fly. Working from the 3-dimensional model, transrectal biopsy of target lesions and 12 systematic biopsies were performed with the patient under local anesthesia in the clinic. RESULTS A total of 171 subjects (median age 65 years) underwent targeted biopsy. At biopsy, median prostate specific antigen was 4.9 ng/ml and prostate volume was 48 cc. A targeted biopsy was 3 times more likely to identify cancer than a systematic biopsy (21% vs 7%). Prostate cancer was found in 53% of men, 38% of whom had Gleason grade 7 or greater cancer. Of the men with Gleason 7 or greater cancer 38% had disease detected only on targeted biopsies. Targeted biopsy findings correlated with level of suspicion on magnetic resonance imaging. Of 16 men 15 (94%) with an image grade 5 target (highest suspicion) had prostate cancer, including 7 with Gleason 7 or greater cancer. CONCLUSIONS Prostate lesions identified on magnetic resonance imaging can be accurately targeted using magnetic resonance ultrasound fusion biopsy by a urologist in clinic. Biopsy findings correlate with level of suspicion on magnetic resonance imaging.

[1]  Thomas Hambrock,et al.  Magnetic resonance imaging guided prostate biopsy in men with repeat negative biopsies and increased prostate specific antigen. , 2010, The Journal of urology.

[2]  P. P. Iu,et al.  ESUR prostate MR guidelines. , 2013, European radiology.

[3]  M. Cooperberg,et al.  Active surveillance for the management of prostate cancer in a contemporary cohort , 2008, Cancer.

[4]  Matthew R Cooperberg,et al.  Time trends and local variation in primary treatment of localized prostate cancer. , 2010, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[5]  Baris Turkbey,et al.  Is apparent diffusion coefficient associated with clinical risk scores for prostate cancers that are visible on 3-T MR images? , 2011, Radiology.

[6]  Alexandre Mamedov,et al.  Clinical results of long-term follow-up of a large, active surveillance cohort with localized prostate cancer. , 2010, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[7]  J. Moul,et al.  Significant discrepancies between diagnostic and pathologic Gleason sums in prostate cancer: the predictive role of age and prostate-specific antigen. , 2008, Urology.

[8]  W. Ellis,et al.  Improved prostate cancer detection with anterior apical prostate biopsies. , 2006, Urologic oncology.

[9]  Pingkun Yan,et al.  Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion guided prostate biopsy improves cancer detection following transrectal ultrasound biopsy and correlates with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. , 2011, The Journal of urology.

[10]  K. Fareed,et al.  Office based transrectal saturation biopsy improves prostate cancer detection compared to extended biopsy in the repeat biopsy population. , 2011, The Journal of urology.

[11]  William J Catalona,et al.  Serial biopsy results in prostate cancer screening study. , 2002, The Journal of urology.

[12]  Aaron Fenster,et al.  Mechanically assisted 3D ultrasound guided prostate biopsy system. , 2008, Medical physics.

[13]  Mark Emberton,et al.  Image-guided prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance imaging-derived targets: a systematic review. , 2013, European urology.

[14]  Peter Guion,et al.  Initial clinical experience with real‐time transrectal ultrasonography‐magnetic resonance imaging fusion‐guided prostate biopsy , 2008, BJU international.

[15]  Sheng Xu,et al.  Closed-Loop Control in Fused MR-TRUS Image-Guided Prostate Biopsy , 2007, MICCAI.

[16]  Aaron Fenster,et al.  Clinical application of a 3D ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy system. , 2011, Urologic oncology.

[17]  Georgios Sakas,et al.  A novel stereotactic prostate biopsy system integrating pre-interventional magnetic resonance imaging and live ultrasound fusion. , 2011, The Journal of urology.

[18]  K. Wallner,et al.  Performance of transperineal template-guided mapping biopsy in detecting prostate cancer in the initial and repeat biopsy setting , 2009, Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases.

[19]  Baris Turkbey,et al.  Multiparametric 3T prostate magnetic resonance imaging to detect cancer: histopathological correlation using prostatectomy specimens processed in customized magnetic resonance imaging based molds. , 2011, The Journal of urology.

[20]  M. Cooperberg,et al.  UC San Francisco UC San Francisco Previously Published Works Title Active surveillance for prostate cancer : Progress and promise , 2011 .

[21]  H. Ahmed,et al.  Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer: a phase I/II trial. , 2011, The Journal of urology.

[22]  J. Fütterer,et al.  ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012 , 2012, European Radiology.

[23]  Fernando J. Kim,et al.  Is apparent diffusion coefficient associated with clinical risk scores for prostate cancers that are visible on 3-T MR images? , 2011 .

[24]  Thomas Hambrock,et al.  Prospective assessment of prostate cancer aggressiveness using 3-T diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsies versus a systematic 10-core transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsy cohort. , 2012, European urology.

[25]  A. Billis.  Active surveillance program for prostate cancer: an update of the Johns Hopkins experience , 2011 .

[26]  P. Box.  Relationship between apparent diffusion coefficients at 3.0-T MR imaging and Gleason grade in peripheral zone prostate cancer , 2011 .

[27]  B. Trock,et al.  Delayed versus immediate surgical intervention and prostate cancer outcome. , 2006, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[28]  Heinz-Peter Schlemmer,et al.  MRI-guided biopsy of the prostate increases diagnostic performance in men with elevated or increasing PSA levels after previous negative TRUS biopsies. , 2006, European urology.

[29]  K. Fareed,et al.  Importance of additional "extreme" anterior apical needle biopsies in the initial detection of prostate cancer. , 2010, Urology.

[30]  Kirsten L. Greene,et al.  Outcomes of active surveillance for men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer. , 2011, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[31]  A. Villers,et al.  Dynamic contrast enhanced, pelvic phased array magnetic resonance imaging of localized prostate cancer for predicting tumor volume: correlation with radical prostatectomy findings. , 2006, The Journal of urology.

[32]  Matthew R Cooperberg,et al.  Contemporary trends in low risk prostate cancer: risk assessment and treatment. , 2007, The Journal of urology.

[33]  G. Andriole.  Active Surveillance for the Management of Prostate Cancer in a Contemporary Cohort: Dall'Era MA, Konety BR, Cowan JE, et al (Univ of California at San Francisco; et al) Cancer 112:2664-2670, 2008 § , 2012 .

[34]  Monish Aron,et al.  3-Dimensional elastic registration system of prostate biopsy location by real-time 3-dimensional transrectal ultrasound guidance with magnetic resonance/transrectal ultrasound image fusion. , 2012, The Journal of urology.

[35]  T. Tammela,et al.  Outcomes of men with screen-detected prostate cancer eligible for active surveillance who were managed expectantly. , 2009, European urology.

[36]  C C Schulman,et al.  Prospective evaluation of prostate cancer detected on biopsies 1, 2, 3 and 4: when should we stop? , 2001, The Journal of urology.

[37]  P. Choyke,et al.  D'Amico risk stratification correlates with degree of suspicion of prostate cancer on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. , 2010, The Journal of urology.