Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Clinical, and Biopsy Findings in Suspected Prostate Cancer

被引:12
|
作者
Haj-Mirzaian, Arya [2 ,3 ]
Burk, Kristine S. [2 ,3 ,4 ]
Lacson, Ronilda [2 ,3 ]
Glazer, Daniel I. [2 ,3 ,4 ]
Saini, Sanjay [5 ]
Kibel, Adam S. [4 ,6 ]
Khorasani, Ramin [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Brigham & Womens Hosp, Dept Radiol, 75 Francis St, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[2] Brigham & Womens Hosp, Ctr Evidence Based Imaging, Harvard Med Sch, Dept Radiol, Boston, MA USA
[3] Brigham & Womens Hosp, Harvard Med Sch, Dept Radiol, Boston, MA USA
[4] Harvard Med Sch, Dana Farber Canc Inst, Boston, MA USA
[5] Harvard Med Sch, Dept Radiol, Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Boston, MA USA
[6] Harvard Med Sch, Brigham & Womens Hosp, Div Urol Surg, Boston, MA USA
基金
日本学术振兴会;
关键词
D O I
10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.4258
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Importance Multiple strategies integrating magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and clinical data have been proposed to determine the need for a prostate biopsy in men with suspected clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) (Gleason score >= 3 + 4). However, inconsistencies across different strategies create challenges for drawing a definitive conclusion. Objective To determine the optimal prostate biopsy decision-making strategy for avoiding unnecessary biopsies and minimizing the risk of missing csPCa by combining MRI Prostate Imaging Reporting & Data System (PI-RADS) and clinical data. Data Sources PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from inception to July 1, 2022. Study Selection English-language studies that evaluated men with suspected but not confirmed csPCa who underwent MRI PI-RADS followed by prostate biopsy were included. Each study had proposed a biopsy plan by combining PI-RADS and clinical data. Data Extraction and Synthesis Studies were independently assessed for eligibility for inclusion. Quality of studies was appraised using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Mixed-effects meta-analyses and meta-regression models with multimodel inference were performed. Reporting of this study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline. Main Outcomes and Measures Independent risk factors of csPCa were determined by performing meta-regression between the rate of csPCa and PI-RADS and clinical parameters. Yields of different biopsy strategies were assessed by performing diagnostic meta-analysis. Results The analyses included 72 studies comprising 36 366 patients. Univariable meta-regression showed that PI-RADS 4 (beta-coefficient [SE], 7.82 [3.85]; P = .045) and PI-RADS 5 (beta-coefficient [SE], 23.18 [4.46]; P < .001) lesions, but not PI-RADS 3 lesions (beta-coefficient [SE], -4.08 [3.06]; P = .19), were significantly associated with a higher risk of csPCa. When considered jointly in a multivariable model, prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) was the only clinical variable significantly associated with csPCa (beta-coefficient [SE], 15.50 [5.14]; P < .001) besides PI-RADS 5 (beta-coefficient [SE], 9.19 [3.33]; P < .001). Avoiding biopsy in patients with lesions with PI-RADS category of 3 or less and PSAD less than 0.10 (vs <0.15) ng/mL(2) resulted in reducing 30% (vs 48%) of unnecessary biopsies (compared with performing biopsy in all suspected patients), with an estimated sensitivity of 97% (vs 95%) and number needed to harm of 17 (vs 15). Conclusions and Relevance These findings suggest that in patients with suspected csPCa, patient-tailored prostate biopsy decisions based on PI-RADS and PSAD could prevent unnecessary procedures while maintaining high sensitivity.
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsy Compared with Systematic Prostate Biopsy in Biopsy-naive Patients with Suspected Prostate Cancer
    Alkema, Nicolette G.
    Hoogeveen, Sebastiaan F. J. S.
    Cauberg, Evelyne C. C.
    Witte, Lambertus P. W.
    van't Veer-ten Kate, Miranda
    de Boer, Erwin
    Hoogland, Marije A. M.
    Blanker, Marco H.
    Boomsma, Martijn F.
    Steffens, Martijn G.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY OPEN SCIENCE, 2022, 44 : 125 - 130
  • [2] Usefulness of Pre-biopsy Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Clinical Variables to Reduce Initial Prostate Biopsy in Men with Suspected Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer
    Numao, Noboru
    Yoshida, Soichiro
    Komai, Yoshinobu
    Ishii, Chikako
    Kagawa, Makoto
    Kijima, Toshiki
    Yokoyama, Minato
    Ishioka, Junichiro
    Matsuoka, Yoh
    Koga, Fumitaka
    Saito, Kazutaka
    Masuda, Hitoshi
    Fujii, Yasuhisa
    Kawakami, Satoru
    Kihara, Kazunori
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2013, 190 (02): : 502 - 508
  • [3] Comparison of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Cognitive Prostate Biopsy Versus Magnetic Resonance ImagingUltrasound Fusion Prostate Biopsy in The Detection of Prostate Cancer
    Bhojwani, A.
    Desai, C.
    Ehsanullah, S. A.
    Shahzad, S. A.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2021, 108
  • [4] Clinical Outcome Following Low Suspicion Multiparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging or Benign Magnetic Resonance Imaging Guided Biopsy to Detect Prostate Cancer
    Boesen, Lars
    Norgaard, Nis
    Logager, Vibeke
    Thomsen, Henrik S.
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2017, 198 (02): : 310 - 315
  • [5] Integration of Prostate Biopsy Results with Pre-Biopsy Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Findings Improves Local Staging of Prostate Cancer
    Caglic, Iztok
    Sushentsev, Nikita
    Shah, Nimish
    Warren, Anne Y.
    Lamb, Benjamin W.
    Barrett, Tristan
    CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF RADIOLOGISTS JOURNAL-JOURNAL DE L ASSOCIATION CANADIENNE DES RADIOLOGISTES, 2022, 73 (03): : 515 - 523
  • [6] 912 Comparison of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Cognitive Prostate Biopsy Versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Prostate Biopsy in The Detection of Prostate Cancer
    Bhojwani, A.
    Desai, C.
    Ehsanullah, S. A.
    Shahzad, S. A.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2021, 108 (SUPPL 2)
  • [7] Diagnostic accuracy of bi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging in suspected prostate cancer: Correlation of scan results with biopsy findings in a series of 266 patients
    Moss, Basil
    Amin, Suzanne
    Muthukumara, Withma
    Khoory, Christopher
    Minshull-Beech, Helen
    Nambirajan, Thiagarajan
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL UROLOGY, 2021, 14 (06) : 437 - 446
  • [8] Clinical implementation of pre-biopsy magnetic resonance imaging pathways for the diagnosis of prostate cancer
    Israel, Bas
    Immerzeel, Jos
    van der Leest, Marloes
    Hannink, Gerjon
    Zamecnik, Patrik
    Bomers, Joyce
    Schoots, Ivo G.
    Van Basten, Jean-Paul
    Debruyne, Frans
    van Oort, Inge
    Sedelaar, Michiel
    Barentsz, Jelle
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2022, 129 (04) : 480 - 490
  • [9] Clinical significance of perineural invasion by prostate cancer on magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy
    Suresh, Nivedita
    Teramoto, Yuki
    Goto, Takuro
    Wang, Ying
    Miyamoto, Hiroshi
    HUMAN PATHOLOGY, 2022, 121 : 65 - 72
  • [10] Magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer clinical application
    Bing Li
    Yong Du
    Hanfeng Yang
    Yayong Huang
    Jun Meng
    Dongmei Xiao
    ChineseJournalofCancerResearch, 2013, 25 (02) : 240 - 249