Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2015:2015:571708.
doi: 10.1155/2015/571708. Epub 2015 Jan 27.

MRI-targeted biopsies versus systematic transrectal ultrasound guided biopsies for the diagnosis of localized prostate cancer in biopsy naïve men

Alexandre Peltier  1 , Fouad Aoun  1 , Marc Lemort  2 , Félix Kwizera  1 , Marianne Paesmans  3 , Roland Van Velthoven  1
Affiliations
Clinical Trial

MRI-targeted biopsies versus systematic transrectal ultrasound guided biopsies for the diagnosis of localized prostate cancer in biopsy naïve men

Alexandre Peltier et al. Biomed Res Int. 2015.

Abstract

Introduction: To compare, in the same cohort of men, the detection of clinically significant disease in standard (STD) cores versus multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) targeted (TAR) cores.

Material and methods: A prospective study was conducted on 129 biopsy naïve men with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer. These patients underwent prebiopsy mpMRI with STD systematic biopsies and TAR biopsies when lesions were found. The agreement between the TAR and the STD protocols was measured using Cohen's kappa coefficient.

Results: Cancer detection rate of MRI-targeted biopsy was 62.7%. TAR protocol demonstrated higher detection rate of clinically significant disease compared to STD protocol. The proportion of cores positive for clinically significant cancer in TAR cores was 28.9% versus 9.8% for STD cores (P < 0.001). The proportion of men with clinically significant cancer and the proportion of men with Gleason score 7 were higher with the TAR protocol than with the STD protocol (P = 0.003; P = 0.0008, resp.).

Conclusion: mpMRI improved clinically significant prostate cancer detection rate compared to STD protocol alone with less tissue sampling and higher Gleason score. Further development in imaging as well as multicentre studies using the START recommendation is needed to elucidate the role of mpMRI targeted biopsy in the management of prostate cancer.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Ferlay J., Shin H. R., Bray F., et al. GLOBOCAN 2008: Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2010. (IARC Cancer Base No. 10).
    1. Heidenreich A., Abrahamsson P.-A., Artibani W., et al. Early detection of prostate cancer: European association of urology recommendation. European Urology. 2013;64(3):347–354. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.06.051. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Schroder F. H., van der M. P., Beemsterboer P., et al. Evaluation of the digital rectal examination as a screening test for prostate cancer. Rotterdam section of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 1998;90(23):1817–1823. - PubMed
    1. Schröder F. H., Carter H. B., Wolters T., et al. Early detection of prostate cancer in 2007: part 1: PSA and PSA kinetics. European Urology. 2008;53(3):468–477. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2007.10.047. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Djavan B., Ravery V., Zlotta A., et al. Prospective evaluation of prostate cancer detected on biopsies 1, 2, 3 and 4: when should we stop? The Journal of Urology. 2001;166(5):1679–1683. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(05)65652-2. - DOI - PubMed