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
. 2025 Jun 27.
doi: 10.1007/s00428-025-04154-x. Online ahead of print.

Low heterogeneity of tumor grades in multiple MRI-targeted prostate biopsies argues for the aggregate method of grading

Affiliations

Low heterogeneity of tumor grades in multiple MRI-targeted prostate biopsies argues for the aggregate method of grading

Oliver Hommerding et al. Virchows Arch. .

Abstract

Prostate cancer diagnosis primarily relies on histological confirmation via needle core biopsy, with systematic 12-core biopsies (SB) being commonly used. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and MRI-targeted biopsies have shown enhanced detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. This study compares two tumor grading methods-aggregate and individual grading-used in MRI-targeted biopsies to assess their correlation with the final ISUP Grade Group (GG) of the RPE. A cohort of 108 patients with ≥ 2 positive cores in at least one MRI-targeted biopsy, totaling 179 positive lesions, was analyzed. Systematic and MRI-targeted biopsies were correlated with RPE specimens. The mean highest ISUP GG for systematic biopsies was 2.77 (SD ± 1.29), compared to 2.62 (SD ± 1.13) for targeted biopsies using the aggregate method. Comparing the highest ISUP GG in systematic as well as targeted biopsies with the final ISUP GG of the RPE, exact correlation between GG was found in 70.1% (aggregate) and 66.4% (individual) for targeted biopsies and 58.1% for systematic biopsies. The results of the individual method showed slightly better correlation with the final ISUP GG from the RPE specimen in only 0.93%, while in 2.8% of cases, it resulted in inferior correlation compared to the aggregate method. Our findings suggest that the aggregate grading method of targeted biopsies is preferable due to its comparable predictive accuracy, lower workload, and alignment with existing clinical guidelines. This supports the ISUP's recommendation to use the aggregate method for MRI-targeted biopsies in clinical practice. Further research is needed to standardize reporting protocols for MRI-targeted biopsies and refine their integration into prostate cancer risk stratification models.

Keywords: Aggregate method; ISUP Grade Group; Individual method; MRI-targeted biopsy; Prostate cancer; Systematic biopsy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Conflict of interest: The authors declare no competing interests.

Similar articles

References

    1. Bjurlin MA, Carter HB, Schellhammer P et al (2013) Optimization of initial prostate biopsy in clinical practice: sampling, labeling and specimen processing. J Urol 189:2039–2046. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.02.072 - DOI - PubMed - PMC
    1. Washington SL, Bonham M, Whitson JM et al (2012) Transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy does not reliably identify dominant cancer location in men with low-risk prostate cancer. BJU Int 110:50–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10704.x - DOI - PubMed
    1. D’Elia C, Cerruto MA, Cioffi A et al (2014) Upgrading and upstaging in prostate cancer: from prostate biopsy to radical prostatectomy. Mol Clin Oncol 2:1145–1149. https://doi.org/10.3892/mco.2014.370 - DOI - PubMed - PMC
    1. Freedland SJ, Kane CJ, Amling CL et al (2007) Upgrading and downgrading of prostate needle biopsy specimens: risk factors and clinical implications. Urology 69:495–499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2006.10.036 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Schnall MD, Pollack HM (1990) Magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate gland. Urol Radiol 12:109–114. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02923982 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources