دورية أكاديمية
أعرض في EDS

Is MRI ready to replace biopsy during active surveillance?

التفاصيل البيبلوغرافية
العنوان: Is MRI ready to replace biopsy during active surveillance?
المؤلفون: Dias AB; University Medical Imaging Toronto; Joint Department of Medical Imaging; University Health Network-Sinai Health System-Women's College Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada., Woo S; Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA., Leni R; Division of Experimental Oncology, Department of Urology, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.; Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy., Rajwa P; Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.; Department of Urology, Medical University of Silesia, Zabrze, Poland., Kasivisvanathan V; Division of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK; Department of Urology, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK., Ghai S; University Medical Imaging Toronto; Joint Department of Medical Imaging; University Health Network-Sinai Health System-Women's College Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada., Haider M; University Medical Imaging Toronto; Joint Department of Medical Imaging; University Health Network-Sinai Health System-Women's College Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada., Gandaglia G; Division of Experimental Oncology, Department of Urology, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.; Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy., Brembilla G; Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy. brembilla.giorgio@hsr.it.; Department of Radiology, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy. brembilla.giorgio@hsr.it.
المصدر: European radiology [Eur Radiol] 2024 Jul 04. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Jul 04.
Publication Model: Ahead of Print
نوع المنشور: Journal Article; Review
اللغة: English
بيانات الدورية: Publisher: Springer International Country of Publication: Germany NLM ID: 9114774 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1432-1084 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 09387994 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Eur Radiol Subsets: MEDLINE
أسماء مطبوعة: Original Publication: Berlin : Springer International, c1991-
مستخلص: Active surveillance (AS) is a conservative management option recommended for patients diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) and selected cases with intermediate-risk PCa. The adoption of prostate MRI in the primary diagnostic setting has sparked interest in its application during AS. This review aims to examine the role and performance of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) across the entire AS pathway, from initial stratification to follow-up, also relative to the utilization of the Prostate Cancer Radiological Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation (PRECISE) criteria. Given the high negative predictive value of mpMRI in detecting clinically significant PCa (csPCa), robust evidence supports its use in patient selection and risk stratification at the time of diagnosis or confirmatory biopsy. However, conflicting results have been observed when using MRI in evaluating disease progression during follow-up. Key areas requiring clarification include addressing the clinical significance of MRI-negative csPCa, optimizing MRI quality, determining the role of biparametric MRI (bpMRI) or mpMRI protocols, and integrating artificial intelligence (AI) for improved performance. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: MRI plays an essential role in the selection, stratification, and follow up of patients in active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer. However, owing to existing limitations, it cannot fully replace biopsies in the context of AS. KEY POINTS: Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) has become a crucial tool in active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer (PCa). Conflicting results have been observed regarding multiparametric MRI efficacy in assessing disease progression. Standardizing MRI-guided protocols will be critical in addressing current limitations in active surveillance for prostate cancer.
(© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to European Society of Radiology.)
References: Mottet N, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E et al (2021) EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer-2020 Update. Part 1: Screening, Diagnosis, and Local Treatment with Curative Intent. Eur Urol 79:243–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2020.09.042.
Bokhorst LP, Valdagni R, Rannikko A et al (2016) A decade of active surveillance in the PRIAS study: an update and evaluation of the criteria used to recommend a switch to active treatment. Eur Urol 70:954–960. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.06.007. (PMID: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.06.00727329565)
Willemse PPM, Davis NF, Grivas N et al (2022) Systematic review of active surveillance for clinically localised prostate cancer to develop recommendations regarding inclusion of intermediate-risk disease, biopsy characteristics at inclusion and monitoring, and surveillance repeat biopsy strategy. Eur Urol 81:337–346. (PMID: 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.12.00734980492)
Moore CM, King LE, Withington J et al (2023) Best current practice and research priorities in active surveillance for prostate cancer—a report of a movember international consensus meeting. Eur Urol Oncol 6:160–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2023.01.003. (PMID: 10.1016/j.euo.2023.01.00336710133)
Sathianathen NJ, Omer A, Harriss E et al (2020) Negative predictive value of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer in the prostate imaging reporting and data system era: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 78:402–414. (PMID: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.03.04832444265)
Van Hemelrijck M, Ji X, Kattan MW et al (2019) Reasons for discontinuing active surveillance: assessment of 21 centres in 12 countries in the movember GAP3 consortium. Eur Urol 75:523–531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2018.10.025. (PMID: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.10.02530385049)
Dasgupta P, Davis J, Hughes S (2019) NICE guidelines on prostate cancer 2019. BJU Int 124:1. (PMID: 10.1111/bju.1481531206999)
Eastham JA, Boorjian SA, Kirkby E (2022) Clinically localized prostate cancer: AUA/ASTRO guideline. J Urol 208:505–507. https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000002854. (PMID: 10.1097/JU.000000000000285435830561)
Schaeffer EM, Srinivas S, Adra N et al (2022) NCCN GUIDELINES® INSIGHTS: prostate cancer, version 1.2023: featured updates to the NCCN guidelines. JNCCN. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw 20:1288–1298. https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2022.0063. (PMID: 10.6004/jnccn.2022.0063)
Hettiarachchi D, Geraghty R, Rice P et al (2021) Can the use of serial multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging during active surveillance of prostate cancer avoid the need for prostate biopsies?—a systematic diagnostic test accuracy review. Eur Urol Oncol 4:426–436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2020.09.002. (PMID: 10.1016/j.euo.2020.09.00232972894)
Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL et al (2016) PI-RADS prostate imaging - reporting and data system: 2015, Version 2. Eur Urol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.08.052.
Moore CM, Giganti F, Albertsen P et al (2017) Reporting magnetic resonance imaging in men on active surveillance for prostate cancer: the PRECISE recommendations—a report of a European School of Oncology Task Force. Eur Urol 71:648–655. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.06.011. (PMID: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.06.01127349615)
Englman C, Maffei D, Allen C et al (2024) PRECISE version 2: updated recommendations for reporting prostate magnetic resonance imaging in patients on active surveillance for prostate cancer. Eur Urol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2024.03.014.
Kasivisvanathan V, Rannikko AS, Borghi M et al (2018) MRI-targeted or standard biopsy for prostate-cancer diagnosis. N Engl J Med 378:1767–1777. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1801993. (PMID: 10.1056/NEJMoa1801993295529759084630)
Ahdoot M, Wilbur AR, Reese SE et al (2020) MRI-targeted, systematic, and combined biopsy for prostate cancer diagnosis. N Engl J Med 382:917–928. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa1910038. (PMID: 10.1056/nejmoa1910038321308147323919)
Schoots IG, Nieboer D, Giganti F et al (2018) Is magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy a useful addition to systematic confirmatory biopsy in men on active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis. BJU Int 122:946–958. (PMID: 10.1111/bju.1435829679430)
Klotz L, Pond G, Loblaw A et al (2020) Randomized study of systematic biopsy versus magnetic resonance imaging and targeted and systematic biopsy in men on active surveillance (ASIST): 2-year postbiopsy follow-up. Eur Urol 77:311–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2019.10.007. (PMID: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.10.00731708295)
Doan P, Scheltema MJ, Amin A et al (2022) Final analysis of the magnetic resonance imaging in active surveillance trial. J Urol 208:1028–1036. https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000002885. (PMID: 10.1097/JU.000000000000288535947521)
Stavrinides V, Giganti F, Trock B et al (2020) Five-year outcomes of magnetic resonance imaging–based active surveillance for prostate cancer: a large cohort study [Formula presented]. Eur Urol 78:443–451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2020.03.035. (PMID: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.03.035323600497443696)
Klotz L, Loblaw A, Sugar L et al (2019) Active surveillance magnetic resonance imaging study (ASIST): results of a randomized multicenter prospective trial. Eur Urol 75:300–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2018.06.025. (PMID: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.06.02530017404)
Recabal P, Assel M, Sjoberg DD et al (2016) The efficacy of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy in risk classification for patients with prostate cancer on active surveillance. J Urol 196:374–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.02.084. (PMID: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.02.084269204655540367)
Rajwa P, Pradere B, Quhal F et al (2021) Reliability of serial prostate magnetic resonance imaging to detect prostate cancer progression during active surveillance: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 80:549–563. (PMID: 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.05.00134020828)
Bokhorst LP, Alberts AR, Rannikko A et al (2015) Compliance rates with the Prostate Cancer Research International Active Surveillance (PRIAS) protocol and disease reclassification in noncompliers. Eur Urol 68:814–821. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.012. (PMID: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.01226138043)
Hamdy FC, Donovan JL, Lane JA et al (2023) Fifteen-year outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 388:1547–1558. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa2214122. (PMID: 10.1056/nejmoa221412236912538)
Rajwa P, Sprenkle PC, Leapman MS (2021) When and how should active surveillance for prostate cancer be de-escalated? Eur Urol Focus 7:297–300. (PMID: 10.1016/j.euf.2020.01.00132019719)
A randomised controlled trial of regular MRI scans compared to standard care in patients with prostate cancer managed using active surveillance (NIHR152027). https://fundingawards.nihr.ac.uk/award/NIHR152027.
Valentin B, Arsov C, Ullrich T et al (2024) Magnetic resonance imaging-guided active surveillance without annual rebiopsy in patients with grade group 1 or 2 prostate cancer: the prospective PROMM-as study. Eur Urol Open Sci 59:30–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euros.2023.10.005. (PMID: 10.1016/j.euros.2023.10.00538298772)
O’Connor LP, Wang AZ, Yerram NK et al (2021) Changes in magnetic resonance imaging using the prostate cancer radiologic estimation of change in sequential evaluation criteria to detect prostate cancer progression for men on active surveillance. Eur Urol Oncol 4:227–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2020.09.004. (PMID: 10.1016/j.euo.2020.09.00433867045)
Giganti F, Stabile A, Stavrinides V et al (2021) Natural history of prostate cancer on active surveillance: stratification by MRI using the PRECISE recommendations in a UK cohort. Eur Radiol 31:1644–1655. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-07256-z. (PMID: 10.1007/s00330-020-07256-z33000302)
Aerts J, Hendrickx S, Berquin C et al (2023) Clinical application of the prostate cancer radiological estimation of change in sequential evaluation score for reporting magnetic resonance imaging in men on active surveillance for prostate cancer. Eur Urol Open Sci 56:39–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euros.2023.08.006. (PMID: 10.1016/j.euros.2023.08.0063782251510562144)
Li P, You S, Nguyen C et al (2018) Genes involved in prostate cancer progression determine MRI visibility. Theranostics 8:1752–1765. https://doi.org/10.7150/thno.23180. (PMID: 10.7150/thno.23180295563545858498)
Lehto TPK, Pylväläinen J, Sandeman K et al (2024) Histomic and transcriptomic features of MRI-visible and invisible clinically significant prostate cancers are associated with prognosis. Int J Cancer 154:926–939. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.34743. (PMID: 10.1002/ijc.3474337767987)
Wibmer AG, Chaim J, Lakhman Y et al (2021) Oncologic outcomes after localized prostate cancer treatment: associations with pretreatment prostate magnetic resonance imaging findings. J Urol 205:1055–1062. https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000001474. (PMID: 10.1097/JU.000000000000147433207133)
Pausch AM, Ghafoor S, Kluckert J et al (2024) Risk factors for prostate cancer in men with false-negative mpMRI: a retrospective single center cohort study of image quality scores and clinical parameters. Eur J Radiol 170:111227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2023.111227. (PMID: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2023.11122738039782)
Brembilla G, Lavalle S, Parry T et al (2023) Impact of prostate imaging quality (PI-QUAL) score on the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer at biopsy. Eur J Radiol 164 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2023.110849.
Giganti F, Ng A, Asif A et al (2023) Global variation in magnetic resonance imaging quality of the prostate. Radiology 309:e231130. https://doi.org/10.1148/RADIOL.231130.
Giganti F, Allen C, Emberton M et al (2020) Prostate imaging quality (PI-QUAL): a new quality control scoring system for multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate from the PRECISION trial. Eur Urol Oncol 3:615–619. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2020.06.007. (PMID: 10.1016/j.euo.2020.06.00732646850)
Woo S, Suh CH, Kim SY et al (2018) Head-to-head comparison between biparametric and multiparametric MRI for the diagnosis of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 211:W226–W241. (PMID: 10.2214/AJR.18.1988030240296)
Asif A, Nathan A, Ng A et al (2023) Comparing biparametric to multiparametric MRI in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer in biopsy-naive men (PRIME): a prospective, international, multicentre, non-inferiority within-patient, diagnostic yield trial protocol. BMJ Open 13 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-070280.
Caglic I, Sushentsev N, Gnanapragasam VJ et al (2021) MRI-derived PRECISE scores for predicting pathologically-confirmed radiological progression in prostate cancer patients on active surveillance. Eur Radiol 31:2696–2705. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-07336-0. (PMID: 10.1007/s00330-020-07336-033196886)
Woo S (2023) Editorial comment: PRECISE-the precisely right thing to use when interpreting prostate MRI for active surveillance? AJR Am J Roentgenol 225:660. (PMID: 10.2214/AJR.23.29852)
Sanmugalingam N, Sushentsev N, Lee KL et al (2023) The PRECISE recommendations for prostate MRI in patients on active surveillance for prostate cancer: a critical review. AJR Am J Roentgenol 225:649–660. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.23.29518. (PMID: 10.2214/AJR.23.29518)
Sushentsev N, Rundo L, Blyuss O et al (2021) MRI-derived radiomics model for baseline prediction of prostate cancer progression on active surveillance. Sci Rep 11:12917. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-92341-6.
Ploussard G, Rouvière O, Rouprêt M et al (2022) The current role of MRI for guiding active surveillance in prostate cancer. Nat Rev Urol 19:357–365. (PMID: 10.1038/s41585-022-00587-035393568)
Klotz L, Vesprini D, Sethukavalan P et al (2015) Long-term follow-up of a large active surveillance cohort of patients with prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 33:272–277. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2014.55.1192. (PMID: 10.1200/JCO.2014.55.119225512465)
Selvadurai ED, Singhera M, Thomas K et al (2013) Medium-term outcomes of active surveillance for localised prostate cancer. Eur Urol 64:981–987. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.02.020. (PMID: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.02.02023473579)
Morash C, Tey R, Agbassi C et al (2015) Active surveillance for the management of localized prostate cancer: guideline recommendations. J Can Urol Assoc 9:171–178. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.2806. (PMID: 10.5489/cuaj.2806)
Dieffenbacher S, Nyarangi-Dix J, Giganti F et al (2021) Standardized magnetic resonance imaging reporting using the prostate cancer radiological estimation of change in sequential evaluation criteria and magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound fusion with transperineal saturation biopsy to select men. Eur Urol Focus 7:102–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2019.03.001. (PMID: 10.1016/j.euf.2019.03.00130878348)
Osses DF, Drost FJH, Verbeek JFM et al (2020) Prostate cancer upgrading with serial prostate magnetic resonance imaging and repeat biopsy in men on active surveillance: are confirmatory biopsies still necessary? BJU Int 126:124–132. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.15065. (PMID: 10.1111/bju.15065322329217383866)
Ullrich T, Arsov C, Quentin M et al (2020) Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging can exclude prostate cancer progression in patients on active surveillance: a retrospective cohort study. Eur Radiol 30:6042–6051. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-06997-1. (PMID: 10.1007/s00330-020-06997-1325918877553894)
Bhanji Y, Mamawala M, de la Calle CM et al (2023) Prostate cancer radiological estimation of change in sequential evaluation (PRECISE) magnetic resonance imaging scoring to predict clinical outcomes in active surveillance for grade group 1 prostate cancer. Urology 180:194–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2023.07.019. (PMID: 10.1016/j.urology.2023.07.01937536582)
فهرسة مساهمة: Keywords: Active surveillance; Magnetic resonance imaging; Prostate cancer
تواريخ الأحداث: Date Created: 20240704 Latest Revision: 20240704
رمز التحديث: 20240705
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-024-10863-9
PMID: 38965093
قاعدة البيانات: MEDLINE
الوصف
تدمد:1432-1084
DOI:10.1007/s00330-024-10863-9