Comparison of MRI- and TRUS-Informed Prostate Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis in Biopsy-Naive Men: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Hanan Goldberg, Ardalan E. Ahmad, Thenappan Chandrasekar, Laurence Klotz, Mark Emberton, Masoom A. Haider, Samir Taneja, Karan Arora, Neil E. Fleshner, Antonio Finelli, Nathan Perlis, Mark D. Tyson, Zachary Klaassen, Christopher J.D. Wallis

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    Abstract

    Purpose:
    Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging with informed targeted biopsies has changed the paradigm of prostate cancer diagnosis. Randomized studies have demonstrated a diagnostic benefit of clinical significance for targeted biopsy compared to standard systematic biopsies. We evaluated whether multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging informed targeted biopsy has superior diagnosis rates of any, clinically significant, high grade and clinically insignificant prostate cancer compared to systematic biopsy in biopsy naïve men.

    Materials and Methods:
    Data were searched in Medline®, Embase®, Web of Science and Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews-Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from database inception until 2019. Studies were selected by 2 authors independently, with disagreements resolved by consensus with a third author. Overall 1,951 unique references were identified and 100 manuscripts underwent full-text review. Data were pooled using random effects models. The meta-analysis is reported according to the PRISMA statement and the study protocol is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42019128468).

    Results:
    Overall 29 studies (13,845 patients) were analyzed. Compared to systematic biopsy, use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging informed targeted biopsy was associated with a 15% higher rate of any prostate cancer diagnosis (95% CI 10–20, p <0.00001). This relationship was not affected by the study methodology (p=0.11). Diagnoses of clinically significant and high grade prostate cancer were more common in the multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging informed targeted biopsy group (risk difference 11%, 95% CI 0–20, p=0.05 and 2%, 95% CI 1–4, p=0.005, respectively) while there was no difference in diagnosis of clinically insignificant prostate cancer (risk difference 0, 95% CI -3 to 3, p=0.96). Notably, the exclusion of systematic biopsy in the multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging informed targeted biopsy arm significantly modified the association between a multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging strategy and lower rates of clinically insignificant prostate cancer diagnosis (p=0.01) without affecting the diagnosis rates of clinically significant or high grade prostate cancer.

    Conclusions:
    Compared to systematic biopsy a multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging informed targeted biopsy strategy results in a significantly higher diagnosis rate of any, clinically significant and high grade prostate cancer. Excluding systematic biopsy from multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging informed targeted biopsy was associated with decreased rates of clinically insignificant prostate cancer diagnosis without affecting diagnosis of clinically significant or high grade prostate cancer.
    Original languageEnglish (US)
    JournalThe Journal of Urology
    DOIs
    StatePublished - 2020

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of MRI- and TRUS-Informed Prostate Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis in Biopsy-Naive Men: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this