The primacy of multiparametric MRI in men with suspected prostate cancer

Background: Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) became recognised in investigating those with suspected prostate cancer between 2010 and 2012; in the USA, the preventative task force moratorium on PSA screening was a strong catalyst. In a few short years, it has been adopted into daily urological and oncological practice. The pace of clinical uptake, born along by countless papers proclaiming high accuracy in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer, has sparked much debate about the timing of mpMRI within the traditional biopsy-driven clinical pathways. There are strongly held opposing views on using mpMRI as a triage test regarding the need for biopsy and/or guiding the biopsy pattern. Objective: To review the evidence base and present a position paper on the role of mpMRI in the diagnosis and management of prostate cancer. Methods: A subgroup of experts from the ESUR Prostate MRI Working Group conducted literature review and face to face and electronic exchanges to draw up a position statement. Results: This paper considers diagnostic strategies for clinically significant prostate cancer; current national and international guidance; the impact of pre-biopsy mpMRI in detection of clinically significant and clinically insignificant neoplasms; the impact of pre-biopsy mpMRI on biopsy strategies and targeting; the notion of mpMRI within a wider risk evaluation on a patient by patient basis; the problems that beset mpMRI including inter-observer variability. Conclusions: The paper concludes with a set of suggestions for using mpMRI to influence who to biopsy and who not to biopsy at diagnosis. Key Points: • Adopt mpMRI as the first, and primary, investigation in the workup of men with suspected prostate cancer. • PI-RADS assessment categories 1 and 2 have a high negative predictive value in excluding significant disease, and systematic biopsy may be postponed, especially in men with low-risk of disease following additional risk stratification. • PI-RADS assessment category lesions 4 and 5 should be targeted; PI-RADS assessment category lesion 3 may be biopsied as a target, as part of systematic biopsies or may be observed depending on risk stratification

The Role of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography in the Primary Staging of Newly Diagnosed Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Context Management of newly diagnosed prostate cancer (PCa) is guided in part by accurate clinical staging. The role of imaging, including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT), in initial staging remains controversial. Objective To systematically review the studies of MRI and/or PET/CT in the staging of newly diagnosed PCa with respect to tumor (T), nodal (N), and metastatic (M) staging (TNM staging). Evidence acquisition We performed a systematic review of the literature using MEDLINE and Web of Science databases between 2012 and 2020 following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement guidelines. Evidence synthesis A total of 139 studies (83 on T, 47 on N, and 24 on M status) were included. Ninety-nine (71%) were retrospective, 39 (28%) were prospective, and one was a randomized controlled trial (RCT). Most studies on T staging examined MRI, while PET/CT was used primarily for N and M staging. Sensitivity for the detection of extraprostatic extension, seminal vesicle invasion, or lymph node invasion ranged widely. When imaging was incorporated into existing risk tools, gain in accuracy was observed in some studies, although these findings have not been replicated. For M staging, most favorable results were reported for prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET/CT, which demonstrated significantly better performance than conventional imaging. Conclusions A variety of studies on modern imaging techniques for TNM staging in newly diagnosed PCa exist. For T and N staging, reported sensitivity of imaging modalities such as MRI or PET/CT varied widely due to data heterogeneity, small sample size, and low event rates resulting in large confidence intervals and a high level of uncertainty. Therefore, uniformity in data presentation and standardization on this topic are needed. The most promising technique for M staging, which was evaluated recently in an RCT, is PSMA-PET/CT. Patient summary We performed a systematic review of currently available imaging modalities to stage newly diagnosed prostate cancer. With respect to local tumor and lymph node assessment, performance of imaging ranged widely. However, prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography showed favorable results for the detection of distant metastases