Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Role of Imaging as an Adjunct or Replacement for Biopsy: European Experience

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Prostate Cancer Diagnosis

Part of the book series: Current Clinical Urology ((CCU))

  • 1497 Accesses

Abstract

The use of MRI in prostate cancer management remains controversial, but its use is growing fast. As a result, current clinical-practice guidelines fail to keep up with developments that are both technological and clinical. In this chapter we, rather controversially, propose that an increase in the use of mp-MRI within the diagnostic pathway would result in an enhanced detection of clinically significant disease, fewer men diagnosed with clinically insignificant disease, fewer men biopsied overall, and fewer needle deployments in those that are.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Dickinson L, Ahmed HU, Allen C, Barentsz JO, Carey B, Futterer JJ, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging for the detection, localisation, and characterisation of prostate cancer: recommendations from a European consensus meeting. Eur Urol. 2011;59(4):477–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hambrock T, Somford DM, Hoeks C, Bouwense SA, Huisman H, Yakar D, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging guided prostate biopsy in men with repeat negative biopsies and increased prostate-specific antigen. J Urol. 2010;183:520–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Franiel T, Stephan C, Erbersdobler A, Dietz E, Maxeiner A, Hell N, et al. Areas suspicious for prostate cancer: MR-guided biopsy in patients with at least one transrectal US-guided biopsy with a negative finding–multiparametric MR imaging for detection and biopsy planning. Radiology. 2011;259(1):162–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Roethke M, Anastasiadis AG, Lichy M, Werner M, Wagner P, Kruck S, et al. MRI-guided prostate biopsy detects clinically significant cancer: analysis of a cohort of 100 patients after previous negative TRUS biopsy. World J Urol. 2012;30:213–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Testa C, Schiavina R, Lodi R, Salizzoni E, Tonon C, D’Errico A, et al. Accuracy of MRI/MRSI-based transrectal ultrasound biopsy in peripheral and transition zones of the prostate gland in patients with prior negative biopsy. NMR Biomed. 2010;23(9):1017–26. Evaluation studies.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Sciarra A, Panebianco V, Ciccariello M, Salciccia S, Cattarino S, Lisi D, et al. Value of magnetic resonance spectroscopy imaging and dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging for detecting prostate cancer foci in men with prior negative biopsy. Clin Cancer Res. 2010;16(6):1875–83. Clinical trial randomized controlled trial.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Cirillo S, Petracchini M, Della Monica P, Gallo T, Tartaglia V, Vestita E, et al. Value of endorectal MRI and MRS in patients with elevated prostate-specific antigen levels and previous negative biopsies to localize peripheral zone tumors. Clin Radiol. 2008;63(8):871–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Ouzzane A, Puech P, Lemaitre L, Leroy X, Nevoux P, Betrouni N, et al. Combined multiparametric MRI and targeted biopsies improve anterior prostate cancer detection, staging and grading. Urology. 2011;78:1356–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Haffner J, Lemaitre L, Puech P, Haber GP, Leroy X, Jones JS, et al. Role of magnetic resonance imaging before initial biopsy: comparison of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted and systematic biopsy for significant prostate cancer detection. BJU Int. 2011;108:E171–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ahmed HU, Kirkham A, Arya M, Illing R, Freeman A, Allen C, et al. Is it time to consider a role for MRI before prostate biopsy? Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2009;6(4):197–206. Review.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Toi A, Neill MG, Lockwood GA, Sweet JM, Tammsalu LA, Fleshner NE. The continuing importance of transrectal ultrasound identification of prostatic lesions. J Urol. 2007;177(2):516–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kuligowska E, Barish MA, Fenlon HM, Blake M. Predictors of prostate carcinoma: accuracy of gray-scale and color Doppler US and serum markers. Radiology. 2001;220(3):757–64. Comparative study.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Walz J, Marcy M, Pianna JT, Brunelle S, Gravis G, Salem N, et al. Identification of the prostate cancer index lesion by real-time elastography: considerations for focal therapy of prostate cancer. World J Urol. 2011;29:589–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Mitterberger MJ, Aigner F, Horninger W, Ulmer H, Cavuto S, Halpern EJ, et al. Comparative efficiency of contrast-enhanced colour Doppler ultrasound targeted versus systematic biopsy for prostate cancer detection. Eur Radiol. 2010;20(12):2791–6. Comparative study evaluation studies.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Puech P, Potiron E, Lemaitre L, Leroy X, Haber GP, Crouzet S, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced-­magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of intraprostatic prostate cancer: correlation with radical prostatectomy specimens. Urology. 2009;74(5):1094–9. Epub 24 Sep 2009.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Delongchamps NB, Rouanne M, Flam T, Beuvon F, Liberatore M, Zerbib M, et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for the detection and localization of prostate cancer: combination of T2-weighted, dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted imaging. BJU Int. 2011;107(9):1411–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Villers A, Puech P, Mouton D, Leroy X, Ballereau C, Lemaitre L. Dynamic contrast-enhanced, pelvic phased array magnetic resonance imaging of localized prostate cancer for predicting tumor volume: correlation with radical prostatectomy findings. J Urol. 2006;176(6 Pt 1):2432–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lemaitre L, Puech P, Poncelet E, Bouye S, Leroy X, Biserte J, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of anterior prostate cancer: morphometric assessment and correlation with radical prostatectomy findings. Eur Radiol. 2009;19(2):470–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Villeirs GM, De Meerleer GO. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) anatomy of the prostate and application of MRI in radiotherapy planning. Eur J Radiol. 2007;63(3):361–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Morakkabati-Spitz N, Bastian PJ, Gieseke J, Traber F, Kuhl CK, Wattjes MP, et al. MR imaging of the prostate at 3.0T with external phased array coil—preliminary results. Eur J Med Res. 2008;13(6):287–91.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Carlani M, Mancino S, Bonanno E, Finazzi Agro E, Simonetti G. Combined morphological, [1H]-MR spectroscopic and contrast-enhanced imaging of human prostate cancer with a 3-Tesla scanner: preliminary experience. Radiol Med. 2008;113(5):670–88.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Weinreb JC, Blume JD, Coakley FV, Wheeler TM, Cormack JB, Sotto CK, et al. Prostate cancer: sextant localization at MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging before prostatectomy–results of ACRIN prospective multi-institutional clinico­pathologic study. Radiology. 2009;251(1):122–33. Controlled clinical trial multicenter study research support, N.I.H., Extramural.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Girouin N, Mege-Lechevallier F, Tonina Senes A, Bissery A, Rabilloud M, Marechal JM, et al. Prostate dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI with simple visual diagnostic criteria: is it reasonable? Eur Radiol. 2007;17(6):1498–509.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24.  

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Gibbs P, Liney GP, Pickles MD, Zelhof B, Rodrigues G, Turnbull LW. Correlation of ADC and T2 measurements with cell density in prostate cancer at 3.0 Tesla. Invest Radiol. 2009;44(9):572–6. Evaluation studies research support, non-U.S. Gov’t.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Itou Y, Nakanishi K, Narumi Y, Nishizawa Y, Tsukuma H. Clinical utility of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values in patients with prostate cancer: can ADC values contribute to assess the aggressiveness of prostate cancer? J Magn Reson Imaging. 2011;33(1):167–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Woodfield CA, Tung GA, Grand DJ, Pezzullo JA, Machan JT, Renzulli 2nd JF. Diffusion-weighted MRI of peripheral zone prostate cancer: comparison of tumor apparent diffusion coefficient with Gleason score and percentage of tumor on core biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194(4):W316–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Yoshimitsu K, Kiyoshima K, Irie H, Tajima T, Asayama Y, Hirakawa M, et al. Usefulness of apparent diffusion coefficient map in diagnosing prostate carcinoma: correlation with stepwise histopathology. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008;27(1):132–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Zelhof B, Pickles M, Liney G, Gibbs P, Rodrigues G, Kraus S, et al. Correlation of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance data with cellularity in prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2009;103(7):883–8. Evaluation studies research support, non-U.S. Gov’t.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. deSouza NM, Riches SF, Vanas NJ, Morgan VA, Ashley SA, Fisher C, et al. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging: a potential noninvasive marker of tumor aggressiveness in localized prostate cancer. Clin Radiol. 2008;63(7):774–82.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Langer DL, van der Kwast TH, Evans AJ, Sun L, Yaffe MJ, Trachtenberg J, et al. Intermixed normal tissue within prostate cancer: effect on MR imaging measurements of apparent diffusion coefficient and T2–sparse versus dense cancers. Radiology. 2008;249(3):900–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Hambrock T, Somford DM, Huisman HJ, van Oort IM, Witjes JA, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa CA, et al. Relationship between apparent diffusion coefficients at 3.0-T MR imaging and Gleason grade in peripheral zone prostate cancer. Radiology. 2011;259:453–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. van As NJ, de Souza NM, Riches SF, Morgan VA, Sohaib SA, Dearnaley DP, et al. A study of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in men with untreated localised prostate cancer on active surveillance. Eur Urol. 2009;56(6):981–7. Research support, non-U.S. Gov’t.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Crawford ED, Wilson SS, Torkko KC, Hirano D, Stewart JS, Brammell C, et al. Clinical staging of prostate cancer: a computer-simulated study of ­transperineal prostate biopsy. BJU Int. 2005;96(7):999–1004. Comparative study research support, N.I.H., Extramural research support, U.S. Gov’t, P.H.S.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Puech P, Huglo D, Petyt G, Lemaitre L, Villers A. Imaging of organ-confined prostate cancer: functional ultrasound, MRI and PET/computed tomography. Curr Opin Urol. 2009;19(2):168–76. Epub 04 Feb 2009.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Presti JC. Prostate biopsy: current status and limitations. Rev Urol. 2007;9(3):93–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Moussa AS, Meshref A, Schoenfield L, Masoud A, Abdel-Rahman S, Li J, et al. Importance of additional “extreme” anterior apical needle biopsies in the initial detection of prostate cancer. Urology. 2010;75:1034–9. Epub 19 Jan 2010.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Delongchamps NB, Haas GP. Saturation biopsies for prostate cancer: current uses and future prospects. Nat Rev Urol. 2009;6(12):645–52. Review.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Taira AV, Merrick GS, Galbreath RW, Andreini H, Taubenslag W, Curtis R, et al. Performance of transperineal template-guided mapping biopsy in detecting prostate cancer in the initial and repeat biopsy setting. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2010;13(1):71–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Ahmed HU, Hu Y, Carter T, Arumainayagam N, Lecornet E, Freeman A, et al. Characterizing clinically significant prostate cancer using template prostate mapping biopsy. J Urol. 2011;186(2):458–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Singh AK, Kruecker J, Xu S, Glossop N, Guion P, Ullman K, et al. Initial clinical experience with real-time transrectal ultrasonography-magnetic resonance imaging fusion-guided prostate biopsy. BJU Int. 2008;101(7):841–5. Evaluation studies multicenter study.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Stenman UH, Abrahamsson PA, Aus G, Lilja H, Bangma C, Hamdy FC, et al. Prognostic value of serum markers for prostate cancer. Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl. 2005;216:64–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Rouse P, Shaw G, Ahmed HU, Freeman A, Allen C, Emberton M. Multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging to rule-in and rule-out clinically important prostate cancer in men at risk: a cohort study. Urol Int. 2011;87:49–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Shariat SF, Kattan MW, Vickers AJ, Karakiewicz PI, Scardino PT. Critical review of prostate cancer ­predictive tools. Future Oncol. 2009;5(10):1555–84. Research support, N.I.H., Extramural research support, non-U.S. Gov’t review.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Pauly KB, Diederich CJ, Rieke V, Bouley D, Chen J, Nau WH, et al. Magnetic resonance-guided high-intensity ultrasound ablation of the prostate. Top Magn Reson Imaging. 2006;17(3):195–207. Research support, N.I.H., Extramural research support, non-U.S. Gov’t review.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Shukla-Dave A, Hricak H, Kattan MW, Pucar D, Kuroiwa K, Chen HN, et al. The utility of magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy for predicting insignificant prostate cancer: an initial analysis. BJU Int. 2007;99(4):786–93. Evaluation studies research support, N.I.H., Extramural.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Umbehr M, Bachmann LM, Held U, Kessler TM, Sulser T, Weishaupt D, et al. Combined magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance spectroscopy imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2009;55(3):575–90. Epub 28 Oct 2008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Bouye S, Potiron E, Puech P, Leroy X, Lemaitre L, Villers A. Transition zone and anterior stromal prostate cancers: zone of origin and intraprostatic patterns of spread at histopathology. Prostate. 2009;69(1):105–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Haffner J, Potiron E, Bouye S, Puech P, Leroy X, Lemaitre L, et al. Peripheral zone prostate cancers: location and intraprostatic patterns of spread at histopathology. Prostate. 2009;69(3):276–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Punglia RS, D’Amico AV, Catalona WJ, Roehl KA, Kuntz KM. Effect of verification bias on screening for prostate cancer by measurement of prostate-specific antigen. N Engl J Med. 2003;349(4):335–42. Research support, non-U.S. Gov’t research support, U.S. Gov’t, P.H.S.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Merrick GS, Gutman S, Andreini H, Taubenslag W, Lindert DL, Curtis R, et al. Prostate cancer distribution in patients diagnosed by transperineal template-guided saturation biopsy. Eur Urol. 2007;52(3):715–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Bott SR, Henderson A, Halls JE, Montgomery BS, Laing R, Langley SE. Extensive transperineal template biopsies of prostate: modified technique and results. Urology. 2006;68(5):1037–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Scattoni V, Zlotta A, Montironi R, Schulman C, Rigatti P, Montorsi F. Extended and saturation prostatic biopsy in the diagnosis and characterisation of prostate cancer: a critical analysis of the literature. Eur Urol. 2007;52(5):1309–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Djavan B, Milani S, Remzi M. Prostate biopsy: who, how and when an update. Can J Urol. 2005;12(Suppl 1):44–8. Comparative study review; discussion 99–100.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Hospital Huriez, University Lille Nord de France, Lille, France

    Arnauld Villers M.D.

  2. Department of Radiology, CHRU, Hospital Huriez, University Lille Nord de France, Lille, 59037, France

    Philippe Puech M.D.

  3. Department of Urology, University College London Hospitals, NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK

    Hashim Uddin Ahmed MRCS, BM, B.Ch. (Oxon), B.A. (Hon) & Mark Emberton FRCS (Urol), FRCS, M.D., MBBS, B.Sc.

  4. Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK

    Hashim Uddin Ahmed MRCS, BM, B.Ch. (Oxon), B.A. (Hon) & Mark Emberton FRCS (Urol), FRCS, M.D., MBBS, B.Sc.

Authors
  1. Arnauld Villers M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Philippe Puech M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hashim Uddin Ahmed MRCS, BM, B.Ch. (Oxon), B.A. (Hon)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mark Emberton FRCS (Urol), FRCS, M.D., MBBS, B.Sc.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arnauld Villers M.D. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medic, Department of Regional Urology, at Case Western Reserve, Cleveland, 44195, Ohio, USA

    J. Stephen Jones

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Villers, A., Puech, P., Ahmed, H.U., Emberton, M. (2013). Role of Imaging as an Adjunct or Replacement for Biopsy: European Experience. In: Jones, J. (eds) Prostate Cancer Diagnosis. Current Clinical Urology. Humana Press, Totowa, NJ. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-62703-188-2_24

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-62703-188-2_24

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Humana Press, Totowa, NJ

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-62703-187-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-62703-188-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation