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.
To review the evidence base and present a position paper on the role of mpMRI in the diagnosis and management of prostate cancer.
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.
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.
The paper concludes with a set of suggestions for using mpMRI to influence who to biopsy and who not to biopsy at diagnosis.
• 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.
European radiology. 2019 Jun 06 [Epub ahead of print]
Jonathan Richenberg, Vibeke Løgager, Valeria Panebianco, Olivier Rouviere, Geert Villeirs, Ivo G Schoots
Department of Imaging, Brighton & Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust and Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Brighton, BN2 5BE, UK. ., Department of Radiology, Herlev University Hospital Copenhagen University, Herlev, Denmark., Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza, University of Rome, Rome, Italy., Hospices civils de Lyon, Department of Urinary and Vascular Radiology, hôpital Édouard-Herriot, 69437, Lyon, France., Department of Radiology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium., Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC - University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.