Micro-ultrasound Versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance

Abstract

Accurate assessment of tumor grade is critical for active surveillance (AS) in prostate cancer. We compared magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and micro-ultrasound scoring (Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System [PI-RADS] v2.1 vs Prostate Risk Identification using Micro-ultrasound [PRI-MUS]) in 128 men on AS. The primary outcome was upgrading to Gleason grade group (GG) ≥2. There was no difference in GG ≥2 detection between the imaging techniques (PRI-MUS score ≥3: 33/34, 98%; PI-RADS score ≥3: 29/34, 85%; p = 0.22). The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for GG ≥2 detection were 97%, 32%, 34%, and 97% with PRI-MUS ≥3, and 85%, 53%, 40%, and 91% with PI-RADS ≥3, respectively. Upgrading to GG ≥2 was more likely for PRI-MUS ≥3 than for PRI-MUS ≤2 scores (odds ratio 15.5, 95% confidence interval 2.0–118.5). A limitation is the lack of blinding to the MRI results. In conclusion, detection of upgrading to GG ≥2 during AS appears similar when using micro-ultrasound or MRI to inform prostate biopsy. Patient summary: We looked at a novel imaging technology, micro-ultrasound, in patients undergoing biopsy during active surveillance for prostate cancer. We found that micro-ultrasound can detect prostate cancer that may require treatment at a similar rate to that with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans.

Keywords

• Prostate Cancer
• Prostate biopsy
• Micro-ultrasound
• Active surveillance
• Targeted biopsy
• Systematic biopsy