This research study is designed to determine if targeted Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Ultrasound (US) fusion biopsy is better than the standard of care ultrasound guided biopsy alone in diagnosing subjects with clinically significant prostate cancer with MRI visible lesions. This study will consist of comparing the standard of care (ultrasound guided prostate biopsy) with the protocol biopsy which consists of an ultrasound guided prostate biopsy and a MRI/US fusion tracked prostate biopsy.
The efficacy of targeting lesions for ultrasound-guided biopsy, surgery,or ablation may be limited by the visibility of a target during the procedure. The successful outcome of the intervention depends upon accurate device placement. Historically, prostate cancer was diagnosed by finger guided trans-rectal prostate biopsies. However, with the advent of PSA screening and improvements in ultrasonography, ultrasound guided prostate biopsy has become the standard of care to screen and diagnose men with prostate cancer. A standard 12-14 core prostate biopsy is now common practice, detecting cancer in 27% to 44% of patients in patients with an elevated serum PSA. Initially, prostate MR imaging was not considered for routine clinical practice. However, the addition of an endorectal-coil probe and a 3 Tesla magnet has improved its diagnostic utility. Currently, most mpMRI are done without the use of an endo-rectal coil at 3Tesla. The MRI is able to evaluate the entire prostate (transrectal ultrasound images are overlaid on a previously obtained prostate MRI, combined with an electromagnetic tracking system) prior to biopsy and allows the physician to target specific areas of the prostate that are suspicious for cancer. This contrasts with the typical US guided approach which samples regions of the prostate in a standard fashion. This study will consist of comparison of the standard of care prostate biopsy with the protocol biopsy which consists of a US guided prostate biopsy and a MR/US fusion tracked prostate biopsy. The researchers are interested in learning which procedure is more useful in obtaining a diagnosis of prostate cancer which will in turn provide a better diagnosis rate. Each patient will act as their own control.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
NA
Purpose
DIAGNOSTIC
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
1,586
Standard of care
Trans-rectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided fusion prostate biopsy (Arm 1) or a Transperineal Ultrasound guided fusion prostate biopsy (Arm 2). All patients will under go a standard ultrasound guided biopsy at the time of their targeted (fusion) biopsy.
TRUS images are overlaid on a previously obtained prostate MRI, combined with an electromagnetic tracking system. The urologist then performs directed prostate biopsies at MR-identified targets in addition to the standard prostate biopsies.
The Smith Institute for Urology
Lake Success, New York, United States
RECRUITINGThe Smith Institute for Urology at Lenox Hill
New York, New York, United States
RECRUITINGManhattan Eye, Ear, and Throat Hospital (MEETH)
New York, New York, United States
RECRUITINGIncidence of Prostate Cancer
Incidence of diagnosing subjects with prostate cancer with MR visible lesions
Time frame: 1 Month
Incidence of adverse events
the incidence of adverse events occurring after a targeted and ultrasound guided prostate biopsy
Time frame: 1 Month
Pirads score
The Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) score classifies MRI lesions on a scale from 1 to 5, which reflects their level of suspicion from least to most. Higher score indicates more suspicion.
Time frame: 1 Month
Gleason score
The Gleason Score ranges from 1-5 and describes how much the cancer from a biopsy looks like healthy tissue (lower score) or abnormal tissue (higher score). Sum of the gleason grade of the most predominant tumor pattern and a second gleason grade of the second most predominant pattern. Full score from 2 to 10, with higher score indicating more clinically significance.
Time frame: 1 Month
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.