Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 24, 2026
Use of MRI-ultrasound Fusion to Achieve Targeted Prostate Biopsy
Published on: April 9, 2019
MR-guided prostate biopsy for planning of focal salvage after radiation therapy
Cynthia Ménard1, Douglas Iupati, Julia Publicover
1From the Radiation Medicine Program (C.M., D.I., J.P., J.L., J.A., A.S., W.D.F., M.M., C.C., R.B., A.B., D.A.J., P.C., K.K.B.) and Department of Biostatistics (E.G.A.), Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, 610 University Ave, Room 5-809, Toronto, ON, Canada M4X 1C3; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (C.M., D.I., A.S., M.M., C.C., G.M., R.B., A.B., D.A.J., P.C., K.K.B.); Department of Radiation Oncology, Wellington Cancer Centre, Wellington, New Zealand (D.I.), Departments of Anesthesia (G.O.) and Pathology (A.J.E.), University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Center, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (G.M.); Department of Radiation Oncology, Wellington Cancer Centre, Wellington, New Zealand (D.I.); and Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network and Mount Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (M.A.H.).
Purpose:
To determine if the integration of diagnostic magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and MR-guided biopsy would improve target delineation for focal salvage therapy in men with prostate cancer.
Materials And Methods:
Between September 2008 and March 2011, 30 men with biochemical failure after radiation therapy for prostate cancer provided written informed consent and were enrolled in a prospective clinical trial approved by the institutional research ethics board. An integrated diagnostic MR imaging and interventional biopsy procedure was performed with a 1.5-T MR imager by using a prototype table and stereotactic transperineal template. Multiparametric MR imaging (T2-weighted, dynamic contrast material-enhanced, and diffusion-weighted sequences) was followed by targeted biopsy of suspicious regions and systematic sextant sampling. Biopsy needle locations were imaged and registered to diagnostic images. Two observers blinded to clinical data and the results of prior imaging studies delineated tumor boundaries. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (Az) was calculated based on generalized linear models by using biopsy as the reference standard to distinguish benign from malignant lesions.
Results:
Twenty-eight patients were analyzed. Most patients (n = 22) had local recurrence, with 82% (18 of 22) having unifocal disease. When multiparametric volumes from two observers were combined, it increased the apparent overall tumor volume by 30%; however, volumes remained small (mean, 2.9 mL; range, 0.5-8.3 mL). Tumor target boundaries differed between T2-weighted, dynamic contrast-enhanced, and diffusion-weighted sequences (mean Dice coefficient, 0.13-0.35). Diagnostic accuracy in the identification of tumors improved with a multiparametric approach versus a strictly T2-weighted or dynamic contrast-enhanced approach through an improvement in sensitivity (observer 1, 0.65 vs 0.35 and 0.44, respectively; observer 2, 0.82 vs 0.64 and 0.53, respectively; P < .05) and improved further with a 5-mm expansion margin (Az = 0.85 vs 0.91 for observer 2). After excluding three patients with fewer than six informative biopsy cores and six patients with inadequately stained margins, MR-guided biopsy enabled more accurate delineation of the tumor target volume be means of exclusion of false-positive results in 26% (five of 19 patients), false-negative results in 11% (two of 19 patients) and by guiding extension of tumor boundaries in 16% (three of 19 patients).
Conclusion:
The integration of guided biopsy with diagnostic MR imaging is feasible and alters delineation of the tumor target boundary in a substantial proportion of patients considering focal salvage.
