Analysis demonstrates the effectiveness of biopsy strategies in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer, highlighting the roles of PI-RADS scores.
Objective To investigate the diagnostic performance of perilesional biopsies (PLBx) compared to other biopsy strategies, assessing the impact of the Prostate Imaging‐Reporting and Data System (PI‐RADS) score and biopsy history in patients with a visible lesion at multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate (mpMRI), as the European Association of Urology guidelines recommend combining MRI‐targeted biopsies (TBx) with PLBx as an alternative to systematic biopsies (SBx) even though evidence is limited. Patients and Methods We relied on a cohort of 2852 patients with PI‐RADS ≥3 lesions undergoing TBx + SBx at three tertiary referral centres. The primary outcome was detection of clinically significant PCa (csPCa) (International Society of Urological Pathology Grade Group [ISUP GG] ≥2) of TBx + PLBx vs TBx + SBx. Results were stratified by PI‐RADS score and biopsy history. The PLBx cores were defined as samples taken from prostate sectors adjacent to the mpMRI lesion. We finally assessed insignificant PCa (insPCa, i.e., ISUP GG 1) detection across biopsy strategies. Differences were assessed using the chi‐square test. Results Detection of csPCa was 48%. Overall, TBx + SBx had a higher csPCa detection rate than TBx + PLBx (50% vs 45%, P = 0.03), particularly in PI‐RADS 3 lesions (26% vs 21%, P = 0.02) and active surveillance (AS) patients (46% vs 40%, P = 0.04). No significant differences were found in PI‐RADS 4 (53% vs 50%, P > 0.1) or PI‐RADS 5 (76% vs 75%, P > 0.1). In the biopsy naïve and previous negative biopsy groups, csPCa detection was similar between strategies ( P > 0.1). Conclusions Overall, TBx + SBx offers the highest detection of csPCa. Even though TBx + PLBx may be considered in PI‐RADS 4–5 lesions to reduce insPCa detection, TBx + SBx remains the preferred strategy for PI‐RADS 3 and AS patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cannoletta et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: