272P - Comparison between MRI-targeted and standard biopsy for prostate cancer detection: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Prostate cancer was the second most commonly diagnosed cancer in men and is responsible for the fifth highest number of deaths globally. In its early stages, prostate cancer may not exhibit any noticeable symptoms and often progresses slowly, so that it requires active surveillance and detection. Standard biopsy of the prostate that is typically performed using TRUS guidance is one of commonly detection used for prostate cancer. However, several studies showed that MRI-targeted biopsy has better accuracy than standard biopsy. Thus, this meta-analysis aims to evaluate which examination has the ability to detect prostate cancer better between MRI-targeted or standard biopsy.

Methods

Studies were extracted from PubMed databases using several keywords such as ((mri targeted) AND (standard biopsy)) AND (prostate cancer) on May 25th, 2023. Extracted studies were selected through several inclusion criteria, such as randomized controlled trials and cohorts in the last 10 years and exclusion criteria, such as meta-analysis, reviews, case reports and unavailability of full paper access. The quality of the included studies were assessed using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and JADAD scale.

Results

Six total studies were included in these studies, consist of three cohort studies and three RCTs with 4867 mens under suspicion for prostate cancer. Five out of six studies were in good quality, while the other one have fair quality. Meta-analysis showed that MRI-targeted biopsy had a higher detection rate than standard biopsy for prostate cancer with Odds Ratio (M-H, Random Effect Model, 95% CI) 1.72 [0.97, 3.06]. This result proved that MRI-targeted biopsy is superior to standard biopsy for detecting prostate cancer.

Conclusions

In conclusion, detection for prostate cancer is better with MRI-targeted biopsy than standard biopsy due to higher detection rate in MRI-targeted biopsy. However, further studies were required to confirm these findings.

Clinical trial identification

Editorial acknowledgement

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

Has not received any funding.

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.