Veeru Kasivisvanathan, Vinson Wai-Shun Chan, Keiran D Clement, Brooke Levis, Alexander Ng, Aqua Asif, Masoom A Haider, Mark Emberton, Gregory R Pond, Ridhi Agarwal, Katie Scandrett, Yemisi Takwoingi, Laurence Klotz, Caroline M Moore
{"title":"VISION：磁共振成像靶向活检与标准经直肠超声引导活检在前列腺癌检测中的个人患者数据随机试验 Meta 分析。","authors":"Veeru Kasivisvanathan, Vinson Wai-Shun Chan, Keiran D Clement, Brooke Levis, Alexander Ng, Aqua Asif, Masoom A Haider, Mark Emberton, Gregory R Pond, Ridhi Agarwal, Katie Scandrett, Yemisi Takwoingi, Laurence Klotz, Caroline M Moore","doi":"10.1016/j.eururo.2024.08.022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>The PRECISION and PRECISE trials compared magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy (MRI ± TB) with the standard transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided biopsy for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). PRECISION demonstrated superiority of MRI ± TB over TRUS guided biopsy, while PRECISE demonstrated noninferiority. The VISION study is a planned individual patient data meta-analysis (IPDMA) comparing MRI ± TB with TRUS guided biopsy for csPCa diagnosis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Central of Registered Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched on the November 12, 2023 for randomised controlled trials of biopsy-naïve patients with a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer undergoing MRI or standard TRUS. Studies were included if its participants with suspicious MRI underwent targeted biopsy alone and those with nonsuspicious lesion avoided biopsy. The primary outcome is the proportion of men diagnosed with csPCa (Gleason ≥3 + 4).</p><p><strong>Key findings and limitations: </strong>Two studies, PRECISION and PRECISE (953 patients), were included in the IPDMA. In the MRI ± TB arm, 32.2% of patients avoided biopsy due to nonsuspicious MRI. MRI ± TB detected 8.7 percentage points (36.3% vs 27.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.8-14.6, p = 0.004) more csPCa than TRUS biopsy and 12.3 percentage points (9.6% vs 21.9%; 95% CI 7.8-16.9, p < 0.001) less clinically insignificant prostate cancer (cisPCa; Gleason 3 + 3). The overall risk of bias for the included studies were found to be low after assessment using the QUADAS-2, QUADAS-C, and ROB 2.0 tools.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and clinical implications: </strong>The MRI ± TB pathway is superior to TRUS biopsy in detecting csPCa and avoiding the diagnosis of cisPCa. MRI should be included in the standard of care pathway for prostate cancer diagnosis.</p>","PeriodicalId":94000,"journal":{"name":"European urology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"VISION: An Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis of Randomised Trials Comparing Magnetic Resonance Imaging Targeted Biopsy with Standard Transrectal Ultrasound Guided Biopsy in the Detection of Prostate Cancer.\",\"authors\":\"Veeru Kasivisvanathan, Vinson Wai-Shun Chan, Keiran D Clement, Brooke Levis, Alexander Ng, Aqua Asif, Masoom A Haider, Mark Emberton, Gregory R Pond, Ridhi Agarwal, Katie Scandrett, Yemisi Takwoingi, Laurence Klotz, Caroline M Moore\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.eururo.2024.08.022\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>The PRECISION and PRECISE trials compared magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy (MRI ± TB) with the standard transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided biopsy for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). PRECISION demonstrated superiority of MRI ± TB over TRUS guided biopsy, while PRECISE demonstrated noninferiority. The VISION study is a planned individual patient data meta-analysis (IPDMA) comparing MRI ± TB with TRUS guided biopsy for csPCa diagnosis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Central of Registered Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched on the November 12, 2023 for randomised controlled trials of biopsy-naïve patients with a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer undergoing MRI or standard TRUS. Studies were included if its participants with suspicious MRI underwent targeted biopsy alone and those with nonsuspicious lesion avoided biopsy. The primary outcome is the proportion of men diagnosed with csPCa (Gleason ≥3 + 4).</p><p><strong>Key findings and limitations: </strong>Two studies, PRECISION and PRECISE (953 patients), were included in the IPDMA. In the MRI ± TB arm, 32.2% of patients avoided biopsy due to nonsuspicious MRI. MRI ± TB detected 8.7 percentage points (36.3% vs 27.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.8-14.6, p = 0.004) more csPCa than TRUS biopsy and 12.3 percentage points (9.6% vs 21.9%; 95% CI 7.8-16.9, p < 0.001) less clinically insignificant prostate cancer (cisPCa; Gleason 3 + 3). The overall risk of bias for the included studies were found to be low after assessment using the QUADAS-2, QUADAS-C, and ROB 2.0 tools.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and clinical implications: </strong>The MRI ± TB pathway is superior to TRUS biopsy in detecting csPCa and avoiding the diagnosis of cisPCa. MRI should be included in the standard of care pathway for prostate cancer diagnosis.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94000,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European urology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2024.08.022\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2024.08.022","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
VISION: An Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis of Randomised Trials Comparing Magnetic Resonance Imaging Targeted Biopsy with Standard Transrectal Ultrasound Guided Biopsy in the Detection of Prostate Cancer.
Background and objective: The PRECISION and PRECISE trials compared magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy (MRI ± TB) with the standard transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided biopsy for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). PRECISION demonstrated superiority of MRI ± TB over TRUS guided biopsy, while PRECISE demonstrated noninferiority. The VISION study is a planned individual patient data meta-analysis (IPDMA) comparing MRI ± TB with TRUS guided biopsy for csPCa diagnosis.
Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Central of Registered Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched on the November 12, 2023 for randomised controlled trials of biopsy-naïve patients with a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer undergoing MRI or standard TRUS. Studies were included if its participants with suspicious MRI underwent targeted biopsy alone and those with nonsuspicious lesion avoided biopsy. The primary outcome is the proportion of men diagnosed with csPCa (Gleason ≥3 + 4).
Key findings and limitations: Two studies, PRECISION and PRECISE (953 patients), were included in the IPDMA. In the MRI ± TB arm, 32.2% of patients avoided biopsy due to nonsuspicious MRI. MRI ± TB detected 8.7 percentage points (36.3% vs 27.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.8-14.6, p = 0.004) more csPCa than TRUS biopsy and 12.3 percentage points (9.6% vs 21.9%; 95% CI 7.8-16.9, p < 0.001) less clinically insignificant prostate cancer (cisPCa; Gleason 3 + 3). The overall risk of bias for the included studies were found to be low after assessment using the QUADAS-2, QUADAS-C, and ROB 2.0 tools.
Conclusions and clinical implications: The MRI ± TB pathway is superior to TRUS biopsy in detecting csPCa and avoiding the diagnosis of cisPCa. MRI should be included in the standard of care pathway for prostate cancer diagnosis.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
