Introduction: The risk of occult prostate carcinoma (PCa) after negative multiparametric MRI (mpMRI)-transrectal fusion biopsy (F-Bx) is unknown. To determine the false-negative predictive value, we examined PCa detection after prior negative F-Bx. Methods: Between December 2012 and November 2016, 491 patients with suspected PCa and suspicious mpMRI findings underwent transrectal F-Bx. Patients with benign pathology (n = 191) were eligible for our follow-up (FU) survey. Patient characteristics and clinical parameters were correlated to subsequent findings of newly detected PCa. Results: Complete FU with a median of 31 (interquartile range: 17–39) months was available for 176/191 (92.2%) patients. Of those, 54 men had either surgical interventions on the prostate or re-Bxs. Newly detected PCa was evident in 14/176 (7.95%) patients stratified to ISUP ≤2 in 10 and ≥3 in 4 cases. The comparison of patients with newly detected PCa to those without cancerous findings in FU showed significant differences in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density (0.16 vs. 0.13 ng/mL2) and prostate volume (45 vs. 67 mL, both p < 0.05). Both factors are significant predictors for newly detected cancer after initial negative F-Bx. Conclusion: Only PSA density (>0.13 ng/mL2) and small prostate volume are significant predictors for newly detected PCa after initial negative F-Bx. Despite negative mpMRI/TRUS F-Bx results, patients should be further monitored due to a risk of developing PCa over time. Notwithstanding the limitation of our study that not all patients underwent another Bx, we assume that the false-negative rate is low but existing. Our data represent a real-world scenario.

1.
Cooperberg
MR
,
Broering
JM
,
Kantoff
PW
,
Carroll
PR
.
Contemporary trends in low risk prostate cancer: risk assessment and treatment
.
J Urol
.
2007
;
178
(
3 Pt 2
):
S14
9
. .
2.
Ploussard
G
,
Nicolaiew
N
,
Marchand
C
,
Terry
S
,
Allory
Y
,
Vacherot
F
, et al.
Risk of repeat biopsy and prostate cancer detection after an initial extended negative biopsy: longitudinal follow-up from a prospective trial
.
BJU Int
.
2013
;
111
(
6
):
988
96
. .
3.
Leitlinienprogramm Onkologie (Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft Deutsche Krebshilfe, AWMF): Interdisziplinäre Leitlinie der Qualität S3 zur Früherkennung, Diagnose und Therapie der verschiedenen Stadien des Prostatakarzinoms, Langversion 5.1, 2019, AWMF Registernummer: 043/022OL. Available from: http://www.leitlinienprogramm-onkologie.de/leitlinien/prostatakarzinom/. abgerufen am 2020 Oct 10.
4.
EAU Guidelines. Edn. presented at the EAU Annual Congress Amsterdam 2020. ISBN 978-94-92671-07-3.
5.
Junker
D
,
Quentin
M
,
Nagele
U
,
Edlinger
M
,
Richenberg
J
,
Schaefer
G
, et al.
Evaluation of the PI-RADS scoring system for mpMRI of the prostate: a whole-mount step-section analysis
.
World J Urol
.
2015
;
33
(
7
):
1023
30
. .
6.
Borghesi
M
,
Ahmed
H
,
Nam
R
,
Schaeffer
E
,
Schiavina
R
,
Taneja
S
, et al.
Complications after systematic, random, and image-guided prostate biopsy
.
Eur Urol
.
2017
;
71
(
3
):
353
65
. .
7.
Loeb
S
,
van den Heuvel
S
,
Zhu
X
,
Bangma
CH
,
Schröder
FH
,
Roobol
MJ
.
Infectious complications and hospital admissions after prostate biopsy in a European randomized trial
.
Eur Urol
.
2012
;
61
(
6
):
1110
4
. .
8.
Tang
Y
,
Liu
Z
,
Tang
L
,
Zhang
R
,
Lu
Y
,
Liang
J
, et al.
Significance of MRI/transrectal ultrasound fusion three-dimensional model-guided, targeted biopsy based on transrectal ultrasound-guided systematic biopsy in prostate cancer detection: a systematic review and meta-analysis
.
Urol Int
.
2018
;
100
(
1
):
57
65
. .
9.
Ahdoot
M
,
Wilbur
AR
,
Reese
SE
,
Lebastchi
AH
,
Mehralivand
S
,
Gomella
PT
, et al.
MRI-targeted, systematic, and combined biopsy for prostate cancer diagnosis
.
N Engl J Med
.
2020
;
382
(
10
):
917
28
. .
10.
Siddiqui
MM
,
Rais-Bahrami
S
,
Turkbey
B
,
George
AK
,
Rothwax
J
,
Shakir
N
, et al.
Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer
.
JAMA
.
2015
;
313
(
4
):
390
7
. .
11.
Drost
FH
,
Osses
DF
,
Nieboer
D
,
Steyerberg
EW
,
Bangma
CH
,
Roobol
MJ
, et al.
Prostate MRI, with or without MRI-targeted biopsy, and systematic biopsy for detecting prostate cancer
.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev
.
2019
;
4
(
4
):
Cd012663
. .
12.
Ahmed
HU
,
El-Shater Bosaily
A
,
Brown
LC
,
Gabe
R
,
Kaplan
R
,
Parmar
MK
, et al.
Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study
.
Lancet
.
2017
;
389
(
10071
):
815
22
. .
13.
Záleský
M
,
Stejskal
J
,
Adamcova
V
,
Hrbáček
J
,
Minarik
I
,
Pavlicko
A
, et al.
Use of prostate specific antigen density combined with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging improves triage for prostate biopsy
.
Urol Int
.
2019
;
103
(
1
):
33
40
. .
14.
Kasivisvanathan
V
,
Rannikko
AS
,
Borghi
M
,
Panebianco
V
,
Mynderse
LA
,
Vaarala
MH
, et al.
MRI-targeted or standard biopsy for prostate-cancer diagnosis
.
N Engl J Med
.
2018
;
378
(
19
):
1767
77
. .
15.
Bloom
JB
,
Hale
GR
,
Gold
SA
,
Rayn
KN
,
Smith
C
,
Mehralivand
S
, et al.
Predicting gleason group progression for men on prostate cancer active surveillance: role of a negative confirmatory magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion biopsy
.
J Urol
.
2019
;
201
(
1
):
84
90
. .
16.
Rothke
M
,
Blondin
D
,
Schlemmer
HP
,
Franiel
T
.
[PI-RADS classification: structured reporting for MRI of the prostate]
.
Rofo
.
2013
;
185
(
3
):
253
61
.
17.
Egevad
L
,
Delahunt
B
,
Srigley
JR
,
Samaratunga
H
.
International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grading of prostate cancer: an ISUP consensus on contemporary grading
.
APMIS
.
2016
;
124
(
6
):
433
5
. .
18.
Clavien
PA
,
Barkun
J
,
de Oliveira
ML
,
Vauthey
JN
,
Dindo
D
,
Schulick
RD
, et al.
The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience
.
Ann Surg
.
2009
;
250
(
2
):
187
96
. .
19.
Boesen
L
,
Nørgaard
N
,
Løgager
V
,
Thomsen
HS
.
Clinical outcome following low suspicion multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging or benign magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy to detect prostate cancer
.
J Urol
.
2017
;
198
(
2
):
310
5
. .
20.
Hong
CW
,
Walton-Diaz
A
,
Rais-Bahrami
S
,
Hoang
AN
,
Türkbey
B
,
Stamatakis
L
, et al.
Imaging and pathology findings after an initial negative MRI-US fusion-guided and 12-core extended sextant prostate biopsy session
.
Diagn Interv Radiol
.
2014
;
20
(
3
):
234
8
. .
21.
Berger
AP
,
Gozzi
C
,
Steiner
H
,
Frauscher
F
,
Varkarakis
J
,
Rogatsch
H
, et al.
Complication rate of transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy: a comparison among 3 protocols with 6, 10 and 15 cores
.
J Urol
.
2004
;
171
(
4
):
1478
1
.
discussion 80–1
. .
22.
Panebianco
V
,
Barchetti
G
,
Simone
G
,
Del Monte
M
,
Ciardi
A
,
Grompone
MD
, et al.
Negative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer: what’s next?
Eur Urol
.
2018
;
74
(
1
):
48
54
. .
23.
Al-Azab
R
,
Toi
A
,
Lockwood
G
,
Kulkarni
GS
,
Fleshner
N
.
Prostate volume is strongest predictor of cancer diagnosis at transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy with prostate-specific antigen values between 2.0 and 9.0 ng/mL
.
Urology
.
2007
;
69
(
1
):
103
7
. .
24.
Gordetsky
JB
,
Ullman
D
,
Schultz
L
,
Porter
KK
,
Del Carmen Rodriguez Pena
M
,
Calderone
CE
, et al.
Histologic findings associated with false-positive multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging performed for prostate cancer detection
.
Hum Pathol
.
2019
;
83
:
159
65
. .
25.
Cash
H
,
Günzel
K
,
Maxeiner
A
,
Stephan
C
,
Fischer
T
,
Durmus
T
, et al.
Prostate cancer detection on transrectal ultrasonography-guided random biopsy despite negative real-time magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasonography fusion-guided targeted biopsy: reasons for targeted biopsy failure
.
BJU Int
.
2016
;
118
(
1
):
35
43
. .
26.
Sonn
GA
,
Fan
RE
,
Ghanouni
P
,
Wang
NN
,
Brooks
JD
,
Loening
AM
, et al.
Prostate magnetic resonance imaging interpretation varies substantially across radiologists
.
Eur Urol Focus
.
2019
;
5
(
4
):
592
9
.
27.
Franz
T
,
von Hardenberg
J
,
Blana
A
,
Cash
H
,
Baumunk
D
,
Salomon
G
, et al.
[MRI/TRUS fusion-guided prostate biopsy: value in the context of focal therapy]
.
Urologe A
.
2017
;
56
(
2
):
208
16
. .
28.
Westhoff
N
,
Siegel
FP
,
Hausmann
D
,
Polednik
M
,
von Hardenberg
J
,
Michel
MS
, et al.
Precision of MRI/ultrasound-fusion biopsy in prostate cancer diagnosis: an ex vivo comparison of alternative biopsy techniques on prostate phantoms
.
World J Urol
.
2017
;
35
(
7
):
1015
22
. .
29.
Westhoff
N
,
Haumann
H
,
Kriegmair
MC
,
von Hardenberg
J
,
Budjan
J
,
Porubsky
S
, et al.
Association of training level and outcome of software-based image fusion-guided targeted prostate biopsies
.
World J Urol
.
2019
;
37
(
10
):
2119
27
.
30.
Rosenkrantz
AB
,
Verma
S
,
Choyke
P
,
Eberhardt
SC
,
Eggener
SE
,
Gaitonde
K
, et al.
Prostate magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy in patients with a prior negative biopsy: a consensus statement by AUA and SAR
.
J Urol
.
2016
;
196
(
6
):
1613
8
. .
31.
Halstuch
D
,
Baniel
J
,
Lifshitz
D
,
Sela
S
,
Ber
Y
,
Margel
D
.
Assessment of needle tip deflection during transrectal guided prostate biopsy: implications for targeted biopsies
.
J Endourol
.
2018
;
32
(
3
):
252
6
. .
32.
Ullrich
T
,
Arsov
C
,
Quentin
M
,
Laqua
N
,
Klingebiel
M
,
Martin
O
, et al.
Analysis of PI-RADS 4 cases: management recommendations for negatively biopsied patients
.
Eur J Radiol
.
2019
;
113
:
1
6
. .
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.