Cribriform pattern and perineural invasion on MR/US fusion biopsy predict failure of selection criteria for prostatic hemigland ablation.

OBJECTIVES

To assess clinicopathologic factors on MR/US fusion biopsy that might predict failure of theoretical selection criteria for prostatic hemigland ablation (HA).

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

A retrospectively maintained single institution multiparametric MRI database (n = 1667) was queried to identify 355 patients who underwent MR/US fusion biopsy, including both targeted biopsy and concurrent systematic biopsy from December 1, 2014 to June 1, 2018. Clinical, pathological, and imaging variables were assessed on fusion biopsy (Table 1) to determine who met theoretical selection criteria for HA, defined as unilateral intermediate-risk prostate cancer per NCCN criteria (Grade Group [GG] 2 or 3 with prostate-specific antigen <20) and no evidence of extraprostatic extension (EPE) on multiparametric MRI. Predictors of selection criteria failure were then assessed in patients who also underwent radical prostatectomy (RP). Failure of the theoretical HA selection criteria was defined as presence of GG ≧ 2 on the contralateral (untreated) side, or the presence of high-risk disease (any GG ≧ 4 or EPE) in the RP specimen.

RESULTS

Of the 355 patients who underwent fusion biopsy, 84 patients met the theoretical selection criteria for HA. Of those patients eligible, 54 underwent RP, 37 (68.5%) of which represented unsuccessful HA selection criteria. Patients no longer met HA selection criteria on the basis of upgrading alone in 6/54 (11.1%), EPE alone in 9/54 (16.7%), bilateral GG 2 or 3 in 16/54 (29.6%) or combined EPE and bilateral GG 2 or 3 in 6/54 (11.1%) cases. In the HA selection failures due to upgrading, three also had EPE, one of whom also had missed contralateral GG ≧ 2 disease. The only factor independently associated with HA failure was any presence of cribriform pattern (HR 7.01, P = 0.021). Perineural invasion on systematic biopsyalso appeared to improve the performance of our multivariable model (HR 5.33, P = 0.052), though it was not statistically significant when using a cutoff of <0.05. Accuracy for predicting successful HA was 0.32 and improved to 0.74 if PNI or cribriform were excluded and 0.84 if both were excluded.

CONCLUSIONS

In a retrospective analysis of RP patients who underwent preoperative MRI/US fusion biopsy, current selection criteria for prostatic HA based on NCCN intermediate-risk stratification failed to accurately identify appropriate candidates in 68.5% of patients. Cribriform pattern and PNI detected on biopsy reduced the failure of hemigland selection criteria to 43%. These criteria should be routinely reported on biopsy pathology and taken into consideration when selecting patients for HA in prospective clinical trials.