Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
In men who require a prostate biopsy does a multi-parametric ultrasound based diagnostic strategy compared to a multi-parametric MRI based diagnostic strategy lead to similar detection of clinically significant prostate cancer?
Men who require prostate biopsy will be approached and consented to enter this study. Participants will all undergo pre-biopsy mp-MRI and mp-USS of the prostate. Only men with positive scans will undergo prostate biopsy. The order in which lesions discovered on mp-MRI or on mp-USS are sampled will be randomised. All biopsies will be taken via the transperineal route in a single procedure. Comparison will be drawn between biopsy results of lesions detected by mp-USS with those lesions detected by mp-MRI. Consideration will be given as to whether a lesion detected by one imaging modality is the same abnormality as one detected by the other imaging modality, in the same patient. Analysis will be carried out at both the level of the lesion and the whole prostate. Men without suspicious lesions on either imaging modality will not proceed to biopsy.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| multiparametric MRI. Multi-parametric ultrasound | Procedure | The investigators aim to test the hypothesis that multiparametric ultrasound is able to detect clinically significant prostate cancer with an accuracy that is similar to multiparametric MRI. Multi-parametric ultrasound uses different types of ultrasound images to visualise different aspects of the tissue. In other words, the standard grey-scale images shows the gross anatomy, Power Doppler and Contrast enhanced Ultrasound image blood supply (cancers have more blood supply), and Real-Time Elastography images the density of tissue (cancers are more dense). |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| To determine the overall agreement in identifying lesions to biopsy between mp-USS and mp-MRI in men who require a prostate biopsy. Then compare agreement in proportion of men diagnosed with clinically significant prostate cancer on biopsy. | Clinically significant for the purpose will be defined by UCL/Ahmed definition 1:Gleason ≥4+3 and/or maximum cancer core length of ≥ 6mm | at time of surgery |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| To compare the overall agreement in proportion of men diagnosed with other thresholds of clinically significant prostate cancer on biopsy | Thresholds for clinical significance namely UCL/Ahmed definition 2 (a) Gleason ≥ 3+4 and/or Maximum cancer core length ≥ 4mm, (b) Gleason ≥ 3+4 and or MCCL ≥ 6mm (c) Any length of Gleason ≥ 3+4 (d) Any length of Gleason ≥4+3 | at time of surgery |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Men at or referred to the participating centres who may require a prostate biopsy. Referrals will be screened and potential participants contacted by telephone, post or email. These men will be given the patient information sheet at least 24 hours before their clinic visit, allowing adequate time to consider their desire for involvement
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bina Shah | Contact | +44 (0)20 7679 9280 | SITU.CADMUS@ucl.ac.uk |
Not provided
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| University College London Hospitals | Recruiting | London | England | WIT 3AA | United Kingdom |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 23708103 | Result | Velonas VM, Woo HH, dos Remedios CG, Assinder SJ. Current status of biomarkers for prostate cancer. Int J Mol Sci. 2013 May 24;14(6):11034-60. doi: 10.3390/ijms140611034. | |
| 23827086 | Result | Kirkham AP, Haslam P, Keanie JY, McCafferty I, Padhani AR, Punwani S, Richenberg J, Rottenberg G, Sohaib A, Thompson P, Turnbull LW, Kurban L, Sahdev A, Clements R, Carey BM, Allen C. Prostate MRI: who, when, and how? Report from a UK consensus meeting. Clin Radiol. 2013 Oct;68(10):1016-23. doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2013.03.030. Epub 2013 Jul 1. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D011471 | Prostatic Neoplasms |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D005834 | Genital Neoplasms, Male |
| D014565 | Urogenital Neoplasms |
| D009371 | Neoplasms by Site |
| D009369 | Neoplasms |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| To determine the detection of clinically significant cancer (using all of the pre-specified definitions based on histology) by using the combination of these two imaging techniques versus either modality alone | at time of surgery |
| To determine whether the order in which the targeted biopsies are carried out, either to the same target (present on both scans) or different targets impacts on detection of clinically significant cancer | clinically significant cancer (using all of the pre-specified definitions based on histology) | at time of surgery |
| To compare, in those men who go on to radical prostatectomy, the mp-MRI, mp-USS and histology from targeted biopsy with the whole mount specimen obtained at surgery. | at time of surgery |
| To create an inception cohort of men, consented for long-term follow-up and linkage, providing the potential for further translational and clinical studies | at time of surgery |
| To determine rates of adverse events, resource utilization and impact of each test on health-related quality-of-life (using EQ-5D-5L questionnaire) which would allow modelling of overall cost-effectiveness of one strategy compared to the other. | at time of surgery |
| 19720969 | Result | Welch HG, Albertsen PC. Prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment after the introduction of prostate-specific antigen screening: 1986-2005. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009 Oct 7;101(19):1325-9. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djp278. Epub 2009 Aug 31. |
| 23360718 | Result | Wilt TJ, Ahmed HU. Prostate cancer screening and the management of clinically localized disease. BMJ. 2013 Jan 29;346:f325. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f325. No abstract available. |
| 20816614 | Result | Wei JT. Limitations of a contemporary prostate biopsy: the blind march forward. Urol Oncol. 2010 Sep-Oct;28(5):546-9. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2009.12.022. |
| 20724727 | Result | Thompson IM, Ankerst DP, Tangen CM. Prostate-specific antigen, risk factors, and prostate cancer: confounders nestled in an enigma. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010 Sep 8;102(17):1299-301. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djq313. Epub 2010 Aug 19. No abstract available. |
| 35240084 | Derived | Grey ADR, Scott R, Shah B, Acher P, Liyanage S, Pavlou M, Omar R, Chinegwundoh F, Patki P, Shah TT, Hamid S, Ghei M, Gilbert K, Campbell D, Brew-Graves C, Arumainayagam N, Chapman A, McLeavy L, Karatziou A, Alsaadi Z, Collins T, Freeman A, Eldred-Evans D, Bertoncelli-Tanaka M, Tam H, Ramachandran N, Madaan S, Winkler M, Arya M, Emberton M, Ahmed HU. Multiparametric ultrasound versus multiparametric MRI to diagnose prostate cancer (CADMUS): a prospective, multicentre, paired-cohort, confirmatory study. Lancet Oncol. 2022 Mar;23(3):428-438. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(22)00016-X. |
| D005832 |
| Genital Diseases, Male |
| D000091662 | Genital Diseases |
| D000091642 | Urogenital Diseases |
| D011469 | Prostatic Diseases |
| D052801 | Male Urogenital Diseases |