Purpose of the Report: Although multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is commonly used for the primary staging of prostate cancer, it may miss non-enlarged metastatic lymph nodes. Positron emission tomography-computed tomography targeting the prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA PET-CT) is a promising method to detect non-enlarged metastatic lymph nodes, but more data are needed. Materials and Methods: In this single-center, prospective study, we enrolled patients with intermediate-to-high-risk prostate cancer scheduled for radical prostatectomy with pelvic node dissection. Before surgery, prostate imaging with mpMRI and PSMA PET-CT was used to assess lymph node involvement (LNI), extra-prostatic extension (EPE), and seminal vesicle involvement (SVI). Additionally, we used clinical nomograms to estimate the risk of these three outcomes. Results: Of the 74 patients included, 61 (82%) had high-risk prostate cancer, and the rest had intermediate-risk cancer. Histopathology revealed LNI in 20 (27%) patients, SVI in 26 (35%), and EPE in 52 (70%). PSMA PET-CT performed better than mpMRI at detecting LNI (area under the curve (AUC, 95% confidence interval): 0.779 (0.665–0.893) vs. 0.655 (0.529–0.780)), but mpMRI was better at detecting SVI (AUC: 0.775 (0.672–0.878) vs. 0.585 (0.473–0.698)). The MSKCC nomogram performed well at detecting both LNI (AUC: 0.799 (0.680–0.918)) and SVI (0.772 (0.659–0.885)). However, when the nomogram was used to derive binary diagnoses, decision curve analyses showed that the MSKCC nomogram provided less net benefit than mpMRI and PSMA PET-CT for detecting SVI and LNI, respectively. Conclusions: mpMRI and [⁶⁸Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET-CT are complementary techniques to be used in conjunction for the primary T and N staging of prostate cancer.

Prostate cancer (PCa) is a major public health issue, as the second most common cancer and the fifth leading cause of cancer-related deaths among men. Many PCa cases are indolent and pose minimal risk, making active surveillance a suitable management approach. However, clinically significant prostate carcinoma (csPCa) can lead to serious health issues, including progression, metastasis, and death. Differentiating between insignificant prostate cancer (inPCa) and csPCa is crucial for determining appropriate treatment. Diagnosis of PCa primarily involves trans-perineal and transrectal systematic biopsies. Systematic transrectal prostate biopsy, which typically collects 10–12 tissue samples, is a standard method, but it can miss csPCa and is associated with some complications. Recent advancements, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsies, have been suggested to improve risk stratification and reduce overtreatment of inPCa and undertreatment of csPCa, thereby enhancing patient quality of life and treatment outcomes. Guided biopsies are increasingly recommended for their ability to better detect high-risk cancers while reducing identification of low-risk cases. MRI-targeted biopsies, especially when used as an initial biopsy in biopsy-naïve patients and those under active surveillance, have become more common. Utilization of MRI-TB alone can decrease septic complications; however, the combining of targeted biopsies with perilesional sampling is recommended for optimal detection of csPCa. Future advancements in imaging and biopsy techniques, including AI-augmented lesion detection and robotic-assisted sampling, promise to further improve the accuracy and effectiveness of PCa detection.

Combining systematic biopsy (SB) with targeted biopsy (TB) in the case of a positive result from multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is a matter of debate. The Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) score of 5 indicates the highest probability of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPC) detection in TB. Potentially, omitting SB in the case of PIRADS 5 may have a marginal impact on the csPC detection rate. The aim of this study was to determine whether SB can be avoided in the case of PIRADS 5 and to identify potential factors allowing for performing TB only. This cohort study involved n = 225 patients with PIRADS 5 on mpMRI (PIRADS 2.0/2.1) who underwent transperineal or transrectal combined biopsy (CB). CsPC was diagnosed in 51.6% (n = 116/225) of cases. TB and SB resulted in the detection of csPC in 48% (n = 108/225) and 20.4% (n = 46/225) of cases, respectively (TB vs. SB, p < 0.001). When the TB was positive, SB detected csPC in n = 38 of the cases (38/108 = 35%). SB added to TB significantly improved csPC detection in 6.9% of cases in absolute terms (n = 8/116) (TB vs. CB, p = 0.008). The multivariate regression model proved that the significant predictors of csPC detection via SB were the densities of the prostate-specific antigen—PSAD > 0.17 ng/mL² (OR = 4.038, 95%CI: 1.568–10.398); primary biopsy setting (OR = 2.818, 95%CI: 1.334–5.952); and abnormal digital rectal examination (DRE) (OR = 2.746, 95%CI: 1.328–5.678). In a primary biopsy setting (n = 103), SB detected 10% (n = 6/60) of the additional cases of csPC (p = 0.031), while in a repeat biopsy setting (n = 122), SB detected 3.5% (n = 2/56) of the additional cases of csPC (p = 0.5). In the case of PSAD > 0.17 ng/mL² (n = 151), SB detected 7.4% (n = 7/95) of additional cases of csPC (p = 0.016), while in the case of PSAD < 0.17 ng/mL² (n = 74), SB detected 4.8% (n = 1/21) of the additional cases of csPC (p = 1.0). The omission of SB had an impact on the csPC diagnosis rate in patients with PIRADS 5 score lesions. Patients who have already undergone prostate biopsy and those with low PSAD are at a lower risk of missing csPC when SB is avoided. However, performing TB only may result in missing other csPC foci located outside the index lesion, which can alter treatment decisions.

Background: To investigate the role of mpMRI and high PIRADS score as independent triggers in the qualification of patients with ISUP 1 prostate cancer on biopsy to radical prostatectomy.Methods: Between January 2017 and June 2019, 494 laparoscopic radical prostatectomies were performed in our institution, including 203 patients (41.1%) with ISUP 1 cT1c-2c PCa on biopsy. Data regarding biopsy results, digital rectal examination, PSA, mpMRI and postoperative pathological report have been retrospectively analysed.Results: In 183 cases (90.1%) mpMRI has been performed at least 6 weeks after biopsy. Final pathology revealed ISUP Gleason Grade Group upgrade in 62.6% of cases. PIRADS 5, PIRADS 4 and PIRADS 3 were associated with Gleason Grade Group upgrade in 70.5%, 62.8%, 48.3% of patients on final pathology, respectively. Within PIRADS 5 group, the number of upgraded cases was statistically significant.Conclusions: PIRADS score correlates with an upgrade on final pathology and may justify shared decision of radical treatment in patients unwilling to repeated biopsies. However, the use of PIRADS 5 score as a sole indicator for prostatectomy may result in nonnegligible overtreatment rate.

Prostate cancer represents a significant public health challenge, with its management requiring precise diagnostic and prognostic tools. Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA), a cell surface enzyme overexpressed in prostate cancer cells, has emerged as a pivotal biomarker. PSMA’s ability to increase the sensitivity of PET imaging has revolutionized its application in the clinical management of prostate cancer. The advancements in PET-PSMA imaging technologies and methodologies, including the development of PSMA-targeted radiotracers and optimized imaging protocols, led to diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility across different stages of prostate cancer. This highlights its superiority in staging and its comparative effectiveness against conventional imaging modalities. This paper analyzes the impact of PET-PSMA on prostate cancer management, discussing the existing challenges and suggesting future research directions. The integration of recent studies and reviews underscores the evolving understanding of PET-PSMA imaging, marking its significant but still expanding role in clinical practice. This comprehensive review serves as a crucial resource for clinicians and researchers involved in the multifaceted domains of prostate cancer diagnosis, treatment, and management.