“We have the Artemis platform here that a couple of my colleagues used, but I haven’t personally done them.
Potentially much of how MRIs are used have a lot to do with who is reading them, how consistent they are, and how confident they are in calling a lesion suspicious versus not—instead of calling everything indeterminate. For most people—including myself—to be convinced not to biopsy something, you need to have a convincing report and conversely you have to be very convinced that there’s no there, there.
I think we’re moving in the direction, though, where the MRI will define our next steps—not quite there yet, but I think we’re moving that way.
Right now, people who are doing targeted biopsies still do the systematic biopsy, but in the future the goal would be to only biopsy the area that seems suspicious and be able to avoid extra biopsies. We’re not quite there, but almost. I think the PRECISION study absolutely offers very compelling data.”
Kelvin Moses, MD, PhD
More from Urology Times: