Prostate CancerFOCUS-PCNCT06517901
Fusion or Cognitive Ultrasound-guided Biopsy to Detect Prostate Cancer
A study testing Software fusion prostate biopsy and Cognitive fusion prostate biopsy in people with Prostate Cancer and Diagnosis, run by Albany Medical College at 4 sites in 2 countries.
Trial summary
The MRI-targeted biopsy for prostate cancer detection can be performed using one of two techniques: 1. Software-based fusion of MRI and ultrasound images (software fusion) or 2. Visually estimated MRI-informed (cognitive fusion) technique To date, there is a lack of adequately powered RCTs directly comparing the… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older, men only
- Conditions the study is for
- Prostate Cancer, Diagnosis
- What is being tested?
- Software fusion prostate biopsy and Cognitive fusion prostate biopsy
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 1,306 participants
- Where
- 4 sitesin 2 countries
- Study dates
- 18 Apr 2025to 30 Jun 2027
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- Men only
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Men undergoing prostate biopsy (either transrectal or transperineal) for suspected prostate cancer as part of their regular medical care
- Must be eligible to undergo both prostate biopsy procedure (cognitive or fusion)
- Men undergoing their first prostate biopsy procedure or with no previous prostate biopsy within 3 years
- Pre-biopsy mp-MRI of prostate with one or more lesions classified as PIRADS 3-5
- Largest dimension of any lesion on mp-MRI to be ≤ 2 cm
- Prostate-specific antigen level ≤ 20 ng/mL and/or abnormal digital rectal examination
Who cannot join
- mp-MRI detected lesions that are > 2 cm
- History of prostate biopsy within 3 years
- Previous diagnosis of prostate cancer
- Contraindications to prostate biopsy (eg, fever, evidence of genito-urinary infection, excessive co-morbidities as per treating physician)
Trial locations and contacts
4 sites in 2 countries. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
4 sites in 2 countries
United States3 sites, 3 recruiting
- Recruiting
Albany Medical Center
Albany, New York, 12208
Badar M. Mian, MD, 518-262-7558, mianb@amc.edu
Brenda Romeo, 518-262-8579, romeob@amc.edu
- Recruiting
Lahey Clinic, Inc
Burlington, Massachusetts, 01805
Kimberly Rieger-Christ, 781-744-8027, bilh_osr@lahey.org
William Faust, MD
- Not yet recruiting
Pennsylvania State University
Hershey, Pennsylvania, 17023
Suzanne Boltz, 717-531-0003, urologyresearch@pennstatehealth.psu.edu
Jay Raman, MD
Canada1 site, 1 recruiting
- Not yet recruiting
Manitoba Prostate Centre, CancerCare Manitoba
Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3A 1M5
Zoe Ignation, 204-787-2955, zignacio@cancercare.mb.ca
Ardalanejaz Ahmad, MD
About this study
Official title: MRI-targeted Fusion or Cognitive Ultrasound-guided Biopsy to Detect Prostate Cancer
The MRI-targeted biopsy for prostate cancer detection can be performed using one of two techniques:
- Software-based fusion of MRI and ultrasound images (software fusion) or
- Visually estimated MRI-informed (cognitive fusion) technique
To date, there is a lack of adequately powered RCTs directly comparing the cognitive vs fusion targeted biopsy. This randomized study will directly compare the detection rates of clinically significant prostate cancer following either the cognitive or the fusion targeted prostate biopsy in men with suspicious lesions noted on multi-parametric MRI (mp-MRI) of prostate.
Read the detailed description
For prostate cancer detection, pre-biopsy multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) followed by MRI-targeted prostate biopsy is standard of care which is supported by the guidelines from the American Urological Association and the European Association of Urology. The MRI-targeted prostate biopsy is associated with a significant increase in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) compared to the ultrasound guided biopsy. The MRI-targeted biopsy can be performed using one of two techniques including software-based fusion of MRI and ultrasound images (software fusion) or visually guided MRI-informed (cognitive fusion) technique.
With regards to the diagnostic performance in detecting csPCa, current literature does not demonstrate a clear advantage to one targeting technique over the other. A systematic review and meta-analysis (published in early 2024) by Falagario et al evaluated all of the comparative studies of the above-mentioned MRI-targeting techniques. Of the 20 studies included, six reported improved detection of csPCa with fusion technique, one reported an advantage to the cognitive technique, while thirteen reported no significant difference. Of note, the majority of the studies were retrospective, with high risk of bias, that lacked uniform definition of csPCa, and employed variable mp-MRI technique (1.5T vs 3T) and scoring system (Likert vs PIRADS). There were only three small, prospective, randomized studies (RCT) available in the systematic review of literature. One RCT reported the fusion technique to be superior while two demonstrated no difference in csPCa detection rates. There was no significant difference in the detection of csPCa between the targeting techniques, however, low quality of evidence and heterogeneity warranted well-designed prospective studies.
Other studies, as well as personal experience, point to somewhat improved cancer detection the cognitive MRI-targeting approach, although the rates may be affected by patient selection related to lesion size and location.
Thus, the investigators are conducting an RCT to direct compare the csPCa detection rates following either the cognitive or the fusion targeted prostate biopsy in men with suspicious lesions noted on mp-MRI of prostate. The investigators hypothesize that the diagnostic accuracy MRI-targeted prostate biopsy using cognitive fusion technique is either similar to or not significantly inferior to the software fusion technique.
- Conditions
- Prostate Cancer, Diagnosis
- Being tested
- Software fusion prostate biopsy, Cognitive fusion prostate biopsy
- Keywords
- Prostate, Cancer, Biopsy, Diagnosis, MRI
- Medical subject headings
- Prostatic Neoplasms, Disease, Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Software fusion prostate biopsyProcedure or surgery
Software fusion biopsy: Each participant in this study arm will first undergo biopsy of the MRI-detected lesion using an image fusion platform such as UroNav or similar. Three biopsy cores will be taken per lesion, with a maximum of three lesions being sampled per participant. Then systematic samples will be taken from the remainder of the prostate as per standard protocol (10-12 cores).
Cognitive fusion prostate biopsyProcedure or surgery
Also called Visual estimation fusion prostate biopsy
Cognitive fusion biopsy: Each participant in this study arm will first undergo biopsy of the MRI-detected lesion using visual estimation and/or measurements of lesion. Three biopsy cores will be taken per lesion, with a maximum of three lesions being sampled per participant. Then systematic samples will be taken from the remainder of the prostate as per standard protocol (10-12 cores).
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Software fusion biopsy | Active comparator | Software fusion biopsy: Biopsy of the MRI-detected lesion using an image fusion platform such as UroNav or similar. Receives: Procedure: Software fusion prostate biopsy |
| Cognitive fusion biopy | Experimental | Cognitive fusion biopsy: Biopsy of the MRI-detected lesion using visual estimation and/or measurements to identify landmarks and lesions. Receives: Procedure: Cognitive fusion prostate biopsy |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer
Compare the overall detection of clinically significant prostate cancer following fusion vs cognitive MRI-targeted biopsy
Measured: 1 year
Secondary outcomes (6)
Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer in the targeted cores, systematic biopsy cores, and combined
Compare the detection of prostate cancer following fusion vs cognitive MRI-targeted biopsy
Measured: 1 year
Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer based on lesion size (< 0.5 cm; 0.5 cm to 1 cm; > 1.1 cm etc)
Compare the detection of prostate cancer following fusion vs cognitive MRI-targeted biopsy
Measured: 1 year
Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer at various lesion location (anterior, posterior, apex, base)
Compare the detection of prostate cancer following fusion vs cognitive MRI-targeted biopsy
Measured: 1 year
Detection rate of overall prostate cancer of any grade
Compare the detection of prostate cancer following fusion vs cognitive MRI-targeted biopsy
Measured: 1 year
Detection rate of clinically insignificant (low grade) prostate cancer
Compare the detection of prostate cancer following fusion vs cognitive MRI-targeted biopsy
Measured: 1 year
Detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer based on PSA density (PSA level / prostate volume)
Compare the detection of prostate cancer following fusion vs cognitive MRI-targeted biopsy
Measured: 1 year
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted24 Jul 2024
- Study start18 Apr 2025
- Primary completion31 Dec 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion30 Jun 2027 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (10)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Prostate CancerStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 1,306 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Albany Medical College
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Badar M Mian, MD, Study chair, Albany Medical College
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06517901
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 7028
- Acronym
- FOCUS-PC
- Status last verified
- Sep 2025
- First submitted
- 19 Jul 2024
- Last updated
- 3 Oct 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Kasivisvanathan V, Rannikko AS, Borghi M, Panebianco V, Mynderse LA, Vaarala MH, Briganti A, Budaus L, Hellawell G, Hindley RG, Roobol MJ, Eggener S, Ghei M, Villers A, Bladou F, Villeirs GM, Virdi J, Boxler S, Robert G, Singh PB, Venderink W, Hadaschik BA, Ruffion A, Hu JC, Margolis D, Crouzet S, Klotz L, Taneja SS, Pinto P, Gill I, Allen C, Giganti F, Freeman A, Morris S, Punwani S, Williams NR, Brew-Graves C, Deeks J, Takwoingi Y, Emberton M, Moore CM; PRECISION Study Group Collaborators. MRI-Targeted or Standard Biopsy for Prostate-Cancer Diagnosis. N Engl J Med. 2018 May 10;378(19):1767-1777. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1801993. Epub 2018 Mar 18.
PubMed 29552975Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Turkbey B, George AK, Rothwax J, Shakir N, Okoro C, Raskolnikov D, Parnes HL, Linehan WM, Merino MJ, Simon RM, Choyke PL, Wood BJ, Pinto PA. Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. JAMA. 2015 Jan 27;313(4):390-7. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.17942.
PubMed 25626035Falagario UG, Pellegrino F, Fanelli A, Guzzi F, Bartoletti R, Cash H, Pavlovich C, Emberton M, Carrieri G, Giannarini G. Prostate cancer detection and complications of MRI-targeted prostate biopsy using cognitive registration, software-assisted image fusion or in-bore guidance: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2025 Jun;28(2):270-279. doi: 10.1038/s41391-024-00827-x. Epub 2024 Apr 5.
PubMed 38580833Izadpanahi MH, Elahian A, Gholipour F, Khorrami MH, Zargham M, Mohammadi Sichani M, Alizadeh F, Khorrami F. Diagnostic yield of fusion magnetic resonance-guided prostate biopsy versus cognitive-guided biopsy in biopsy-naive patients: a head-to-head randomized controlled trial. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2021 Dec;24(4):1103-1109. doi: 10.1038/s41391-021-00366-9. Epub 2021 Apr 27.
PubMed 33907293Arsov C, Rabenalt R, Blondin D, Quentin M, Hiester A, Godehardt E, Gabbert HE, Becker N, Antoch G, Albers P, Schimmoller L. Prospective randomized trial comparing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided in-bore biopsy to MRI-ultrasound fusion and transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in patients with prior negative biopsies. Eur Urol. 2015 Oct;68(4):713-20. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.008. Epub 2015 Jun 23.
PubMed 26116294Wegelin O, Exterkate L, van der Leest M, Kummer JA, Vreuls W, de Bruin PC, Bosch JLHR, Barentsz JO, Somford DM, van Melick HHE. The FUTURE Trial: A Multicenter Randomised Controlled Trial on Target Biopsy Techniques Based on Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer in Patients with Prior Negative Biopsies. Eur Urol. 2019 Apr;75(4):582-590. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.11.040. Epub 2018 Dec 3.
PubMed 30522912Mian BM, Feustel PJ, Aziz A, Kaufman RP Jr, Bernstein A, Fisher HAG. Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Detection Following Transrectal and Transperineal Biopsy: Results of the Prostate Biopsy Efficacy and Complications Randomized Clinical Trial. J Urol. 2024 Jul;212(1):21-31. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000003979. Epub 2024 May 3.
PubMed 38700844Hu JC, Assel M, Allaf ME, Ehdaie B, Vickers AJ, Cohen AJ, Ristau BT, Green DA, Han M, Rezaee ME, Pavlovich CP, Montgomery JS, Kowalczyk KJ, Ross AE, Kundu SD, Patel HD, Wang GJ, Graham JN, Shoag JE, Ghazi A, Singla N, Gorin MA, Schaeffer AJ, Schaeffer EM. Transperineal Versus Transrectal Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted and Systematic Prostate Biopsy to Prevent Infectious Complications: The PREVENT Randomized Trial. Eur Urol. 2024 Jul;86(1):61-68. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2023.12.015. Epub 2024 Jan 11.
PubMed 38212178Ploussard G, Barret E, Fiard G, Lenfant L, Malavaud B, Giannarini G, Almeras C, Aziza R, Renard-Penna R, Descotes JL, Rozet F, Beauval JB, Salin A, Roupret M. Transperineal Versus Transrectal Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsies for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: Final Results of the Randomized PERFECT trial (CCAFU-PR1). Eur Urol Oncol. 2024 Oct;7(5):1080-1087. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2024.01.019. Epub 2024 Feb 24.
PubMed 38403523Ortner G, Mavridis C, Fritz V, Schachtner J, Mamoulakis C, Nagele U, Tokas T. The Added Value of MRI-Based Targeted Biopsy in Biopsy-Naive Patients: A Propensity-Score Matched Comparison. J Clin Med. 2024 Feb 27;13(5):1355. doi: 10.3390/jcm13051355.
PubMed 38592166
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 3 Oct 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- MRI-targeted Fusion or Cognitive Ultrasound-guided Biopsy to Detect Prostate Cancer
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06517901
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- FOCUS-PC / 7028
- Conditions
- Prostate Cancer, Diagnosis
- Keywords
- Prostate, Cancer, Biopsy, Diagnosis, MRI
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Recruiting
- Enrolment
- 1,306 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Albany Medical CollegeUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 18 Apr 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Dec 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 30 Jun 2027 (estimated)
- First posted
- 24 Jul 2024 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The MRI-targeted biopsy for prostate cancer detection can be performed using one of two techniques:
- Software-based fusion of MRI and ultrasound images (software fusion) or
- Visually estimated MRI-informed (cognitive fusion) technique
To date, there is a lack of adequately powered RCTs directly comparing the cognitive vs fusion targeted biopsy. This randomized study will directly compare the detection rates of clinically significant prostate cancer following either the cognitive or the fusion targeted prostate biopsy in men with suspicious lesions noted on multi-parametric MRI (mp-MRI) of prostate.
Detailed description
For prostate cancer detection, pre-biopsy multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) followed by MRI-targeted prostate biopsy is standard of care which is supported by the guidelines from the American Urological Association and the European Association of Urology. The MRI-targeted prostate biopsy is associated with a significant increase in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) compared to the ultrasound guided biopsy. The MRI-targeted biopsy can be performed using one of two techniques including software-based fusion of MRI and ultrasound images (software fusion) or visually guided MRI-informed (cognitive fusion) technique.
With regards to the diagnostic performance in detecting csPCa, current literature does not demonstrate a clear advantage to one targeting technique over the other. A systematic review and meta-analysis (published in early 2024) by Falagario et al evaluated all of the comparative studies of the above-mentioned MRI-targeting techniques. Of the 20 studies included, six reported improved detection of csPCa with fusion technique, one reported an advantage to the cognitive technique, while thirteen reported no significant difference. Of note, the majority of the studies were retrospective, with high risk of bias, that lacked uniform definition of csPCa, and employed variable mp-MRI technique (1.5T vs 3T) and scoring system (Likert vs PIRADS). There were only three small, prospective, randomized studies (RCT) available in the systematic review of literature. One RCT reported the fusion technique to be superior while two demonstrated no difference in csPCa detection rates. There was no significant difference in the detection of csPCa between the targeting techniques, however, low quality of evidence and heterogeneity warranted well-designed prospective studies.
Other studies, as well as personal experience, point to somewhat improved cancer detection the cognitive MRI-targeting approach, although the rates may be affected by patient selection related to lesion size and location.
Thus, the investigators are conducting an RCT to direct compare the csPCa detection rates following either the cognitive or the fusion targeted prostate biopsy in men with suspicious lesions noted on mp-MRI of prostate. The investigators hypothesize that the diagnostic accuracy MRI-targeted prostate biopsy using cognitive fusion technique is either similar to or not significantly inferior to the software fusion technique.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Software fusion biopsy | Active comparator | Procedure: Software fusion prostate biopsySoftware fusion biopsy: Biopsy of the MRI-detected lesion using an image fusion platform such as UroNav or similar. |
| Cognitive fusion biopy | Experimental | Procedure: Cognitive fusion prostate biopsyCognitive fusion biopsy: Biopsy of the MRI-detected lesion using visual estimation and/or measurements to identify landmarks and lesions. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- Male only
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Men undergoing prostate biopsy (either transrectal or transperineal) for suspected prostate cancer as part of their regular medical care
- Must be eligible to undergo both prostate biopsy procedure (cognitive or fusion)
- Men undergoing their first prostate biopsy procedure or with no previous prostate biopsy within 3 years
- Pre-biopsy mp-MRI of prostate with one or more lesions classified as PIRADS 3-5
- Largest dimension of any lesion on mp-MRI to be ≤ 2 cm
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- mp-MRI detected lesions that are > 2 cm
- History of prostate biopsy within 3 years
- Previous diagnosis of prostate cancer
- Contraindications to prostate biopsy (eg, fever, evidence of genito-urinary infection, excessive co-morbidities as per treating physician)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Software fusion prostate biopsySoftware fusion biopsy: Each participant in this study arm will first undergo biopsy of the MRI-detected lesion using an image fusion platform such as UroNav or similar. Three biopsy cores will be taken per lesion, with a maximum of three lesions being sampled per participant. Then systematic samples will be taken from the remainder of the prostate as per standard protocol (10-12 cores). | Procedure or surgery | Software fusion biopsy |
| Cognitive fusion prostate biopsyAlso: Visual estimation fusion prostate biopsyCognitive fusion biopsy: Each participant in this study arm will first undergo biopsy of the MRI-detected lesion using visual estimation and/or measurements of lesion. Three biopsy cores will be taken per lesion, with a maximum of three lesions being sampled per participant. Then systematic samples will be taken from the remainder of the prostate as per standard protocol (10-12 cores). | Procedure or surgery | Cognitive fusion biopy |
Primary outcome
Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer
Time frame: 1 year
Compare the overall detection of clinically significant prostate cancer following fusion vs cognitive MRI-targeted biopsy
6 secondary outcomes
Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer in the targeted cores, systematic biopsy cores, and combined
Time frame: 1 year
Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer based on lesion size (< 0.5 cm; 0.5 cm to 1 cm; > 1.1 cm etc)
Time frame: 1 year
Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer at various lesion location (anterior, posterior, apex, base)
Time frame: 1 year
Detection rate of overall prostate cancer of any grade
Time frame: 1 year
Detection rate of clinically insignificant (low grade) prostate cancer
Time frame: 1 year
Detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer based on PSA density (PSA level / prostate volume)
Time frame: 1 year
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 3 Oct 2025.
- Background: PubMed 29552975Kasivisvanathan V, Rannikko AS, Borghi M, Panebianco V, Mynderse LA, Vaarala MH, Briganti A, Budaus L, Hellawell G, Hindley RG, Roobol MJ, Eggener S, Ghei M, Villers A, Bladou F, Villeirs GM, Virdi J, Boxler S, Robert G, Singh PB, Venderink W, Hadaschik BA, Ruffion A, Hu JC, Margolis D, Crouzet S, Klotz L, Taneja SS, Pinto P, Gill I, Allen C, Giganti F, Freeman A, Morris S, Punwani S, Williams NR, Brew-Graves C, Deeks J, Takwoingi Y, Emberton M, Moore CM; PRECISION Study Group Collaborators. MRI-Targeted or Standard Biopsy for Prostate-Cancer Diagnosis. N Engl J Med. 2018 May 10;378(19):1767-1777. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1801993. Epub 2018 Mar 18.
- Background: PubMed 25626035Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Turkbey B, George AK, Rothwax J, Shakir N, Okoro C, Raskolnikov D, Parnes HL, Linehan WM, Merino MJ, Simon RM, Choyke PL, Wood BJ, Pinto PA. Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. JAMA. 2015 Jan 27;313(4):390-7. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.17942.
- Background: PubMed 38580833Falagario UG, Pellegrino F, Fanelli A, Guzzi F, Bartoletti R, Cash H, Pavlovich C, Emberton M, Carrieri G, Giannarini G. Prostate cancer detection and complications of MRI-targeted prostate biopsy using cognitive registration, software-assisted image fusion or in-bore guidance: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2025 Jun;28(2):270-279. doi: 10.1038/s41391-024-00827-x. Epub 2024 Apr 5.
- Background: PubMed 33907293Izadpanahi MH, Elahian A, Gholipour F, Khorrami MH, Zargham M, Mohammadi Sichani M, Alizadeh F, Khorrami F. Diagnostic yield of fusion magnetic resonance-guided prostate biopsy versus cognitive-guided biopsy in biopsy-naive patients: a head-to-head randomized controlled trial. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2021 Dec;24(4):1103-1109. doi: 10.1038/s41391-021-00366-9. Epub 2021 Apr 27.
- Background: PubMed 26116294Arsov C, Rabenalt R, Blondin D, Quentin M, Hiester A, Godehardt E, Gabbert HE, Becker N, Antoch G, Albers P, Schimmoller L. Prospective randomized trial comparing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided in-bore biopsy to MRI-ultrasound fusion and transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in patients with prior negative biopsies. Eur Urol. 2015 Oct;68(4):713-20. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.008. Epub 2015 Jun 23.
- Background: PubMed 30522912Wegelin O, Exterkate L, van der Leest M, Kummer JA, Vreuls W, de Bruin PC, Bosch JLHR, Barentsz JO, Somford DM, van Melick HHE. The FUTURE Trial: A Multicenter Randomised Controlled Trial on Target Biopsy Techniques Based on Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer in Patients with Prior Negative Biopsies. Eur Urol. 2019 Apr;75(4):582-590. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.11.040. Epub 2018 Dec 3.
- Background: PubMed 38700844Mian BM, Feustel PJ, Aziz A, Kaufman RP Jr, Bernstein A, Fisher HAG. Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Detection Following Transrectal and Transperineal Biopsy: Results of the Prostate Biopsy Efficacy and Complications Randomized Clinical Trial. J Urol. 2024 Jul;212(1):21-31. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000003979. Epub 2024 May 3.
- Background: PubMed 38212178Hu JC, Assel M, Allaf ME, Ehdaie B, Vickers AJ, Cohen AJ, Ristau BT, Green DA, Han M, Rezaee ME, Pavlovich CP, Montgomery JS, Kowalczyk KJ, Ross AE, Kundu SD, Patel HD, Wang GJ, Graham JN, Shoag JE, Ghazi A, Singla N, Gorin MA, Schaeffer AJ, Schaeffer EM. Transperineal Versus Transrectal Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted and Systematic Prostate Biopsy to Prevent Infectious Complications: The PREVENT Randomized Trial. Eur Urol. 2024 Jul;86(1):61-68. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2023.12.015. Epub 2024 Jan 11.
- Background: PubMed 38403523Ploussard G, Barret E, Fiard G, Lenfant L, Malavaud B, Giannarini G, Almeras C, Aziza R, Renard-Penna R, Descotes JL, Rozet F, Beauval JB, Salin A, Roupret M. Transperineal Versus Transrectal Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsies for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: Final Results of the Randomized PERFECT trial (CCAFU-PR1). Eur Urol Oncol. 2024 Oct;7(5):1080-1087. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2024.01.019. Epub 2024 Feb 24.
- Background: PubMed 38592166Ortner G, Mavridis C, Fritz V, Schachtner J, Mamoulakis C, Nagele U, Tokas T. The Added Value of MRI-Based Targeted Biopsy in Biopsy-Naive Patients: A Propensity-Score Matched Comparison. J Clin Med. 2024 Feb 27;13(5):1355. doi: 10.3390/jcm13051355.
- American Urological Association guidelinesLink provided by the sponsor.
- European Association for Urology guidelinesLink provided by the sponsor.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Prostate Cancer
Active, not recruiting
Streamlined Geriatric and Oncological Evaluation Based On IC Technology
Breast Cancer, Comorbidities and Coexisting Conditions
Active, not recruitingObservational study
MRI Fusion Biopsy vs. Micro-Ultrasound Guided Biopsy
Prostate Cancer
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Natural History Study of Early Life Exposures in Agriculture (ELEA)
Prostate Cancer, Leukemia
Not yet recruitingPhase 1/2
STAR0602 With Nivolumab in Non Small Cell Lung Cancer and in Metastatic Castrate-Resistant Prostate Cancer, and STAR0602 Alone in Thymic Carcinoma
NSCLC, Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Recruiting
Rehabilitation and Sex Therapy to Optimize Recovery After Prostate Cancer Treatment
Prostate Cancer, Urinary Incontinence
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
Badar M Mian, MD study chair
Albany Medical College
4 sites in 2 countries: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Software fusion prostate biopsy and Cognitive fusion prostate biopsy in people with Prostate Cancer and Diagnosis, run by Albany Medical College at 4 sites in 2 countries.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 6 inclusion and 4 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 3 Oct 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 4 sites in United States, Canada. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Badar M Mian, MD (5182623296, mianb@amc.edu), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (time frame: 1 year). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT06517901, which also lists 10 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 3 Oct 2025; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 8 Nov 2026.