Table 1. Comparison of Diagnostic Performance between MRI-Targeted and Standard TRUS-Guided Biopsy in the Biopsy Naïve Patient.

Study (Year)	Study Design	MRI Interpretation	Population (Male)	Cancer Detection Rate (%)
				MRI-Targeted Biopsy		Standard Biopsy
				Overall PCa	CSC	Overall PCa	CSC
Panebianco et al.* (2015)[25]	Prospective	PI-RADS v1	1140	73	N/A	38	N/A
Tonttila et al.* (2016) [26]	Prospective	Likert scale	113	64	55	57	45
Baco et al.* (2016) [27]	Prospective	PI-RADS v1	175	51	44	48	49
Porpiglia et al. (2017) [28]	Prospective	PI-RADS v1	212	51	44	30	18
Kasivisvanathan et al. (2018) [31]	Prospective	PI-RADS v2	500	47	38	48	26
van der Leest et al.* (2019) [29]	Prospective	PI-RADS v2	626	39	25	48	23
Rouviere et al.* (2019) [32]	Prospective	Likert scale	251	64	3	52	30

^*These studies included systematic biopsies in the MRI-targeted biopsy process. CSC = clinically significant cancer, MRI = magnetic resonance imaging, N/A = not applicable, PCa = prostate cancer, PI-RADS = Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System, TRUS = transrectal ultrasonography