Effects of the lesion size on clinically significant prostate cancer detection rates in PI-RADS category 3--5 lesions

被引:0
|
作者
Ayranci, A. [1 ]
Caglar, U. [1 ]
Meric, A. [1 ]
Gelmis, M. [1 ]
Sarilar, O. [1 ]
Ozgor, F. [1 ]
机构
[1] Hosp Formac & Invest Haseki, Serv Urol, Estambul, Turkiye
来源
ACTAS UROLOGICAS ESPANOLAS | 2024年 / 48卷 / 07期
关键词
Prostate cancer; Lesion volume; PI-RADS; Screening; Fusion biopsy; PREDICT; RISK;
D O I
10.1016/j.acuro.2024.01.003
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Introduction: Prostate cancer (PCa) ranks second among prevalent cancers in men, necessitating effective screening tools such as multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) with the prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) classification. This study explores the impact of lesion volume on clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection rates in PI-RADS 3--5 lesions, aiming to contribute insights into the underexplored relationship between lesion size and csPCa detection. Materials and methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on data from 754 patients undergoing mpMRI-guided transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) prostate biopsy between January 2016 and 2023. Patients with PI-RADS 3, 4, and 5 lesions were included. Lesion size and PI-RADS categories were assessed through mpMRI, followed by MR fusion biopsy. Results: Of the patients, 33.7%, 52.3%, and 14.1% had PI-RADS 3, 4, and 5 lesions, respectively. Lesion sizes correlated significantly with csPCa detection in PI-RADS 4 and 5 categories. For PI-RADS 3 lesions, no significant differences in csPCa rates were observed based on lesion size. However, in PI-RADS 4 and 5 groups, larger lesions showed higher csPCa rates. Conclusions: This study suggests that subgroup categorizations based on lesion volume could predict clinically significant PCa with high accuracy, potentially reducing unnecessary biopsies and associated overtreatment. Future research should further explore the relationship between lesion size and csPCa, clarifying discussions regarding the inclusion of systematic biopsies in diagnostic protocols. (c) 2024 AEU. Published by Elsevier Espana, S.L.U. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:526 / 531
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Impact of PI-RADS Category 3 lesions on the diagnostic accuracy of MRI for detecting prostate cancer and the prevalence of prostate cancer within each PI-RADS category: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Wadera, Akshay
    Alabousi, Mostafa
    Pozdnyakov, Alex
    Al-Ghita, Mohammed Kashif
    Jafri, Ali
    McInnes, Matthew D. F.
    Schieda, Nicola
    van der Pol, Christian B.
    Salameh, Jean-Paul
    Samoilov, Lucy
    Gusenbauer, Kaela
    Alabousi, Abdullah
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2021, 94 (1118):
  • [32] Assessment of PI-RADS v2 categories ≥ 3 for diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer
    Nayana U. Patel
    Kimberly E. Lind
    Kavita Garg
    David Crawford
    Priya N. Werahera
    Sajal S. Pokharel
    Abdominal Radiology, 2019, 44 : 705 - 712
  • [33] A PI-RADS STRATIFIED RISK CALCULATOR FOR PREDICTION OF CLINICALLY SIGNIFICANT PROSTATE CANCER AT BIOPSY
    Andreas, Darian
    Nethala, Daniel
    Pandya, Shashank
    Alaiev, Daniel
    Samadder, Aishe
    Lee, Jeffrey
    Martinez, Mariela
    Hall, Simon
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2021, 206 : E1007 - E1007
  • [34] CLINICALLY SIGNIFICANT PROSTATE CANCER DETECTION RATE BY PI-RADS SCORE AND PSA-DENSITY: A DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS
    Feuer, Zachary
    Huang, Richard
    Deng, Fang-Ming
    Wysock, James
    Huang, William
    Taneja, Samir
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2022, 207 (05): : E993 - E994
  • [35] Comparison of Likert and PI-RADS version 2 MRI scoring systems for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer
    Zawaideh, Jeries P.
    Sala, Evis
    Pantelidou, Maria
    Shaida, Nadeem
    Koo, Brendan
    Caglic, Iztok
    Warren, Anne Y.
    Carmisciano, Luca
    Saeb-Parsy, Kasra
    Gnanapragasam, Vincent J.
    Kastner, Christof
    Barrett, Tristan
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2020, 93 (1112):
  • [36] Prebiopsy Biparametric MRI for Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Detection With PI-RADS Version 2: A Multicenter Study
    Choi, Moon Hyung
    Kim, Chan Kyo
    Lee, Young Joon
    Jung, Seung Eun
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2019, 212 (04) : 839 - 846
  • [37] PI-RADS Version 2: Detection of Clinically Significant Cancer in Patients With Biopsy Gleason Score 6 Prostate Cancer
    Seo, Ji Won
    Shin, Su-Jin
    Oh, Young Taik
    Jung, Dae Chul
    Cho, Nam Hoon
    Choi, Young Deuk
    Park, Sung Yoon
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2017, 209 (01) : W1 - W9
  • [38] Association Between Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) Score for the Index Lesion and Multifocal, Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer
    Stabile, Armando
    Dell'Oglio, Paolo
    De Cobelli, Francesco
    Esposito, Antonio
    Gandaglia, Giorgio
    Fossati, Nicola
    Brembilla, Giorgio
    Cristel, Giulia
    Cardone, Gianpiero
    Deho, Federico
    Losa, Andrea
    Suardi, Nazareno
    Gaboardi, Franco
    Del Maschio, Alessandro
    Montorsi, Francesco
    Briganti, Alberto
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY ONCOLOGY, 2018, 1 (01): : 29 - 36
  • [39] Is PI-RADS 3/total lesion ratio associated with clinically-significant prostate cancer in patients with equivocal-risk lesions on multi-parametric MRI?
    Ghabili, Kamyar
    Swallow, Matthew
    Suarez-Sarmiento, Alfredo
    Syed, Jamil
    Leapman, Michael
    Weinreb, Jeffrey
    Sprenkle, Preston
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2018, 36 (06)
  • [40] Editorial for "MRI Radiomics-Based Machine Learning for Predict of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in Equivocal PI-RADS 3 Lesions"
    Nketiah, Gabriel A.
    Bathen, Tone F.
    JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2021, 54 (05) : 1474 - 1475