Comparison of PI-RADS and LIKERT scoring systems in the diagnosis of prostate cancer and the contribution of radiologist experience

被引:0
|
作者
Topaloglu, Ali Can [1 ]
Akkaya, Hueseyin [2 ]
Kaya, Oemer [3 ]
Ipek, Goekhan [4 ]
Dilek, Okan [4 ]
Oezdemir, Selim [5 ]
Gulek, Bozkurt [4 ]
Soeker, Goekhan [4 ]
机构
[1] Sanliurfa Training & Res Hosp, Sanliurfa, Turkiye
[2] Ondokuz Mayis Univ, Samsun, Turkiye
[3] Cukurova Univ, Adana, Turkiye
[4] Univ Hlth Sci, Adana, Turkiye
[5] Osmaniye State Hosp, Osmaniye, Turkiye
来源
CUKUROVA MEDICAL JOURNAL | 2025年 / 50卷 / 01期
关键词
Prostate cancer; PI-RADS v2.1; LIKERT; Multiparametric MRI; PSA; VALIDATION; V2;
D O I
10.17826/cumj.1608411
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the concordance of these two scoring systems with histopathological data and the relationship between this concordance and radiologist experience. Materials and Methods: A total of 347 patients who underwent multiparametric prostate MRI (mpMRI) with a preliminary diagnosis of prostate cancer were retrospectively reviewed. The assessors independently scored the images according to PI-RADS v2.1. Two weeks later, they independently scored the images using the LIKERT system while blinded to their previous PI-RADS v2.1 scores. The study investigated the correlation of these scores with the pathology results and the inter-reader agreement. Results: The mean age of the patients was 65.5 +/- 7.7 years. In the kappa analysis, which evaluated the concordance of both scoring systems with the reference standard pathology, it was observed that concordance increased with radiologist experience. For the entire gland, the kappa values for readers 1, 2, 3, and 4 with PI-RADS v2.1 were found to be 0.669, 0.669, 0.711, and 0.771, respectively, and with the LIKERT system, they were 0.589, 0.669, 0.701, and 0.771, respectively. The AUC values were 0.901 (0.893-0.921) for PI-RADS and 0.895 (0.871-0.922) for LIKERT. Conclusion: The PI-RADS v2.1 and LIKERT scoring systems provided similar inter-reader agreement in evaluating mpMRI. Among less experienced radiologists, PI-RADS v2.1 demonstrated higher concordance with pathology, whereas no difference was observed between more experienced radiologists.
引用
收藏
页码:106 / 114
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] 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):
  • [2] Likert vs PI-RADS v2: a comparison of two radiological scoring systems for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer
    Khoo, Christopher C.
    Eldred-Evans, David
    Peters, Max
    Tanaka, Mariana Bertoncelli
    Noureldin, Mohamed
    Miah, Saiful
    Shah, Taimur
    Connor, Martin J.
    Reddy, Deepika
    Clark, Martin
    Lakhani, Amish
    Rockall, Andrea
    Hosking-Jervis, Feargus
    Cullen, Emma
    Arya, Manit
    Hrouda, David
    Qazi, Hasan
    Winkler, Mathias
    Tam, Henry
    Ahmed, Hashim U.
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2020, 125 (01) : 49 - 55
  • [3] LIKERT VS. PI-RADS V2: A COMPARISON OFTWORADIOLOGICAL SCORING SYSTEMS FOR DETECTION OF CLINICALLY SIGNIFICANT PROSTATE CANCER
    Khoo, Christopher Charles
    Eldred-Evans, David
    Jaenicke, Johannes
    Tanaka, Mariana Bertoncelli
    Shah, Taimur Tariq
    Miah, Saiful
    Connor, Martin
    Reddy, Deepika
    Noureldin, Mohammed
    Sethi, Joanne
    Forde, Alexandra
    Bhola-Stewart, Heather
    Smith, Andrew
    Carton, James
    Lloyd, Josephine
    Mannion, Ethna
    Hosking-Jervis, Feargus
    Cullen, Emma
    Cartwright, Rufus
    Clark, Martin
    Arya, Manit
    Hrouda, David
    Winkler, Mathias
    Tam, Henry
    Ahmed, Hashim Uddin
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2019, 201 (04):
  • [4] Audit of cancer yields after prostate MRI using both the PI-RADS version 2 and Likert scoring systems
    Sokhi, H. K.
    Wilson, A.
    Pindoria, N.
    McNamara, C.
    Padhani, A. R.
    Meer, Z.
    Pope, A.
    CLINICAL RADIOLOGY, 2022, 77 (07) : 541 - 547
  • [5] Prostate cancer in PI-RADS scores 1 and 2 version 2.1: a comparison to previous PI-RADS versions
    Bogner, Katja
    Engelhard, Karl
    Wuest, Wolfgang
    Hamel, Sajad
    ABDOMINAL RADIOLOGY, 2022, 47 (06) : 2187 - 2196
  • [6] Prostate cancer in PI-RADS scores 1 and 2 version 2.1: a comparison to previous PI-RADS versions
    Katja Bogner
    Karl Engelhard
    Wolfgang Wuest
    Sajad Hamel
    Abdominal Radiology, 2022, 47 : 2187 - 2196
  • [7] Comparison of PI-RADS version 2 and PI-RADS version 2.1 for the detection of transition zone prostate cancer
    Tamada, Tsutomu
    Kido, Ayumu
    Takeuchi, Mitsuru
    Yamamoto, Akira
    Miyaji, Yoshiyuki
    Kanomata, Naoki
    Sone, Teruki
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2019, 121
  • [8] Prostate Cancer Localization Using Multiparametric MR Imaging: Comparison of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) and Likert Scales
    Rosenkrantz, Andrew B.
    Kim, Sooah
    Lim, Ruth P.
    Hindman, Nicole
    Deng, Fang-Ming
    Babb, James S.
    Taneja, Samir S.
    RADIOLOGY, 2013, 269 (02) : 481 - 491
  • [9] PI-RADS and Likert scales for structured reporting in multiparametric MR imaging of the prostate
    Desai, Shivang
    Costa, Daniel N.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2022, 95 (1131):
  • [10] PI-RADS: multiparametric MRI in prostate cancer
    Aileen O’Shea
    Mukesh Harisinghani
    Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine, 2022, 35 : 523 - 532