Prospective Evaluation of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 for Prostate Cancer Detection

被引:120
|
作者
Mertan, Francesca V. [1 ]
Greer, Matthew D. [1 ]
Shih, Joanna H. [6 ]
George, Arvin K. [2 ]
Kongnyuy, Michael [2 ]
Muthigi, Akhil [2 ]
Merino, Maria J. [3 ]
Wood, Bradford J. [4 ,5 ]
Pinto, Peter A. [2 ]
Choyke, Peter L. [1 ]
Turkbey, Baris [1 ]
机构
[1] NCI, Mol Imaging Program, 10 Ctr Dr,MSC 1182,Bldg 10,Room B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
[2] NCI, Urol Oncol Branch, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
[3] NCI, Pathol Lab, Bldg 10, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
[4] NCI, Ctr Intervent Oncol, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
[5] NIH, Ctr Clin, Radiol & Imaging Sci, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
[6] NCI, Div Canc Treatment & Diag, Biometr Res Program, NIH, Rockville, MD USA
来源
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY | 2016年 / 196卷 / 03期
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
prostate; magnetic resonance imaging; diffusion magnetic resonance imaging; PI-RADS; BIOPSY; GUIDELINES; DIAGNOSIS; FUSION;
D O I
10.1016/j.juro.2016.04.057
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
Purpose: Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADSv2) was developed to standardize the interpretation and reporting of multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging and provide guidelines for biopsy of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging findings. We prospectively evaluated the cancer detection rate at each overall PI-RADSv2 score. Materials and Methods: This prospective study included 62 consecutive patients with 116 lesions who underwent multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging at 3T with PI-RADSv2 evaluation and subsequent targeted magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound fusion guided biopsy and concurrent 12-core systematic prostate biopsy between May and September 2015. Median patient age and prostate specific antigen values were 65.5 years( range 50.3 to 76.6) and 7.10 ng/ml( range 0.47 to 863.0), respectively. Mean lesion size was 12.7 mm overall. Lesion based cancer detection rates for all tumors and for Gleason 3+4 or greater tumors at each PI-RADSv2 score were calculated. Univariate analysis was performed to assess differences in the cancer detection rate among PI-RADSv2 scores. Results: A total of 116 lesions in 62 patients were evaluated prospectively ( 0 PI-RADS 1, 18 PI-RADS 2, 19 PI-RADS 3, 47 PI-RADS 4, 32 PI-RADS 5), and the patients underwent magnetic resonance/transrectal ultrasound fusion guided biopsy and systematic biopsy. Histopathology revealed 55 of 116( 47.4%) cancers( 17 Gleason 3+3, 16 Gleason 3+4, 6 Gleason 4+3, 12 Gleason 4+4, 3 Gleason 4+5 and 1 Gleason 5+4). Based on targeted biopsy on a per lesion basis, the overall cancer detection rates of PI-RADS 2, 3, 4 and 5 scores for all tumors was 22.2%, 15.8%, 29.8% and 78.1%, respectively. The cancer detection rate of PI-RADS 2, 3, 4 and 5 scores for Gleason 3_4 or greater tumors was 5.6%, 0%, 21.3% and 75%, respectively. Differences in the cancer detection rate between overall PI-RADS 4 and 5 scores were significant( p < 0.001 for Gleason greater than 3+3 and Gleason 3+4 or greater cancers). Conclusions: A PI-RADS score of 5 had the highest prospective cancer detection rate (78%). A PI-RADS score of 4 had only a 30% cancer detection rate, which is lower than expected. Surprisingly, no or few significant cancers were detected at a PI-RADS score of 3 (16%). These early prospective data suggest that current criteria result in a high false-positive rate that lowers the cancer detection rate. Therefore, stricter criteria may be needed in the future to decrease false-positives and increase the cancer detection rate for PI-RADS scores of 3, 4 and 5.
引用
收藏
页码:690 / 696
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Multiparametric MR imaging of the Prostate Interpretation Including Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2
    Furlan, Alessandro
    Borhani, Amir A.
    Westphalen, Antonio C.
    [J]. RADIOLOGIC CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2018, 56 (02) : 223 - +
  • [22] Diagnostic Performance of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 for Detection of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Diagnostic Meta-analysis
    Woo, Sungmin
    Suh, Chong Hyun
    Kim, Sang Youn
    Cho, Jeong Yeon
    Kim, Seung Hyup
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2017, 72 (02) : 177 - 188
  • [23] Standardizing Biparametric MRI to Simplify and Improve Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System, Version 2, in Prostate Cancer Management
    Scialpi, Michele
    Martorana, Eugenio
    D'Andrea, Alfredo
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2016, 207 (04) : W74 - W75
  • [24] Standardized Reporting of Prostate MRI: Comparison of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) Version 1 and Version 2
    Tewes, Susanne
    Mokov, Nikolaj
    Hartung, Dagmar
    Schick, Volker
    Peters, Inga
    Schedl, Peter
    Pertschy, Stefanie
    Wacker, Frank
    Voshage, Goetz
    Hueper, Katja
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2016, 11 (09):
  • [25] Impact of a Structured Reporting Template on Adherence to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 and on the Diagnostic Performance of Prostate MRI for Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer
    Shaish, Hiram
    Feltus, Whitney
    Steinman, Jonathan
    Hecht, Elizabeth
    Wenske, Sven
    Ahmed, Firas
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF RADIOLOGY, 2018, 15 (05) : 749 - 754
  • [26] Pitfalls of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2: a Pictorial Essay
    Yuen, B. T. Y.
    Cho, C. C. M.
    Hung, E. H. Y.
    [J]. HONG KONG JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2018, 21 (04): : 280 - 291
  • [27] Prebiopsy Multiparametric MRI With Cancer-Negative Findings in Men With Suspected Prostate Cancer: Evaluation Using Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2
    Kim, Jun Gon
    Kim, Chan Kyo
    Kim, Jae-Hun
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2018, 211 (01) : 121 - 126
  • [28] Interreader variability in prostate MRI reporting using Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2.1
    Brembilla, Giorgio
    Dell'Oglio, Paolo
    Stabile, Armando
    Damascelli, Anna
    Brunetti, Lisa
    Ravelli, Silvia
    Cristel, Giulia
    Schiani, Elena
    Venturini, Elena
    Grippaldi, Daniele
    Mendola, Vincenzo
    Rancoita, Paola Maria Vittoria
    Esposito, Antonio
    Briganti, Alberto
    Montorsi, Francesco
    Del Maschio, Alessandro
    De Cobelli, Francesco
    [J]. EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2020, 30 (06) : 3383 - 3392
  • [29] Interreader variability in prostate MRI reporting using Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2.1
    Giorgio Brembilla
    Paolo Dell’Oglio
    Armando Stabile
    Anna Damascelli
    Lisa Brunetti
    Silvia Ravelli
    Giulia Cristel
    Elena Schiani
    Elena Venturini
    Daniele Grippaldi
    Vincenzo Mendola
    Paola Maria Vittoria Rancoita
    Antonio Esposito
    Alberto Briganti
    Francesco Montorsi
    Alessandro Del Maschio
    Francesco De Cobelli
    [J]. European Radiology, 2020, 30 : 3383 - 3392
  • [30] Reply to "Standardizing Biparametric MRI to Simplify and Improve Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System, Version 2, in Prostate Cancer Management"
    Rosenkrantz, Andrew B.
    Oto, Aytekin
    Turkbey, Baris
    Westphalen, Antonio C.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2016, 207 (04) : W76 - W76