Review of the accuracy of multi-parametric MRI prostate in detecting prostate cancer within a local reporting service

被引:7
|
作者
Tsai, Wei Che [1 ,2 ]
Field, Lee [1 ,3 ]
Stewart, Sophie [1 ,3 ]
Schultz, Martin [2 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Royal Hobart Hosp, Dept Med Imaging, 48 Liverpool St, Hobart, Tas 7000, Australia
[2] Univ Tasmania, Hobart, Tas, Australia
[3] Radiol Tasmania, Hobart, Tas, Australia
[4] Menzies Inst Med Res, Hobart, Tas, Australia
关键词
Gleason; multi-parametric MRI; PIRADS; prostate biopsy; prostate cancer; PI-RADS; VERSION; 2; GUIDELINES; BIOPSY;
D O I
10.1111/1754-9485.13029
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Introduction Multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate is crucial in detecting prostate cancer (CaP) and staging local disease. The Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) scoring system is used to assess and classify lesions and enables communication between clinicians and radiologists. This study aimed to assess the accuracy of PIRADSv2 in detecting CaP using histopathology specimens within our local service. Methods This retrospective study included 192 patients between September 2016 and May 2019. All had mpMRI prostate examinations prior to biopsy or prostatectomy. Lesions on MRI were assigned a PIRADS score and comparison made with histopathology results. Gleason score >= 7 was considered as clinically significant prostate cancer (csCaP). We calculated accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for detecting all CaP and csCaP. Results In the PIRADS 3 group, 32% were Gleason 6 and 32% were Gleason 7 lesions. In the PIRADS 4 group, 37% were Gleason 6 and 41% were Gleason >= 7. For PIRADS 5 lesions, 32% were Gleason 6 and 68% were Gleason >= 7. For all CaP, sensitivity was 84.7%, specificity 54.6%, PPV 82.3% and NPV 58.8%. For csCaP Gleason >= 7, PIRADS cut-off >= 3 had sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of 95.7%, 39.3%, 47.5% and 94.1%, respectively, and cut-off >= 4 had sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of 84.3%, 53.3%, 50.9% and 85.5%. Conclusions This study confirms PIRADS has high accuracy, sensitivity and NPV for detecting all CaP and csCaP. A high NPV may obviate need for biopsy in low-risk patients.
引用
收藏
页码:379 / 384
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study
    Ahmed, Hashim U.
    Bosaily, Ahmed El-Shater
    Brown, Louise C.
    Gabe, Rhian
    Kaplan, Richard
    Parmar, Mahesh K.
    Collaco-Moraes, Yolanda
    Ward, Katie
    Hindley, Richard G.
    Freeman, Alex
    Kirkham, Alex P.
    Oldroyd, Robert
    Parker, Chris
    Emberton, Mark
    LANCET, 2017, 389 (10071): : 815 - 822
  • [32] Computer-Aided Detection and diagnosis for prostate cancer based on mono and multi-parametric MRI: A review
    Lemaitre, Guillaume
    Marti, Robert
    Freixenet, Jordi
    Vilanova, Joan C.
    Walker, Paul M.
    Meriaudeau, Fabrice
    COMPUTERS IN BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE, 2015, 60 : 8 - 31
  • [33] The Role of Multi-Parametric MRI and Fusion Biopsy for the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer - A Systematic Review of Current Literature
    Sarkar, Debashis
    CELL & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY OF PROSTATE CANCER: UPDATES, INSIGHTS AND NEW FRONTIERS, 2018, 1095 : 111 - 123
  • [34] NEGATIVE PREDICTIVE VALUE OF A NEGATIVE MULTI-PARAMETRIC MRI OF PROSTATE
    Mahon, Joseph
    Kaufman, Ronald P., Jr.
    O'Malley, Rebecca
    Mian, Badar
    Fisher, Hugh
    Essa, Ahmed
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2016, 195 (04): : E697 - E697
  • [35] What is the Accuracy of Ga68 PSMA PET/CT in Detecting Primary Prostate Cancers Compared to Multi-Parametric MRI?
    Pan, Yen-Cheng Henry
    Kalapara, Arveen A.
    Grummet, Jeremy
    Frydenberg, Mark
    Moon, Daniel
    Hanegbi, Uri
    Landau, Adam
    O'Sullivan, Richard
    Beech, Paul
    Ryan, Andrew
    ASIA-PACIFIC JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2018, 14 : 43 - 44
  • [36] Denoising techniques for multi-parametric prostate MRI: A Comparative Study
    Latrach, Afef
    Trigui, Rania
    Sellemi, Lamia
    2020 5TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES FOR SIGNAL AND IMAGE PROCESSING (ATSIP'2020), 2020,
  • [37] Enhanced Multi-Protocol Analysis via Intelligent Supervised Embedding (EMPrAvISE): Detecting Prostate Cancer on Multi-Parametric MRI
    Viswanath, Satish
    Bloch, B. Nicolas
    Chappelow, Jonathan
    Patel, Pratik
    Rofsky, Neil
    Lenkinski, Robert
    Genega, Elisabeth
    Madabhushi, Anant
    MEDICAL IMAGING 2011: COMPUTER-AIDED DIAGNOSIS, 2011, 7963
  • [38] A statistical comparison of multi-parametric MR for prostate cancer
    Chan, IH
    Haker, SJ
    Mulkern, RV
    Zou, KH
    Zhang, J
    Maler, SE
    RADIOLOGY, 2002, 225 : 647 - 647
  • [39] Addressing image misalignments in multi-parametric prostate MRI for enhanced computer-aided diagnosis of prostate cancer
    Balint Kovacs
    Nils Netzer
    Michael Baumgartner
    Adrian Schrader
    Fabian Isensee
    Cedric Weißer
    Ivo Wolf
    Magdalena Görtz
    Paul F. Jaeger
    Victoria Schütz
    Ralf Floca
    Regula Gnirs
    Albrecht Stenzinger
    Markus Hohenfellner
    Heinz-Peter Schlemmer
    David Bonekamp
    Klaus H. Maier-Hein
    Scientific Reports, 13
  • [40] Addressing image misalignments in multi-parametric prostate MRI for enhanced computer-aided diagnosis of prostate cancer
    Kovacs, Balint
    Netzer, Nils
    Baumgartner, Michael
    Schrader, Adrian
    Isensee, Fabian
    Weisser, Cedric
    Wolf, Ivo
    Goertz, Magdalena
    Jaeger, Paul F.
    Schuetz, Victoria
    Floca, Ralf
    Gnirs, Regula
    Stenzinger, Albrecht
    Hohenfellner, Markus
    Schlemmer, Heinz-Peter
    Bonekamp, David
    Maier-Hein, Klaus H.
    SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2023, 13 (01)