Prospective Evaluation of PI-RADS Version 2.1 for Prostate Cancer Detection

被引:25
|
作者
Walker, Stephanie M. [1 ]
Mehralivand, Sherif [1 ]
Harmon, Stephanie A. [1 ,2 ]
Sanford, Thomas [1 ]
Merino, Maria J. [3 ]
Wood, Bradford J. [4 ,5 ]
Shih, Joanna H. [6 ]
Pinto, Peter A. [7 ]
Choyke, Peter L. [1 ]
Turkbey, Baris [1 ]
机构
[1] NCI, Mol Imaging Program, NIH, 10 Ctr Dr,Rm B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
[2] Frederick Natl Lab Canc Res, Clin Res Directorate, Bethesda, MD USA
[3] NCI, Lab Pathol, NIH, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
[4] NCI, Ctr Intervent Oncol, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
[5] NIH, Radiol & Imaging Sci, Clin Ctr, Bldg 10, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
[6] NCI, Biometr Res Branch, NIH, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
[7] NCI, Urol Oncol Branch, NIH, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
early detection; multiparametric MRI; PI-RADS; prostate biopsy; prostate cancer; BIOPSY; MRI; DIAGNOSIS; ACCURACY;
D O I
10.2214/AJR.19.22679
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
OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to prospectively evaluate Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data and System version 2.1 (PI-RADSv2.1), which was released in March 2019 to update version 2.0, for prostate cancer detection with transrectal ultrasound-MRI fusion biopsy and 12-core systematic biopsy. SUBJECTS AND METHODS. This prospective study included 110 consecutively registered patients who underwent multiparametric MRI evaluated with PI-RADSv2.1 criteria followed by fusion biopsy and systematic biopsy between April and September 2019. Lesion-based cancer detection rates (CDRs) were calculated for prostate cancer (Gleason grade group, > 0) and clinically significant prostate cancer (Gleason grade group, > 1). RESULTS. A total of 171 lesions (median size, 1.1 cm) in 110 patients were detected and evaluated with PI-RADSv2.1. In 16 patients no lesion was detected, and only systematic biopsy was performed. Lesions were categorized as follows: PI-RADS category 1, 1 lesion; PI-RADS category 2, 34 lesions; PI-RADS category 3, 54 lesions; PI-RADS category 4, 52 lesions; and PI-RADS category 5, 30 lesions. Histopathologic analysis revealed prostate cancer in 74 of 171 (43.3%) lesions and clinically significant prostate cancer in 57 of 171 (33.3%) lesions. The CDRs of prostate cancer for PI-RADS 2, 3, 4, and 5 lesions were 20.0%, 24.1%, 51.9%, and 90.0%. The CDRs of clinically significant prostate cancer for PI-RADS 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 lesions were 0%, 5.7%, 14.8%, 44.2%, and 80.0%. In 16 patients with normal multiparametric MRI findings ( PI-RADS 1), the CDRs were 50.0% for PCa and 18.8% for clinically significant prostate cancer. CONCLUSION. This investigation yielded CDRs assessed with prospectively assigned PI-RADSv2.1 scores. CDRs increased with higher PI-RADSv2.1 scores. These results can be compared with previously published outcomes derived with PI-RADS version 2.0.
引用
收藏
页码:1098 / 1103
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Association of prostate zonal volume with location and aggressiveness of clinically significant prostate cancer: A multiparametric MRI study according to PI-RADS version 2.1
    Yang, Ling
    Li, Mou
    Zhang, Meng-Ni
    Yao, Jin
    Song, Bin
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2022, 150
  • [42] Assessment of PI-RADS v2 for the Detection of Prostate Cancer
    Kasel-Seibert, Moritz
    Lehmann, Thomas
    Aschenbach, Rene
    Guettler, Felix V.
    Abubrig, Mohamed
    Grimm, Marc-Oliver
    Teichgraeber, Ulf
    Franiel, Tobias
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2016, 85 (04) : 726 - 731
  • [43] Tumor localization by Prostate Imaging and Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2.1 predicts prognosis of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy
    Ayumi Fujimoto
    Shinichi Sakamoto
    Takuro Horikoshi
    Xue Zhao
    Yasutaka Yamada
    Junryo Rii
    Nobuyoshi Takeuchi
    Yusuke Imamura
    Tomokazu Sazuka
    Keisuke Matsusaka
    Jun-ichiro Ikeda
    Tomohiko Ichikawa
    Scientific Reports, 13
  • [44] Tumor localization by Prostate Imaging and Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2.1 predicts prognosis of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy
    Fujimoto, Ayumi
    Sakamoto, Shinichi
    Horikoshi, Takuro
    Zhao, Xue
    Yamada, Yasutaka
    Rii, Junryo
    Takeuchi, Nobuyoshi
    Imamura, Yusuke
    Sazuka, Tomokazu
    Matsusaka, Keisuke
    Ikeda, Jun-ichiro
    Ichikawa, Tomohiko
    SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2023, 13 (01)
  • [45] Use of Radiomics to Improve Diagnostic Performance of PI-RADS v2.1 in Prostate Cancer
    Li, Mou
    Yang, Ling
    Yue, Yufeng
    Xu, Jingxu
    Huang, Chencui
    Song, Bin
    FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY, 2021, 10
  • [46] Perspective: a critical assessment of PI-RADS 2.1
    T. Ullrich
    L. Schimmöller
    Abdominal Radiology, 2020, 45 : 3961 - 3968
  • [47] 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):
  • [48] 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
  • [49] 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
  • [50] Re: Validation of PI-RADS Version 2 in Transition Zone Lesions for the Detection of Prostate Cancer Editorial Comment
    Siegel, Cary
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2019, 201 (02): : 208 - 208