Literature DB >> 27035179

Interobserver Reproducibility of the PI-RADS Version 2 Lexicon: A Multicenter Study of Six Experienced Prostate Radiologists.

Andrew B Rosenkrantz1, Luke A Ginocchio1, Daniel Cornfeld1, Adam T Froemming1, Rajan T Gupta1, Baris Turkbey1, Antonio C Westphalen1, James S Babb1, Daniel J Margolis1.   

Abstract

Purpose To determine the interobserver reproducibility of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2 lexicon. Materials and Methods This retrospective HIPAA-compliant study was institutional review board-approved. Six radiologists from six separate institutions, all experienced in prostate magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, assessed prostate MR imaging examinations performed at a single center by using the PI-RADS lexicon. Readers were provided screen captures that denoted the location of one specific lesion per case. Analysis entailed two sessions (40 and 80 examinations per session) and an intersession training period for individualized feedback and group discussion. Percent agreement (fraction of pairwise reader combinations with concordant readings) was compared between sessions. κ coefficients were computed. Results No substantial difference in interobserver agreement was observed between sessions, and the sessions were subsequently pooled. Agreement for PI-RADS score of 4 or greater was 0.593 in peripheral zone (PZ) and 0.509 in transition zone (TZ). In PZ, reproducibility was moderate to substantial for features related to diffusion-weighted imaging (κ = 0.535-0.619); fair to moderate for features related to dynamic contrast material-enhanced (DCE) imaging (κ = 0.266-0.439); and fair for definite extraprostatic extension on T2-weighted images (κ = 0.289). In TZ, reproducibility for features related to lesion texture and margins on T2-weighted images ranged from 0.136 (moderately hypointense) to 0.529 (encapsulation). Among 63 lesions that underwent targeted biopsy, classification as PI-RADS score of 4 or greater by a majority of readers yielded tumor with a Gleason score of 3+4 or greater in 45.9% (17 of 37), without missing any tumor with a Gleason score of 3+4 or greater. Conclusion Experienced radiologists achieved moderate reproducibility for PI-RADS version 2, and neither required nor benefitted from a training session. Agreement tended to be better in PZ than TZ, although was weak for DCE in PZ. The findings may help guide future PI-RADS lexicon updates. (©) RSNA, 2016 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27035179      PMCID: PMC5006735          DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2016152542

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  36 in total

1.  Characterization of thyroid nodules using the proposed thyroid imaging reporting and data system (TI-RADS).

Authors:  Shih-Ping Cheng; Jie-Jen Lee; Jiun-Lu Lin; Shih-Ming Chuang; Ming-Nan Chien; Chien-Liang Liu
Journal:  Head Neck       Date:  2012-04-19       Impact factor: 3.147

2.  Length of capsular contact for diagnosing extraprostatic extension on prostate MRI: Assessment at an optimal threshold.

Authors:  Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Alampady K Shanbhogue; Annie Wang; Max Xiangtian Kong; James S Babb; Samir S Taneja
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2015-09-23       Impact factor: 4.813

3.  BI-RADS lexicon for US and mammography: interobserver variability and positive predictive value.

Authors:  Elizabeth Lazarus; Martha B Mainiero; Barbara Schepps; Susan L Koelliker; Linda S Livingston
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2006-03-28       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Inter-reader agreement of the ESUR score for prostate MRI using in-bore MRI-guided biopsies as the reference standard.

Authors:  L Schimmöller; M Quentin; C Arsov; R S Lanzman; A Hiester; R Rabenalt; G Antoch; P Albers; D Blondin
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-06-12       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Behavior and interpretation of the kappa statistic: resolution of the two paradoxes.

Authors:  C A Lantz; E Nebenzahl
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 6.437

6.  Consensus criteria for the use of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis and staging of prostate cancer: not ready for routine use.

Authors:  Axel Heidenreich
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2011-01-18       Impact factor: 20.096

7.  Multiattribute probabilistic prostate elastic registration (MAPPER): application to fusion of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Rachel Sparks; B Nicolas Bloch; Ernest Feleppa; Dean Barratt; Daniel Moses; Lee Ponsky; Anant Madabhushi
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 8.  Using multiparametric MRI to 'personalize' biopsy for men.

Authors:  Neil Mendhiratta; Xiaosong Meng; Samir S Taneja
Journal:  Curr Opin Urol       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 2.309

Review 9.  PI-RADS version 2: what you need to know.

Authors:  T Barrett; B Turkbey; P L Choyke
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  2015-07-29       Impact factor: 2.350

10.  ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012.

Authors:  Jelle O Barentsz; Jonathan Richenberg; Richard Clements; Peter Choyke; Sadhna Verma; Geert Villeirs; Olivier Rouviere; Vibeke Logager; Jurgen J Fütterer
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-02-10       Impact factor: 5.315

View more
  125 in total

1.  Inter- and Intrareader Agreement of NI-RADS in the Interpretation of Surveillance Contrast-Enhanced CT after Treatment of Oral Cavity and Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

Authors:  F H J Elsholtz; S-R Ro; S Shnayien; C Erxleben; H-C Bauknecht; J Lenk; L-A Schaafs; B Hamm; S M Niehues
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2020-04-23       Impact factor: 3.825

2.  Can Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values Assist PI-RADS Version 2 DWI Scoring? A Correlation Study Using the PI-RADSv2 and International Society of Urological Pathology Systems.

Authors:  Sonia Gaur; Stephanie Harmon; Lauren Rosenblum; Matthew D Greer; Sherif Mehralivand; Mehmet Coskun; Maria J Merino; Bradford J Wood; Joanna H Shih; Peter A Pinto; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2018-05-07       Impact factor: 3.959

3.  Intra- and interreader reproducibility of PI-RADSv2: A multireader study.

Authors:  Clayton P Smith; Stephanie A Harmon; Tristan Barrett; Leonardo K Bittencourt; Yan Mee Law; Haytham Shebel; Julie Y An; Marcin Czarniecki; Sherif Mehralivand; Mehmet Coskun; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto; Joanna H Shih; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2018-12-21       Impact factor: 4.813

4.  Diagnostic Performance and Interreader Agreement of a Standardized MR Imaging Approach in the Prediction of Small Renal Mass Histology.

Authors:  Fernando U Kay; Noah E Canvasser; Yin Xi; Daniella F Pinho; Daniel N Costa; Alberto Diaz de Leon; Gaurav Khatri; John R Leyendecker; Takeshi Yokoo; Aaron H Lay; Nicholas Kavoussi; Ersin Koseoglu; Jeffrey A Cadeddu; Ivan Pedrosa
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2018-02-01       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Prostate magnetic resonance imaging findings in patients treated for testosterone deficiency while on active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Takeshi Hashimoto; Krishnan Rahul; Toshikazu Takeda; Nicole Benfante; John P Mulhall; Hedvig Hricak; James A Eastham; Hebert Alberto Vargas
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2016-09-22       Impact factor: 3.498

6.  3T multiparametric MR imaging, PIRADSv2-based detection of index prostate cancer lesions in the transition zone and the peripheral zone using whole mount histopathology as reference standard.

Authors:  Nazanin Hajarol Asvadi; Sohrab Afshari Mirak; Amirhossein Mohammadian Bajgiran; Pooria Khoshnoodi; Pornphan Wibulpolprasert; Daniel Margolis; Anthony Sisk; Robert E Reiter; Steven S Raman
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2018-11

7.  Evaluating the size criterion for PI-RADSv2 category 5 upgrade: is 15 mm the best threshold?

Authors:  Julie Y An; Stephanie A Harmon; Sherif Mehralivand; Marcin Czarniecki; Clayton P Smith; Julie A Peretti; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto; Peter L Choyke; Joanna H Shih; Baris Turkbey
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2018-12

Review 8.  VPAC1-targeted PET/CT scan: improved molecular imaging for the diagnosis of prostate cancer using a novel cell surface antigen.

Authors:  Hong Truong; Leonard G Gomella; Mathew L Thakur; Edouard J Trabulsi
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-03-14       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 9.  Prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 (PI-RADS v2): a pictorial review.

Authors:  Elmira Hassanzadeh; Daniel I Glazer; Ruth M Dunne; Fiona M Fennessy; Mukesh G Harisinghani; Clare M Tempany
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2017-01

10.  Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System Steering Committee: PI-RADS v2 Status Update and Future Directions.

Authors:  Anwar R Padhani; Jeffrey Weinreb; Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Geert Villeirs; Baris Turkbey; Jelle Barentsz
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2018-06-13       Impact factor: 20.096

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.