Literature DB >> 28207981

A multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-based risk model to determine the risk of significant prostate cancer prior to biopsy.

Pim J van Leeuwen1,2, Andrew Hayen3, James E Thompson1,2,3, Daniel Moses4, Ron Shnier4, Maret Böhm2, Magdaline Abuodha2, Anne-Maree Haynes2, Francis Ting1,2,3, Jelle Barentsz5, Monique Roobol6, Justin Vass7, Krishan Rasiah7, Warick Delprado8, Phillip D Stricker1,2,3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To develop and externally validate a predictive model for detection of significant prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Development of the model was based on a prospective cohort including 393 men who underwent multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) before biopsy. External validity of the model was then examined retrospectively in 198 men from a separate institution whom underwent mpMRI followed by biopsy for abnormal prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level or digital rectal examination (DRE). A model was developed with age, PSA level, DRE, prostate volume, previous biopsy, and Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) score, as predictors for significant prostate cancer (Gleason 7 with >5% grade 4, ≥20% cores positive or ≥7 mm of cancer in any core). Probability was studied via logistic regression. Discriminatory performance was quantified by concordance statistics and internally validated with bootstrap resampling.
RESULTS: In all, 393 men had complete data and 149 (37.9%) had significant prostate cancer. While the variable model had good accuracy in predicting significant prostate cancer, area under the curve (AUC) of 0.80, the advanced model (incorporating mpMRI) had a significantly higher AUC of 0.88 (P < 0.001). The model was well calibrated in internal and external validation. Decision analysis showed that use of the advanced model in practice would improve biopsy outcome predictions. Clinical application of the model would reduce 28% of biopsies, whilst missing 2.6% significant prostate cancer.
CONCLUSIONS: Individualised risk assessment of significant prostate cancer using a predictive model that incorporates mpMRI PIRADS score and clinical data allows a considerable reduction in unnecessary biopsies and reduction of the risk of over-detection of insignificant prostate cancer at the cost of a very small increase in the number of significant cancers missed.
© 2017 The Authors BJU International © 2017 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  #PCSM; #ProstateCancer; biopsy; early detection; mpMRI; nomogram; screening

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28207981     DOI: 10.1111/bju.13814

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  32 in total

Review 1.  A multiparametric approach to improve upon existing prostate cancer screening and biopsy recommendations.

Authors:  Brian T Helfand; Carly A Conran; Jianfeng Xu; William J Catalona
Journal:  Curr Opin Urol       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 2.309

2.  A Novel Prediction Tool Based on Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Determine the Biopsy Strategy for Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in Patients with PSA Levels Less than 50 ng/ml.

Authors:  Bi-Ming He; Zhen-Kai Shi; Hu-Sheng Li; Heng-Zhi Lin; Qing-Song Yang; Jian-Ping Lu; Ying-Hao Sun; Hai-Feng Wang
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2019-12-17       Impact factor: 5.344

3.  Imaging: MRI improves cost and accuracy of prostate cancer biopsy.

Authors:  James Thompson; Phillip Stricker
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2017-11-08       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 4.  [Intelligent early prostate cancer detection in 2021: more benefit than harm].

Authors:  N Westhoff; J von Hardenberg; M-S Michel
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2021-04-21       Impact factor: 0.639

5.  The Mount Sinai Prebiopsy Risk Calculator for Predicting any Prostate Cancer and Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: Development of a Risk Predictive Tool and Validation with Advanced Neural Networking, Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging Outcome Database, and European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer Risk Calculator.

Authors:  Sneha Parekh; Parita Ratnani; Ugo Falagario; Dara Lundon; Deepshikha Kewlani; Jordan Nasri; Zach Dovey; Dimitrios Stroumbakis; Daniel Ranti; Ralph Grauer; Stanislaw Sobotka; Adriana Pedraza; Vinayak Wagaskar; Lajja Mistry; Ivan Jambor; Anna Lantz; Otto Ettala; Armando Stabile; Pekka Taimen; Hannu J Aronen; Juha Knaapila; Ileana Montoya Perez; Giorgio Gandaglia; Alberto Martini; Wolfgang Picker; Erik Haug; Luigi Cormio; Tobias Nordström; Alberto Briganti; Peter J Boström; Giuseppe Carrieri; Kenneth Haines; Michael A Gorin; Peter Wiklund; Mani Menon; Ash Tewari
Journal:  Eur Urol Open Sci       Date:  2022-05-20

6.  A prostate cancer risk calculator: Use of clinical and magnetic resonance imaging data to predict biopsy outcome in North American men.

Authors:  Adam Kinnaird; Wayne Brisbane; Lorna Kwan; Alan Priester; Ryan Chuang; Danielle E Barsa; Merdie Delfin; Anthony Sisk; Daniel Margolis; Ely Felker; Jim Hu; Leonard S Marks
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2022-03       Impact factor: 2.052

7.  How to implement magnetic resonance imaging before prostate biopsy in clinical practice: nomograms for saving biopsies.

Authors:  Ángel Borque-Fernando; Luis Mariano Esteban; Ana Celma; Sarai Roche; Jacques Planas; Lucas Regis; Inés de Torres; Maria Eugenia Semidey; Enrique Trilla; Juan Morote
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2019-09-10       Impact factor: 4.226

8.  A Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Prediction Model for Prostate Biopsy Risk Stratification.

Authors:  Sherif Mehralivand; Joanna H Shih; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Aytekin Oto; Sandra Bednarova; Jeffrey W Nix; John V Thomas; Jennifer B Gordetsky; Sonia Gaur; Stephanie A Harmon; Mohummad Minhaj Siddiqui; Maria J Merino; Howard L Parnes; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2018-05-01       Impact factor: 31.777

Review 9.  Stopping screening, when and how?

Authors:  Jonas Hugosson
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2018-02

10.  Detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer in magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography-fusion transperineal targeted biopsy for lesions with a prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 score of 3-5.

Authors:  Yuji Hakozaki; Hisashi Matsushima; Taro Murata; Tomoko Masuda; Yoko Hirai; Mai Oda; Nobuo Kawauchi; Munehiro Yokoyama; Haruki Kume
Journal:  Int J Urol       Date:  2018-11-21       Impact factor: 3.369

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.