Literature DB >> 28258355

The performance of PI-RADSv2 and quantitative apparent diffusion coefficient for predicting confirmatory prostate biopsy findings in patients considered for active surveillance of prostate cancer.

Stephanie Nougaret1,2, Nicola Robertson3, Jennifer Golia Pernicka3, Nicolas Molinari4, Andreas M Hötker3, Behfar Ehdaie5, Evis Sala3, Hedvig Hricak3, Hebert Alberto Vargas3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess the performance of the updated Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADSv2) and the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) for predicting confirmatory biopsy results in patients considered for active surveillance of prostate cancer (PCA).
METHODS: IRB-approved, retrospective study of 371 consecutive men with clinically low-risk PCA (initial biopsy Gleason score ≤6, prostate-specific antigen <10 ng/ml, clinical stage ≤T2a) who underwent 3T-prostate MRI before confirmatory biopsy. Two independent radiologists recorded the PI-RADSv2 scores and measured the corresponding ADC values in each patient. A composite score was generated to assess the performance of combining PI-RADSv2 + ADC.
RESULTS: PCA was upgraded on confirmatory biopsy in 107/371 (29%) patients. Inter-reader agreement was substantial (PI-RADSv2: k = 0.73; 95% CI [0.66-0.80]; ADC: r = 0.74; 95% CI [0.69-0.79]). Accuracies, sensitivities, specificities, positive predicted value and negative predicted value of PI-RADSv2 were 85, 89, 83, 68, 95 and 78, 82, 76, 58, 91% for ADC. PI-RADSv2 accuracy was significantly higher than that of ADC for predicting biopsy upgrade (p = 0.014). The combined PI-RADSv2 + ADC composite score did not perform better than PI-RADSv2 alone. Obviating biopsy in patients with PI-RADSv2 score ≤3 would have missed Gleason Score upgrade in 12/232 (5%) of patients.
CONCLUSION: PI-RADSv2 was superior to ADC measurements for predicting PCA upgrading on confirmatory biopsy.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biopsy; Cancer; Confirmatory; PI-RADSv2; Prostate

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28258355      PMCID: PMC5537601          DOI: 10.1007/s00261-017-1086-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)


  34 in total

Review 1.  Prostate cancer: multiparametric MR imaging for detection, localization, and staging.

Authors:  Caroline M A Hoeks; Jelle O Barentsz; Thomas Hambrock; Derya Yakar; Diederik M Somford; Stijn W T P J Heijmink; Tom W J Scheenen; Pieter C Vos; Henkjan Huisman; Inge M van Oort; J Alfred Witjes; Arend Heerschap; Jurgen J Fütterer
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  How Often is Biopsy Necessary in Patients with Prostate Cancer on Active Surveillance?

Authors:  S M Bruinsma; L P Bokhorst; M J Roobol; C H Bangma
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2015-10-19       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  Finding a balanced strategy in prostate cancer diagnosis for case detection by prostate needle biopsy at first presentation: "all for more cores and more cores for all" or individualised sampling regimens? Which way forward?

Authors:  Anup Patel
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2007-03-16       Impact factor: 20.096

4.  Prostate Cancer: The European Society of Urogenital Radiology Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Criteria for Predicting Extraprostatic Extension by Using 3-T Multiparametric MR Imaging.

Authors:  Leonardo Kayat Bittencourt; Geert Litjens; Christina A Hulsbergen-van de Kaa; Baris Turkbey; Emerson Leandro Gasparetto; Jelle O Barentsz
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2015-04-03       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Changes in cancer volume in serial biopsies of men on active surveillance for early stage prostate cancer.

Authors:  Sima P Porten; Jared M Whitson; Janet E Cowan; Nannette Perez; Katsuto Shinohara; Peter R Carroll
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2011-09-25       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 6.  The role of MRI in active surveillance for men with localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Pedro Recabal; Behfar Ehdaie
Journal:  Curr Opin Urol       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 2.309

7.  Magnetic resonance imaging for predicting prostate biopsy findings in patients considered for active surveillance of clinically low risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Hebert Alberto Vargas; Oguz Akin; Asim Afaq; Debra Goldman; Junting Zheng; Chaya S Moskowitz; Amita Shukla-Dave; James Eastham; Peter Scardino; Hedvig Hricak
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-09-25       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  The value of endorectal MR imaging to predict positive biopsies in clinically intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients.

Authors:  J C Vilanova; J Comet; A Capdevila; J Barceló; J L Dolz; M Huguet; C Barceló; J Aldomà; E Delgado
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 9.  Active surveillance for prostate cancer: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Marc A Dall'Era; Peter C Albertsen; Christopher Bangma; Peter R Carroll; H Ballentine Carter; Matthew R Cooperberg; Stephen J Freedland; Laurence H Klotz; Christopher Parker; Mark S Soloway
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2012-06-07       Impact factor: 20.096

10.  Confirmatory biopsy for the assessment of prostate cancer in men considering active surveillance: reference centre experience.

Authors:  Cecilia Bosco; Gabriele Cozzi; Janette Kinsella; Roberto Bianchi; Peter Acher; Benjamin Challacombe; Rick Popert; Christian Brown; Gincy George; Mieke Van Hemelrijck; Declan Cahill
Journal:  Ecancermedicalscience       Date:  2016-04-14
View more
  8 in total

1.  Advanced ultrasound in the diagnosis of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Jean-Michel Correas; Ethan J Halpern; Richard G Barr; Sangeet Ghai; Jochen Walz; Sylvain Bodard; Charles Dariane; Jean de la Rosette
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2020-04-18       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 2.  Application of Multiple Ultrasonic Techniques in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Yushan Liu; Shi Zeng; Ran Xu
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-06-27       Impact factor: 5.738

Review 3.  Magnetic resonance imaging in active surveillance-a modern approach.

Authors:  Francesco Giganti; Caroline M Moore
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2018-02

4.  Reduction of MRI-targeted biopsies in men with low-risk prostate cancer on active surveillance by stratifying to PI-RADS and PSA-density, with different thresholds for significant disease.

Authors:  Ivo G Schoots; Daniel F Osses; Frank-Jan H Drost; Jan F M Verbeek; Sebastiaan Remmers; Geert J L H van Leenders; Chris H Bangma; Monique J Roobol
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2018-02

Review 5.  Prostate Cancer Imaging and Biomarkers Guiding Safe Selection of Active Surveillance.

Authors:  Zachary A Glaser; Jennifer B Gordetsky; Kristin K Porter; Sooryanarayana Varambally; Soroush Rais-Bahrami
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2017-10-30       Impact factor: 6.244

6.  Calculation of Apparent Diffusion Coefficients in Prostate Cancer Using Deep Learning Algorithms: A Pilot Study.

Authors:  Lei Hu; Da Wei Zhou; Cai Xia Fu; Thomas Benkert; Yun Feng Xiao; Li Ming Wei; Jun Gong Zhao
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-09-09       Impact factor: 6.244

Review 7.  The utility of prostate MRI within active surveillance: description of the evidence.

Authors:  Georgina Dominique; Wayne G Brisbane; Robert E Reiter
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2021-12-03       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 8.  MRI findings guiding selection of active surveillance for prostate cancer: a review of emerging evidence.

Authors:  Zachary A Glaser; Kristin K Porter; John V Thomas; Jennifer B Gordetsky; Soroush Rais-Bahrami
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2018-09
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.