Literature DB >> 28418690

PI-RADS Version 2: Detection of Clinically Significant Cancer in Patients With Biopsy Gleason Score 6 Prostate Cancer.

Ji Won Seo1, Su-Jin Shin2,3, Young Taik Oh1, Dae Chul Jung1, Nam Hoon Cho2, Young Deuk Choi4, Sung Yoon Park1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to analyze the utility of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADSv2) in the detection of a clinically significant cancers in patients with prostate cancers with a biopsy Gleason score of 6.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A group of 182 consecutively registered patients with biopsy-proven prostate cancer with a Gleason score of 6 underwent MRI and radical prostatectomy. Clinically significant cancer was surgically defined as Gleason score of 7 or greater, tumor volume of 0.5 cm3 or greater, or tumor category T3 or greater. Clinical parameters (prostate-specific antigen level, greatest percentage of biopsy core, and percentage of positive cores) and the PI-RADSv2 ratings by three independent readers (experienced readers 1 and 2, inexperienced reader 3) were investigated. Cutoffs and the diagnostic performance of PI-RADSv2 for clinically significant cancer were analyzed.
RESULTS: Clinically significant cancer was found in 87.4% (159/182) of patients. The cutoff PI-RADSv2 score for clinically significant cancer was 4 for readers 1 and 2 and 5 for reader 3. The AUCs were 0.829 and 0.853 for readers 1 and 2 (p < 0.001) and 0.602 for reader 3 (p = 0.067). For reader 1, sensitivity was 89.9% (143/159); specificity, 69.6% (16/23); positive predictive value, 95.3% (143/150); negative predictive value, 50.0% (16/32); and accuracy, 87.4% (159/182). The corresponding values for reader 2 were 81.1% (129/159), 82.6% (19/23), 97.0% (129/133), 38.8% (19/49), and 81.3% (148/182). For the experienced readers, 66.7-81.3% of patients with false-negative results had clinically significant cancers with tumor volume less than 1 cm3.
CONCLUSION: PI-RADSv2 may help experienced readers identify clinically significant prostate cancers in patients with a biopsy Gleason score of 6. However, some small (< 1 cm3) clinically significant cancers can be missed when PI-RADSv2 is used.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Gleason score; MRI; PI-RADS; clinically significant cancer; prostate cancer

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28418690     DOI: 10.2214/AJR.16.16981

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol        ISSN: 0361-803X            Impact factor:   3.959


  23 in total

Review 1.  Advances in Imaging in Prostate and Bladder Cancer.

Authors:  Abhishek Srivastava; Laura M Douglass; Victoria Chernyak; Kara L Watts
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 2.  Arguments against using an abbreviated or biparametric prostate MRI protocol.

Authors:  Felipe B Franco; Fiona M Fennessy
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2020-12

3.  Multiparametric MR imaging of peripheral zone prostate cancer: effect of postbiopsy hemorrhage on cancer detection according to Gleason score and tumour volume.

Authors:  Sung Il Jung; Hae Jeong Jeon; Hee Sun Park; Mi Hye Yu; Young Jun Kim; Seung Eun Lee; So Dug Lim
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2018-03-09       Impact factor: 3.039

4.  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

5.  Prospective comparison of PI-RADS version 2 and qualitative in-house categorization system in detection of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Sonia Gaur; Stephanie Harmon; Sherif Mehralivand; Sandra Bednarova; Brian P Calio; Dordaneh Sugano; Abhinav Sidana; Maria J Merino; Peter A Pinto; Bradford J Wood; Joanna H Shih; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2018-03-31       Impact factor: 4.813

Review 6.  Performance of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT for Prostate Cancer Management at Initial Staging and Time of Biochemical Recurrence.

Authors:  Jason Bailey; Morand Piert
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2017-09-09       Impact factor: 3.092

7.  Performance and inter-observer variability of prostate MRI (PI-RADS version 2) outside high-volume centres.

Authors:  Kimia Kohestani; Jonas Wallström; Niclas Dehlfors; Ole Martin Sponga; Marianne Månsson; Andreas Josefsson; Sigrid Carlsson; Mikael Hellström; Jonas Hugosson
Journal:  Scand J Urol       Date:  2019-10-29       Impact factor: 1.612

Review 8.  Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System Version 2: Beyond Prostate Cancer Detection.

Authors:  Sung Yoon Park; Nam Hoon Cho; Dae Chul Jung; Young Taik Oh
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2018-02-22       Impact factor: 3.500

Review 9.  Prostate cancer screening-when to start and how to screen?

Authors:  Kimia Kohestani; Marina Chilov; Sigrid V Carlsson
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2018-02

10.  The prediction value of PI-RADS v2 score in high-grade Prostate Cancer: a multicenter retrospective study.

Authors:  Song Chen; Yun Yang; Tianchen Peng; Xi Yu; Haiqing Deng; Zhongqiang Guo
Journal:  Int J Med Sci       Date:  2020-05-30       Impact factor: 3.738

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.