Literature DB >> 28858541

Risk Stratification Among Men With Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 Category 3 Transition Zone Lesions: Is Biopsy Always Necessary?

Ely R Felker1, Steven S Raman1, Daniel J Margolis2, David S K Lu1, Nicholas Shaheen1, Shyam Natarajan3,4, Devi Sharma4, Jiaoti Huang5, Fred Dorey4, Leonard S Marks4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to determine the clinical and MRI characteristics of clinically significant prostate cancer (PCA) (Gleason score ≥ 3 + 4) in men with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADSv2) category 3 transition zone (TZ) lesions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 2014 to 2016, 865 men underwent prostate MRI and MRI/ultrasound (US) fusion biopsy (FB). A subset of 90 FB-naïve men with 96 PI-RADSv2 category 3 TZ lesions was identified. Patients were imaged at 3 T using a body coil. Images were assigned a PI-RADSv2 category by an experienced radiologist. Using clinical data and imaging features, we performed univariate and multivariate analyses to identify predictors of clinically significant PCA.
RESULTS: The mean patient age was 66 years, and the mean prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) was 0.13 ng/mL2. PCA was detected in 34 of 96 (35%) lesions, 14 of which (15%) harbored clinically significant PCA. In univariate analysis, DWI score, prostate volume, and PSAD were significant predictors (p < 0.05) of clinically significant PCA with a suggested significance for apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and prostate-specific antigen value (p < 0.10). On multivariate analysis, PSAD and lesion ADC were the most important covariates. The combination of both PSAD of 0.15 ng/mL2 or greater and an ADC value of less than 1000 mm2/s yielded an AUC of 0.91 for clinically significant PCA (p < 0.001). If FB had been restricted to these criteria, only 10 of 90 men would have undergone biopsy, resulting in diagnosis of clinically significant PCA in 60% with eight men (9%) misdiagnosed (false-negative).
CONCLUSION: The yield of FB in men with PI-RADSv2 category 3 TZ lesions for clinically significant PCA is 15% but significantly improves to 60% (AUC > 0.9) among men with PSAD of 0.15 ng/mL2 or greater and lesion ADC value of less than 1000 mm2/s.

Entities:  

Keywords:  MRI; Prostate Imaging and Reporting System (PI-RADS); prostate; risk stratification; transition zone

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28858541      PMCID: PMC5732583          DOI: 10.2214/AJR.17.18008

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


  20 in total

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

Authors:  Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Luke A Ginocchio; Daniel Cornfeld; Adam T Froemming; Rajan T Gupta; Baris Turkbey; Antonio C Westphalen; James S Babb; Daniel J Margolis
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2016-04-01       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Diffusion-weighted endorectal MR imaging at 3T for prostate cancer: correlation with tumor cell density and percentage Gleason pattern on whole mount pathology.

Authors:  Daniel I Glazer; Elmira Hassanzadeh; Andriy Fedorov; Olutayo I Olubiyi; Shayna S Goldberger; Tobias Penzkofer; Trevor A Flood; Paul Masry; Robert V Mulkern; Michelle S Hirsch; Clare M Tempany; Fiona M Fennessy
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2017-03

3.  Clinical application of a 3D ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy system.

Authors:  Shyam Natarajan; Leonard S Marks; Daniel J A Margolis; Jiaoti Huang; Maria Luz Macairan; Patricia Lieu; Aaron Fenster
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2011 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.498

4.  Prostate Cancer: Interobserver Agreement and Accuracy with the Revised Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System at Multiparametric MR Imaging.

Authors:  Berrend G Muller; Joanna H Shih; Sandeep Sankineni; Jamie Marko; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Arvin Koruthu George; Jean J M C H de la Rosette; Maria J Merino; Bradford J Wood; Peter Pinto; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2015-06-18       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values of the Benign Central Zone of the Prostate: Comparison With Low- and High-Grade Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Rajan T Gupta; Christopher R Kauffman; Kirema Garcia-Reyes; Mark L Palmeri; John F Madden; Thomas J Polascik; Andrew B Rosenkrantz
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 3.959

6.  Prostate cancer detection with magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion biopsy: The role of systematic and targeted biopsies.

Authors:  Christopher P Filson; Shyam Natarajan; Daniel J A Margolis; Jiaoti Huang; Patricia Lieu; Frederick J Dorey; Robert E Reiter; Leonard S Marks
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2016-01-07       Impact factor: 6.860

7.  Pathologic and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostate cancer.

Authors:  J I Epstein; P C Walsh; M Carmichael; C B Brendler
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1994-02-02       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Serial Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer: Incremental Value.

Authors:  Ely R Felker; Jason Wu; Shyam Natarajan; Daniel J Margolis; Steven S Raman; Jiaoti Huang; Fred Dorey; Leonard S Marks
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2015-12-07       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Preoperative Evaluation of Prostate Cancer Aggressiveness: Using ADC and ADC Ratio in Determining Gleason Score.

Authors:  Sungmin Woo; Sang Youn Kim; Jeong Yeon Cho; Seung Hyup Kim
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2016-04-14       Impact factor: 3.959

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
  16 in total

1.  Retrospective analysis of the development of PIRADS 3 lesions over time: when is a follow-up MRI reasonable?

Authors:  Fabian Steinkohl; Leonhard Gruber; Jasmin Bektic; Udo Nagele; Friedrich Aigner; Thomas R W Herrmann; Michael Rieger; Daniel Junker
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2017-12-14       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Utility of Restriction Spectrum Imaging Among Men Undergoing First-Time Biopsy for Suspected Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Ely R Felker; Steven S Raman; Sepideh Shakeri; Sohrab A Mirak; Amirhossein M Bajgiran; Lorna Kwan; Pooria Khoshnoodi; Fuad F ElKhoury; Daniel J A Margolis; David Karow; David S K Lu; Nate White; Leonard S Marks
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2019-04-30       Impact factor: 3.959

3.  In-bore biopsies of the prostate assisted by a remote-controlled manipulator at 1.5 T.

Authors:  Nicolas Linder; Alexander Schaudinn; Tim-Ole Petersen; Nikolaos Bailis; Patrick Stumpp; Lars-Christian Horn; Jens-Uwe Stolzenburg; Thomas Kahn; Michael Moche; Harald Busse
Journal:  MAGMA       Date:  2019-05-09       Impact factor: 2.310

4.  Multicenter analysis of clinical and MRI characteristics associated with detecting clinically significant prostate cancer in PI-RADS (v2.0) category 3 lesions.

Authors:  Bashir Al Hussein Al Awamlh; Leonard S Marks; Geoffrey A Sonn; Shyam Natarajan; Richard E Fan; Michael D Gross; Elizabeth Mauer; Samprit Banerjee; Stefanie Hectors; Sigrid Carlsson; Daniel J Margolis; Jim C Hu
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2020-04-17       Impact factor: 3.498

5.  Evaluating the performance of clinical and radiological data in predicting prostate cancer in prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2.1 category 3 lesions of the peripheral and the transition zones.

Authors:  Caterina Gaudiano; Lorenzo Bianchi; Beniamino Corcioni; Francesca Giunchi; Riccardo Schiavina; Federica Ciccarese; Lorenzo Braccischi; Arianna Rustici; Michelangelo Fiorentino; Eugenio Brunocilla; Rita Golfieri
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2021-11-25       Impact factor: 2.370

6.  Quantitative Analysis of Diffusion Weighted Imaging May Improve Risk Stratification of Prostatic Transition Zone Lesions.

Authors:  Hannes Engel; Benedict Oerther; Marco Reisert; Elias Kellner; August Sigle; Christian Gratzke; Peter Bronsert; Tobias Krauss; Fabian Bamberg; Matthias Benndorf
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2022 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.406

7.  When to biopsy Prostate Imaging and Data Reporting System version 2 (PI-RADSv2) assessment category 3 lesions? Use of clinical and imaging variables to predict cancer diagnosis at targeted biopsy.

Authors:  Christopher S Lim; Jorge Abreu-Gomez; Michel-Alexandre Leblond; Ivan Carrion; Danny Vesprini; Nicola Schieda; Laurence Klotz
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2021-04       Impact factor: 1.862

8.  Effect of observation size and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value in PI-RADS v2.1 assessment category 4 and 5 observations compared to adverse pathological outcomes.

Authors:  Jorge Abreu-Gomez; Daniel Walker; Tareq Alotaibi; Matthew D F McInnes; Trevor A Flood; Nicola Schieda
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2020-03-24       Impact factor: 5.315

9.  Comparison of prostate imaging reporting and data system v2.1 and 2 in transition and peripheral zones: evaluation of interreader agreement and diagnostic performance in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer.

Authors:  Yasuyo Urase; Yoshiko Ueno; Tsutomu Tamada; Keitaro Sofue; Satoru Takahashi; Nobuyuki Hinata; Kenichi Harada; Masato Fujisawa; Takamichi Murakami
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2021-07-08       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 10.  MRI in early prostate cancer detection: how to manage indeterminate or equivocal PI-RADS 3 lesions?

Authors:  Ivo G Schoots
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2018-02
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.