N L Hansen1, B C Koo2, A Y Warren3, C Kastner4, T Barrett5. 1. CamPARI Clinic, Addenbrooke's Hospital & University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, DE, Germany. 2. CamPARI Clinic, Addenbrooke's Hospital & University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital and University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. 3. CamPARI Clinic, Addenbrooke's Hospital & University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Department of Pathology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK. 4. CamPARI Clinic, Addenbrooke's Hospital & University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Department of Urology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK. 5. CamPARI Clinic, Addenbrooke's Hospital & University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital and University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. Electronic address: tristan.barrett@addenbrookes.nhs.uk.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate sub-differentiation of PI-RADS-3 prostate lesions using pre-defined T2- and diffusion-weighted (DWI) MRI criteria, to aid the biopsy decision process. METHODS: 143 patients with PIRADS-3 index lesions on MRI underwent targeted transperineal-MR/US fusion biopsy. Radiologists with 2 and 7-years experience performed blinded retrospective second-reads using set criteria and assigned biopsy recommendations. Inter-reader agreement, Gleason score (GS), positive (PPV) predictive values (±95% confidence intervals) were calculated and compared by Fisher's exact test with Bonferroni-Hom correction. RESULTS: 43% (61/143) patients had GS 6-10 and 21% (30/143) GS≥3+4 cancer. For peripheral zone lesions, significant differences in any cancer detection were found for shape (0.26±0.13 geographical vs. 0.69±0.23 rounded; p=0.0055) and ADC (mild 0.21±0.12 vs marked 0.81±0.19; p=0.0001). For transition zone, significantly increased cancer detection was shown for location (anterior 0.63±0.15 vs. mid/posterior 0.31±0.14; p=0.0048), border (pseudo-capsule 0.32±0.14 vs. ill-defined 0.61±0.15; p=0.0092), and ADC (mild 0.35±0.12 vs marked restriction 0.68±0.17; p=0.0057). Biopsy recommendations had 62% inter-reader agreement (89/143). Experienced reader PPVs were significantly higher for any cancer with "biopsy-recommended" 0.61±0.11 vs. "no biopsy" 0.21±0.10 (p=0.0001), and for GS 7-10 cancers: 0.32±0.10 vs. 0.08±0.07, respectively (p=0.0003). CONCLUSION: Identification of certain objective imaging criteria as well as a subjective biopsy recommendation from an experienced radiologist can help to increase the predictive value of equivocal prostate lesions and inform the decision making process of whether or not to biopsy.
PURPOSE: To evaluate sub-differentiation of PI-RADS-3 prostate lesions using pre-defined T2- and diffusion-weighted (DWI) MRI criteria, to aid the biopsy decision process. METHODS: 143 patients with PIRADS-3 index lesions on MRI underwent targeted transperineal-MR/US fusion biopsy. Radiologists with 2 and 7-years experience performed blinded retrospective second-reads using set criteria and assigned biopsy recommendations. Inter-reader agreement, Gleason score (GS), positive (PPV) predictive values (±95% confidence intervals) were calculated and compared by Fisher's exact test with Bonferroni-Hom correction. RESULTS: 43% (61/143) patients had GS 6-10 and 21% (30/143) GS≥3+4 cancer. For peripheral zone lesions, significant differences in any cancer detection were found for shape (0.26±0.13 geographical vs. 0.69±0.23 rounded; p=0.0055) and ADC (mild 0.21±0.12 vs marked 0.81±0.19; p=0.0001). For transition zone, significantly increased cancer detection was shown for location (anterior 0.63±0.15 vs. mid/posterior 0.31±0.14; p=0.0048), border (pseudo-capsule 0.32±0.14 vs. ill-defined 0.61±0.15; p=0.0092), and ADC (mild 0.35±0.12 vs marked restriction 0.68±0.17; p=0.0057). Biopsy recommendations had 62% inter-reader agreement (89/143). Experienced reader PPVs were significantly higher for any cancer with "biopsy-recommended" 0.61±0.11 vs. "no biopsy" 0.21±0.10 (p=0.0001), and for GS 7-10 cancers: 0.32±0.10 vs. 0.08±0.07, respectively (p=0.0003). CONCLUSION: Identification of certain objective imaging criteria as well as a subjective biopsy recommendation from an experienced radiologist can help to increase the predictive value of equivocal prostate lesions and inform the decision making process of whether or not to biopsy.
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
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