Literature DB >> 29786491

Validation of PI-RADS Version 2 in Transition Zone Lesions for the Detection of Prostate Cancer.

Janice N Thai1, Harish A Narayanan1, Arvin K George1, M Minhaj Siddiqui1, Parita Shah1, Francesca V Mertan1, Maria J Merino1, Peter A Pinto1, Peter L Choyke1, Bradford J Wood1, Baris Turkbey1.   

Abstract

Purpose To determine the association between Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2 scores and prostate cancer (PCa) in a cohort of patients undergoing biopsy of transition zone (TZ) lesions. Materials and Methods A total of 634 TZ lesions in 457 patients were identified from a prospectively maintained database of consecutive patients undergoing prostate magnetic resonance imaging. Prostate lesions were retrospectively categorized with the PI-RADS version 2 system by two readers in consensus who were blinded to histopathologic findings. The proportion of cancer detection for all PCa and for clinically important PCa (Gleason score ≥3+4) for each PI-RADS version 2 category was determined. The performance of PI-RADS version 2 in cancer detection was evaluated. Results For PI-RADS category 2 lesions, the overall proportion of cancers was 4% (one of 25), without any clinically important cancer. For PI-RADS category 3, 4, and 5 lesions, the overall proportion of cancers was 22.2% (78 of 352), 39.1% (43 of 110), and 87.8% (129 of 147), respectively, and the proportion of clinically important cancers was 11.1% (39 of 352), 29.1% (32 of 110), and 77.6% (114 of 147), respectively. Higher PI-RADS version 2 scores were associated with increasing likelihood of the presence of clinically important PCa (P < .001). Differences were found in the percentage of cancers in the PI-RADS category between PI-RADS 3 and those upgraded to PI-RADS 4 based on diffusion-weighted imaging for clinically important cancers (proportion for clinically important cancers for PI-RADS 3 and PI-RADS 3+1 were 11.1% [39 of 352] and 30.8% [28 of 91], respectively; P < .001). Conclusion Higher PI-RADS version 2 scores are associated with a higher proportion of clinically important cancers in the TZ. PI-RADS category 2 lesions rarely yield PCa, and their presence does not justify targeted biopsy. © RSNA, 2018 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29786491      PMCID: PMC6071681          DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2018170425

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   29.146


  22 in total

Review 1.  The expanding role of MRI in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Gillian Murphy; Masoom Haider; Sangeet Ghai; Boraiah Sreeharsha
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 3.959

2.  Prospective Evaluation of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 for Prostate Cancer Detection.

Authors:  Francesca V Mertan; Matthew D Greer; Joanna H Shih; Arvin K George; Michael Kongnyuy; Akhil Muthigi; Maria J Merino; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2016-04-18       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer.

Authors:  M Minhaj Siddiqui; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Baris Turkbey; Arvin K George; Jason Rothwax; Nabeel Shakir; Chinonyerem Okoro; Dima Raskolnikov; Howard L Parnes; W Marston Linehan; Maria J Merino; Richard M Simon; Peter L Choyke; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2015-01-27       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion guided prostate biopsy improves cancer detection following transrectal ultrasound biopsy and correlates with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Peter A Pinto; Paul H Chung; Ardeshir R Rastinehad; Angelo A Baccala; Jochen Kruecker; Compton J Benjamin; Sheng Xu; Pingkun Yan; Samuel Kadoury; Celene Chua; Julia K Locklin; Baris Turkbey; Joanna H Shih; Stacey P Gates; Carey Buckner; Gennady Bratslavsky; W Marston Linehan; Neil D Glossop; Peter L Choyke; Bradford J Wood
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2011-08-17       Impact factor: 7.450

5.  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

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.  Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Transrectal Ultrasound Guided Fusion Biopsy to Detect Progression in Patients with Existing Lesions on Active Surveillance for Low and Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Thomas P Frye; Arvin K George; Amichai Kilchevsky; Mahir Maruf; M Minhaj Siddiqui; Michael Kongnyuy; Akhil Muthigi; Hui Han; Howard L Parnes; Maria Merino; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey; Brad Wood; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2016-09-06       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  Utility of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging suspicion levels for detecting prostate cancer.

Authors:  Soroush Rais-Bahrami; M Minhaj Siddiqui; Baris Turkbey; Lambros Stamatakis; Jennifer Logan; Anthony N Hoang; Annerleim Walton-Diaz; Srinivas Vourganti; Hong Truong; Jochen Kruecker; Maria J Merino; Bradford J Wood; Peter L Choyke; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2013-05-29       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Prostate Cancer Detection with Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 1 versus Version 2.

Authors:  Zhao-Yan Feng; Liang Wang; Xiang-De Min; Shao-Gang Wang; Guo-Ping Wang; Jie Cai
Journal:  Chin Med J (Engl)       Date:  2016-10-20       Impact factor: 2.628

10.  Standardized Reporting of Prostate MRI: Comparison of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) Version 1 and Version 2.

Authors:  Susanne Tewes; Nikolaj Mokov; Dagmar Hartung; Volker Schick; Inga Peters; Peter Schedl; Stefanie Pertschy; Frank Wacker; Götz Voshage; Katja Hueper
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-09-22       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  9 in total

1.  Simplified PI-RADS with Biparametric MRI: A Practical Approach to Improve Management of PI-RADS Version 2 Category 3 Lesions.

Authors:  Michele Scialpi; Pietro Scialpi; Maria Cristina Aisa; Eugenio Martorana; Alfredo D'Andrea
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2018-11-06       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Apical periurethral transition zone lesions: MRI and histology findings.

Authors:  Sena Tuncer; Sherif Mehralivand; Stephanie A Harmon; Thomas Sanford; G Thomas Brown; Lindsay S Rowe; Maria J Merino; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2020-10

3.  Prostate cancer: diagnostic yield of modified transrectal ultrasound-guided twelve-core combined biopsy (targeted plus systematic biopsies) using prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Chorog Song; Sung Yoon Park
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2021-06-28

4.  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

5.  Prediction of prostate cancer grade using fractal analysis of perfusion MRI: retrospective proof-of-principle study.

Authors:  Florian Michallek; Henkjan Huisman; Bernd Hamm; Sefer Elezkurtaj; Andreas Maxeiner; Marc Dewey
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2021-12-16       Impact factor: 7.034

6.  Improving the detection rate of prostate cancer in the gray zone of PI-RADS v2 and serum tPSA by using prostate-specific antigen-age volume.

Authors:  Yuan-Fei Lu; Qian Zhang; Hai-Yan Chen; Jie-Yu Chen; Yao Pan; Cong-Cong Xu; Jian-Xia Xu; Ri-Sheng Yu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 1.817

7.  Accuracy of fractal analysis and PI-RADS assessment of prostate magnetic resonance imaging for prediction of cancer grade groups: a clinical validation study.

Authors:  Andreas Maxeiner; Marc Dewey; Florian Michallek; Henkjan Huisman; Bernd Hamm; Sefer Elezkurtaj
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2021-12-18       Impact factor: 7.034

8.  New TRUS Techniques and Imaging Features of PI-RADS 4 or 5: Influence on Tumor Targeting.

Authors:  Amy Inji Chang; Byung Kwan Park
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-06-09       Impact factor: 6.244

9.  Diagnostic performance of PI-RADS version 2.1 compared to version 2.0 for detection of peripheral and transition zone prostate cancer.

Authors:  Madhuri Monique Rudolph; Alexander Daniel Jacques Baur; Hannes Cash; Matthias Haas; Samy Mahjoub; Alexander Hartenstein; Charlie Alexander Hamm; Nick Lasse Beetz; Frank Konietschke; Bernd Hamm; Patrick Asbach; Tobias Penzkofer
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-09-29       Impact factor: 4.379

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.