Literature DB >> 31279677

Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System 3 Category Cases at Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Martina Maggi1, Valeria Panebianco2, Augusto Mosca3, Stefano Salciccia4, Alessandro Gentilucci4, Giovanni Di Pierro4, Gian Maria Busetto4, Giovanni Barchetti2, Riccardo Campa2, Isabella Sperduti5, Francesco Del Giudice4, Alessandro Sciarra4.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: The Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) 3 score represents a "grey zone" that need to be further investigated to solve the issue of whether to biopsy these equivocal cases or not.
OBJECTIVE: To critically analyze the current evidence on PI-RADS 3 cases. We evaluated the prevalence of PI-RADS 3 cases in the literature and detection rate of prostate cancer (PC) and clinically significant PC (csPC) at biopsy with regard to factors determining these rates. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We searched in the Medline and Cochrane Library database from the literature from January 2009 to January 2019, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A total of 28 studies were included in our analysis (total number of PI-RADS 3 cases: 1759, range 20-187). The prevalence of PI-RADS 3 cases reported in available studies was 17.3% (range 6.4-45.7%). The PC detection rate was 36% (95% confidence interval [CI] 33.8-37.4; range 10.3-55.8%), whereas that of csPC was 18.5% (95% CI 16.6-20.3; range 3.4-46.5%). Detection rates of PC and csPC were found to be similar in men who underwent a target biopsy versus those with a systematic biopsy (23.5% vs 23.9% and 11.4% vs 12.3%, respectively) and lower than the rates achieved with the combined strategy (36.9% and 19.6%, respectively). A prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) of ≥0.15ng/ml/ml may represent an index to decide whether to submit a PI-RADS 3 case to biopsy.
CONCLUSIONS: In most investigations, PI-RADS 3 cases were not evaluated separately. A PI-RADS 3 lesion remains an equivocal lesion. Evaluation of clinical predictive factors in terms of csPC risk is a main aspect of helping clinicians in the biopsy decision process. PATIENT
SUMMARY: Management of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System 3 cases remains an unmet need, and the detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPC) among this population varies widely. Performing a combined target plus a systematic biopsy yields the highest detection of csPC. A prostate-specific antigen density of lower than 0.15ng/ml/ml may select patients for a follow-up strategy.
Copyright © 2019 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Multiparametric magnetic resonance; Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System 3; Prostate cancer; Targeted biopsy

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31279677     DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2019.06.014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol Focus        ISSN: 2405-4569


  24 in total

1.  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

2.  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

3.  The Application of Biopsy Density in Transperineal Templated-Guided Biopsy Patients With PI-RADS<3.

Authors:  Hai Zhu; Xue-Fei Ding; Sheng-Ming Lu; Ning Ding; Shi-Yi Pi; Zhen Liu; Qin Xiao; Liang-Yong Zhu; Yang Luan; Yue-Xing Han; Hao-Peng Chen; Zhong Liu
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-06-08       Impact factor: 5.738

4.  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

Review 5.  Biomarkers in Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: From Current Knowledge to the Role of Metabolomics and Exosomes.

Authors:  Stefano Salciccia; Anna Laura Capriotti; Aldo Laganà; Stefano Fais; Mariantonia Logozzi; Ettore De Berardinis; Gian Maria Busetto; Giovanni Battista Di Pierro; Gian Piero Ricciuti; Francesco Del Giudice; Alessandro Sciarra; Peter R Carroll; Matthew R Cooperberg; Beatrice Sciarra; Martina Maggi
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2021-04-22       Impact factor: 5.923

6.  Prospective assessment of two-gene urinary test with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate for men undergoing primary prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Gian Maria Busetto; Francesco Del Giudice; Martina Maggi; Ferdinando De Marco; Angelo Porreca; Isabella Sperduti; Fabio Massimo Magliocca; Stefano Salciccia; Benjamin I Chung; Ettore De Berardinis; Alessandro Sciarra
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2020-07-17       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 7.  Multiparametric MRI in Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer: An Overview and a Practical Approach.

Authors:  Chau Hung Lee; Teck Wei Tan; Cher Heng Tan
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 3.500

8.  Micro-Ultrasound Imaging for Accuracy of Diagnosis in Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Minhao Zhang; Rong Wang; Yuqing Wu; Jibo Jing; Shuqiu Chen; Guangyuan Zhang; Bin Xu; Chunhui Liu; Ming Chen
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2019-12-10       Impact factor: 6.244

9.  Equivocal PI-RADS Three Lesions on Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Risk Stratification Strategies to Avoid MRI-Targeted Biopsies.

Authors:  Daniël F Osses; Christian Arsov; Lars Schimmöller; Ivo G Schoots; Geert J L H van Leenders; Irene Esposito; Sebastiaan Remmers; Peter Albers; Monique J Roobol
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2020-12-10

Review 10.  Elective procedures for prostate cancer in the time of Covid-19: a multidisciplinary team experience.

Authors:  Alessandro Sciarra; Stefano Salciccia; Martina Maggi; Francesco Del Giudice; Gian Maria Busetto; Daniela Musio; Antonio Ciardi; Carlo Catalano; Enrico Cortesi; Valeria Panebianco
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2020-05-18       Impact factor: 5.455

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.