Literature DB >> 34032510

Avoiding Unnecessary Biopsy: MRI-based Risk Models versus a PI-RADS and PSA Density Strategy for Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer.

Dominik Deniffel1, Gerard M Healy1, Xin Dong1, Sangeet Ghai1, Emmanuel Salinas-Miranda1, Neil Fleshner1, Robert Hamilton1, Girish Kulkarni1, Ants Toi1, Theodorus van der Kwast1, Alexandre Zlotta1, Antonio Finelli1, Nathan Perlis1, Masoom A Haider1.   

Abstract

Background In validation studies, risk models for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa; Gleason score ≥3+4) combining multiparametric MRI and clinical factors have demonstrated poor calibration (over- and underprediction) and limited use in avoiding unnecessary prostate biopsies. Purpose MRI-based risk models following local recalibration were compared with a strategy that combined Prostate Imaging Data and Reporting System (PI-RADS; version 2) and prostate-specific antigen density (PSAd) to assess the potential reduction of unnecessary prostate biopsies. Materials and Methods This retrospective study included 385 patients without prostate cancer diagnosis who underwent multipara-metric MRI (PI-RADS category ≥3) and MRI-targeted biopsy between 2015 and 2019. Recalibration and selection of the best-performing MRI model (MRI-European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer [ERSPC], van Leeuwen, Radtke, and Mehralivand models) were undertaken in cohort C1 (n = 242; 2015-2017). The impact on biopsy decisions was compared with an alternative strategy (no biopsy for PI-RADS category 3 plus PSAd < 0.1 ng/mL per milliliter) in cohort C2 (n = 143; 2018-2019). Discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility were assessed by using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), calibration plots, and decision curve analysis, respectively. Results The prevalence of csPCa was 38% (93 of 242 patients) and 45% (64 of 143 patients) in cohorts C1 and C2, respectively. Decision curve analysis demonstrated the highest net benefit for the van Leeuwen and Mehralivand models in C1. Used for biopsy decisions in C2, van Leeuwen (AUC, 0.84; 95% CI: 0.77, 0.9) and Mehralivand (AUC, 0.79; 95% CI: 0.72, 0.86) enabled no net benefit at a risk threshold of 10%. Up to a risk threshold of 15%, net benefit remained inferior to the PI-RADS plus PSAd strategy, which avoided biopsy in 63 per 1000 men, without missing csPCa. Without prior recalibration in C1, three of four models (MRIERSPC, Radtke, Mehralivand) were poorly calibrated and not clinically useful in C2. Conclusion The number of unnecessary prostate biopsies in men with positive MRI may be safely reduced by using a prostate-specific antigen density-based strategy. In a risk-averse scenario, this strategy enabled better biopsy decisions compared with MRI-based risk models. ©RSNA, 2021 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 34032510     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2021204112

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  9 in total

1.  Proportion of clinically significant prostate cancer diagnosed by systematic template biopsy after negative pre-biopsy multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and predictive value of prostate-specific antigen density.

Authors:  Mohammad Haroon; Paul Sathiadoss; Rodney H Breau; Ilias Cagiannos; Trevor Flood; Luke T Lavallee; Christopher Morash; Nicola Schieda
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2022-03       Impact factor: 1.862

2.  A comprehensive prostate biopsy standardization system according to quantitative multiparametric MRI and PSA value: P.R.O.S.T score.

Authors:  Chao Liang; Yuhao Wang; Lei Ding; Meiling Bao; Gong Cheng; Pengfei Shao; Lixin Hua; Bianjiang Liu; Jie Li
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2022-07-22       Impact factor: 3.661

3.  Diagnostic value of combining PI-RADS v2.1 with PSAD in clinically significant prostate cancer.

Authors:  Xiaoting Wei; Jianmin Xu; Shuyuan Zhong; Jinsen Zou; Zhiqiang Cheng; Zhiguang Ding; Xuhui Zhou
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2022-07-05

4.  The role of PSA density in the MRI pathway for prostate cancer diagnostics.

Authors:  Hannes Cash; Martin Schostak
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2022-07-26       Impact factor: 5.455

5.  Balancing the benefits and harms of MRI-directed biopsy pathways.

Authors:  Anwar R Padhani; Masoom A Haider; Olivier Rouviere
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2022-02-01       Impact factor: 7.034

6.  The Role of PSA Density among PI-RADS v2.1 Categories to Avoid an Unnecessary Transition Zone Biopsy in Patients with PSA 4-20 ng/mL.

Authors:  Zhi-Bing Wang; Chao-Gang Wei; Yue-Yue Zhang; Peng Pan; Guang-Cheng Dai; Jian Tu; Jun-Kang Shen
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2021-10-11       Impact factor: 3.411

7.  The Diagnostic Value of PI-RADS v2.1 in Patients with a History of Transurethral Resection of the Prostate (TURP).

Authors:  Jiazhou Liu; Shihang Pan; Liang Dong; Guangyu Wu; Jiayi Wang; Yan Wang; Hongyang Qian; Baijun Dong; Jiahua Pan; Yinjie Zhu; Wei Xue
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2022-09-05       Impact factor: 3.109

8.  External validation of two mpMRI-risk calculators predicting risk of prostate cancer before biopsy.

Authors:  Maximilian Pallauf; Fabian Steinkohl; Georg Zimmermann; Maximilian Horetzky; Pawel Rajwa; Benjamin Pradere; Andrea Katharina Lindner; Renate Pichler; Thomas Kunit; Shahrokh F Shariat; Lukas Lusuardi; Martin Drerup
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2022-08-08       Impact factor: 3.661

9.  The Barcelona Predictive Model of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Juan Morote; Angel Borque-Fernando; Marina Triquell; Anna Celma; Lucas Regis; Manel Escobar; Richard Mast; Inés M de Torres; María E Semidey; José M Abascal; Carles Sola; Pol Servian; Daniel Salvador; Anna Santamaría; Jacques Planas; Luis M Esteban; Enrique Trilla
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-21       Impact factor: 6.639

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.