Hannes Engel1, Benedict Oerther2, Marco Reisert3, Elias Kellner3, August Sigle4, Christian Gratzke4, Peter Bronsert5,6, Tobias Krauss2, Fabian Bamberg2, Matthias Benndorf2. 1. Department of Radiology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany; hannes.engel@uniklinik-freiburg.de. 2. Department of Radiology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. 3. Department of Radiology, Medical Physics, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. 4. Department of Urology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. 5. Institute for Surgical Pathology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. 6. Core Facility for Histopathology and Digital Pathology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIM: To investigate whether quantitative analysis of diffusion weighted images allows for improved risk stratification of transition zone lesions in prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) evaluated according to PI-RADSv2.1 [Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System, target variable: clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa)]. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients with transition zone lesions in 3T prostate MRI were enrolled in the study. All lesions on MRI were histopathologically verified by transperineal MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy. Two blinded radiologists re-evaluated all lesions according to PI-RADSv2.1. A consensus reading was performed after reading of all cases. Additionally, mean apparent diffusion coefficient values (mADC) were derived from blinded lesion segmentation. ROC analysis was performed for PI-RADS categories and PI-RADS categories with separate subcategories and diffusion coefficient values (ADC). Data were examined for optimal mADC cut-off values that improve stratification of csPCa and benign lesions. RESULTS: Among 85 patients (mean age=66.2 years), 98 transition zone lesions were detected. Biopsy confirmed csPCa in 24/98 cases. Area under the curve (AUC) was 0.89/0.90 for reader 1, 0.92/0.91 for reader 2 and 0.92/0.91 for the consensus reading (5 category analysis/analysis with subcategories separately). Inter-reader agreement was substantial, with lower PI-RADS categories assigned by the more experienced reader (p<0.05). AUC for mADC alone was 0.81. When a cut-off threshold of 950 μm2/s mADC is used to downgrade PI-RADS 3 lesions to PI-RADS 2, biopsy could be avoided in all benign PI-RADS 3 cases. CONCLUSION: Quantitative analysis of diffusion weighted images may help avoid unnecessary biopsies of transition zone PI-RADS 3 lesions.
BACKGROUND/AIM: To investigate whether quantitative analysis of diffusion weighted images allows for improved risk stratification of transition zone lesions in prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) evaluated according to PI-RADSv2.1 [Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System, target variable: clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa)]. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients with transition zone lesions in 3T prostate MRI were enrolled in the study. All lesions on MRI were histopathologically verified by transperineal MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy. Two blinded radiologists re-evaluated all lesions according to PI-RADSv2.1. A consensus reading was performed after reading of all cases. Additionally, mean apparent diffusion coefficient values (mADC) were derived from blinded lesion segmentation. ROC analysis was performed for PI-RADS categories and PI-RADS categories with separate subcategories and diffusion coefficient values (ADC). Data were examined for optimal mADC cut-off values that improve stratification of csPCa and benign lesions. RESULTS: Among 85 patients (mean age=66.2 years), 98 transition zone lesions were detected. Biopsy confirmed csPCa in 24/98 cases. Area under the curve (AUC) was 0.89/0.90 for reader 1, 0.92/0.91 for reader 2 and 0.92/0.91 for the consensus reading (5 category analysis/analysis with subcategories separately). Inter-reader agreement was substantial, with lower PI-RADS categories assigned by the more experienced reader (p<0.05). AUC for mADC alone was 0.81. When a cut-off threshold of 950 μm2/s mADC is used to downgrade PI-RADS 3 lesions to PI-RADS 2, biopsy could be avoided in all benign PI-RADS 3 cases. CONCLUSION: Quantitative analysis of diffusion weighted images may help avoid unnecessary biopsies of transition zone PI-RADS 3 lesions.
Authors: Ali Sami Kıvrak; Yahya Paksoy; Cengiz Erol; Mustafa Koplay; Seda Özbek; Fatih Kara Journal: Diagn Interv Radiol Date: 2013 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 2.630
Authors: H Ballentine Carter; Peter C Albertsen; Michael J Barry; Ruth Etzioni; Stephen J Freedland; Kirsten Lynn Greene; Lars Holmberg; Philip Kantoff; Badrinath R Konety; Mohammad Hassan Murad; David F Penson; Anthony L Zietman Journal: J Urol Date: 2013-05-06 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Rajesh Bhayana; Aileen O'Shea; Mark A Anderson; William R Bradley; Ravi V Gottumukkala; Amirkasra Mojtahed; Theodore T Pierce; Mukesh Harisinghani Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2020-09-09 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Mark Wu; Satheesh Krishna; Rebecca E Thornhill; Trevor A Flood; Matthew D F McInnes; Nicola Schieda Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2019-01-30 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Nicolas Mottet; Joaquim Bellmunt; Michel Bolla; Erik Briers; Marcus G Cumberbatch; Maria De Santis; Nicola Fossati; Tobias Gross; Ann M Henry; Steven Joniau; Thomas B Lam; Malcolm D Mason; Vsevolod B Matveev; Paul C Moldovan; Roderick C N van den Bergh; Thomas Van den Broeck; Henk G van der Poel; Theo H van der Kwast; Olivier Rouvière; Ivo G Schoots; Thomas Wiegel; Philip Cornford Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2016-08-25 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Ely R Felker; Steven S Raman; Daniel J Margolis; David S K Lu; Nicholas Shaheen; Shyam Natarajan; Devi Sharma; Jiaoti Huang; Fred Dorey; Leonard S Marks Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2017-08-31 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Piotr Woźnicki; Niklas Westhoff; Thomas Huber; Philipp Riffel; Matthias F Froelich; Eva Gresser; Jost von Hardenberg; Alexander Mühlberg; Maurice Stephan Michel; Stefan O Schoenberg; Dominik Nörenberg Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2020-07-02 Impact factor: 6.639