Comparison of PI-RADS and LIKERT scoring systems in the diagnosis of prostate cancer and the contribution of radiologist experience

被引:0
|
作者
Topaloglu, Ali Can [1 ]
Akkaya, Hueseyin [2 ]
Kaya, Oemer [3 ]
Ipek, Goekhan [4 ]
Dilek, Okan [4 ]
Oezdemir, Selim [5 ]
Gulek, Bozkurt [4 ]
Soeker, Goekhan [4 ]
机构
[1] Sanliurfa Training & Res Hosp, Sanliurfa, Turkiye
[2] Ondokuz Mayis Univ, Samsun, Turkiye
[3] Cukurova Univ, Adana, Turkiye
[4] Univ Hlth Sci, Adana, Turkiye
[5] Osmaniye State Hosp, Osmaniye, Turkiye
来源
CUKUROVA MEDICAL JOURNAL | 2025年 / 50卷 / 01期
关键词
Prostate cancer; PI-RADS v2.1; LIKERT; Multiparametric MRI; PSA; VALIDATION; V2;
D O I
10.17826/cumj.1608411
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the concordance of these two scoring systems with histopathological data and the relationship between this concordance and radiologist experience. Materials and Methods: A total of 347 patients who underwent multiparametric prostate MRI (mpMRI) with a preliminary diagnosis of prostate cancer were retrospectively reviewed. The assessors independently scored the images according to PI-RADS v2.1. Two weeks later, they independently scored the images using the LIKERT system while blinded to their previous PI-RADS v2.1 scores. The study investigated the correlation of these scores with the pathology results and the inter-reader agreement. Results: The mean age of the patients was 65.5 +/- 7.7 years. In the kappa analysis, which evaluated the concordance of both scoring systems with the reference standard pathology, it was observed that concordance increased with radiologist experience. For the entire gland, the kappa values for readers 1, 2, 3, and 4 with PI-RADS v2.1 were found to be 0.669, 0.669, 0.711, and 0.771, respectively, and with the LIKERT system, they were 0.589, 0.669, 0.701, and 0.771, respectively. The AUC values were 0.901 (0.893-0.921) for PI-RADS and 0.895 (0.871-0.922) for LIKERT. Conclusion: The PI-RADS v2.1 and LIKERT scoring systems provided similar inter-reader agreement in evaluating mpMRI. Among less experienced radiologists, PI-RADS v2.1 demonstrated higher concordance with pathology, whereas no difference was observed between more experienced radiologists.
引用
收藏
页码:106 / 114
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [11] Clinical-imaging metrics for the diagnosis of prostate cancer in PI-RADS 3 lesions
    Kang, Zhen
    Margolis, Daniel J.
    Tian, Ye
    Li, Qiubai
    Wang, Shaogang
    Wang, Liang
    UROLOGIC ONCOLOGY-SEMINARS AND ORIGINAL INVESTIGATIONS, 2024, 42 (11) : 371e1 - 371e10
  • [12] Diffusion weighted image-guided transitional zone scoring in the detection of transitional zone prostate cancer: comparison with current PI-RADS v2.1 scoring
    Lee, Myoung Seok
    Park, Jeong Hwan
    Kim, Sang Youn
    Kim, Taek Min
    Oh, Sohee
    Moon, Min Hoan
    ABDOMINAL RADIOLOGY, 2024, : 1653 - 1661
  • [13] Clinical Utility of Prostate Health Index for Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer in Patients with PI-RADS 3 Lesions
    Lee, Chung-Un
    Lee, Sang-Min
    Chung, Jae-Hoon
    Kang, Minyong
    Sung, Hyun-Hwan
    Jeon, Hwang-Gyun
    Jeong, Byong-Chang
    Seo, Seong-Il
    Jeon, Seong-Soo
    Lee, Hyun-Moo
    Song, Wan
    CANCERS, 2022, 14 (17)
  • [14] Comparison of PI-RADS 2, ADC histogram-derived parameters, and their combination for the diagnosis of peripheral zone prostate cancer
    W. C. Lin
    A. C. Westphalen
    G. E. Silva
    S. Chodraui Filho
    R. B. Reis
    V. F. Muglia
    Abdominal Radiology, 2016, 41 : 2209 - 2217
  • [15] Comparison of PI-RADS 2, ADC histogram-derived parameters, and their combination for the diagnosis of peripheral zone prostate cancer
    Lin, W. C.
    Westphalen, A. C.
    Silva, G. E.
    Chodraui Filho, S.
    Reis, R. B.
    Muglia, V. F.
    ABDOMINAL RADIOLOGY, 2016, 41 (11) : 2209 - 2217
  • [16] Direct Comparison of PI-RADS Version 2 and 2.1 in Transition Zone Lesions for Detection of Prostate Cancer: Preliminary Experience
    Byun, Jieun
    Park, Kye Jin
    Kim, Mi-hyun
    Kim, Jeong Kon
    JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2020, 52 (02) : 577 - 586
  • [17] Assessment of PI-RADS v2 categories3 for diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer
    Patel, Nayana U.
    Lind, Kimberly E.
    Garg, Kavita
    Crawford, David
    Werahera, Priya N.
    Pokharel, Sajal S.
    ABDOMINAL RADIOLOGY, 2019, 44 (02) : 705 - 712
  • [18] Diagnostic Performance of PI-RADS v2, Proposed Adjusted PI-RADS v2 and Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Cancer Detection: A Preliminary Study
    Cai, Guan-Hui
    Yang, Qi-Hua
    Chen, Wen-Bo
    Liu, Qing-Yu
    Zeng, Yu-Rong
    Zeng, Yu-Jing
    CURRENT ONCOLOGY, 2021, 28 (03) : 1823 - 1834
  • [19] Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) scoring in a transperineal prostate biopsy setting
    Grey, Alistair D. R.
    Chana, Manik S.
    Popert, Rick
    Wolfe, Konrad
    Liyanage, Sidath H.
    Acher, Peter L.
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2015, 115 (05) : 728 - 735
  • [20] PI-RADS version 2.1 scoring system is superior in detecting transition zone prostate cancer: a diagnostic study
    Wang, Zhibing
    Zhao, Wenlu
    Shen, Junkang
    Jiang, Zhen
    Yang, Shuo
    Tan, Shuangxiu
    Zhang, Yueyue
    ABDOMINAL RADIOLOGY, 2020, 45 (12) : 4142 - 4149