Comparison of different thresholds of PSA density for risk stratification of PI-RADSv2.1 categories on prostate MRI

被引:15
作者
Girometti, Rossano [1 ]
Giannarini, Gianluca [2 ]
Panebianco, Valeria [3 ]
Maresca, Silvio [1 ]
Cereser, Lorenzo [1 ]
De Martino, Maria [4 ]
Pizzolitto, Stefano [5 ]
Pecoraro, Martina [3 ]
Ficarra, Vincenzo [6 ]
Zuiani, Chiara [1 ]
Valotto, Claudio [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Udine, Santa Maria DellaMisericordia Univ Hosp, Inst Radiol, Dept Med, Udine, Italy
[2] Santa Maria della Misericordia Univ Hosp, Urol Unit, Udine, Italy
[3] Sapienza Univ Rome, Dept Radiol Sci Oncol & Pathol, Rome, Italy
[4] Univ Udine, Dept Med, Div Med Stat, Udine, Italy
[5] Santa Maria della Misericordia Univ Hosp, Pathol Unit, Udine, Italy
[6] Univ Messina, Dept Human & Paediat Pathol Gaetano Barresi, Urol Sect, Messina, Italy
关键词
DUTASTERIDE; PERFORMANCE; CANCER; MEN;
D O I
10.1259/bjr.20210886
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Objectives: To compare the effect of different PSA density (PSAD) thresholds on the accuracy for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) of the Prostate Imaging Reporting And Data System v.2.1 (PI-RADSv2.1). Methods: We retrospectively included 123 biopsy-naive men who underwent multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and transperineal mpMRI-targeted and systematic prostate biopsy between April 2019 and October 2020. mpMRI, obtained on a 3.0T magnet with a PI-RADSv2.1-compliant protocol, was read by two radiologists (>1500/>500 mpMRI examinations). csPCa was defined as International Society of Urogenital Pathology grading group >= 2. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to calculate per-index lesion sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) of PI-RADSv.2.1 categories after adjusting for PSAD >= 0.10,>= 0.15, and >= 0.20 ng/mL ml(-1). Per-adjusted category cancer detection rate (CDR) was calculated, and decision analysis performed to compare PSAD-adjusted PI-RADSv.2.1 categories as a biopsy trigger. Results: csPCa prevalence was 43.9%. PSAD-adjustment increased the CDR of PI--RADSv2.1 category 4. Sensitivity/specificity/AUC were 92.6%/53.6%/0.82 for unadjusted PI-RADS, and 85.2%/72.4%/0.84, 62.9%/85.5%/0.83, and 92.4%/53.6%/0.82 when adjusting PI-RADS categories for a 0.10, 0.15, and 0.20 ng/ml ml(-1) PSAD threshold, respectively. Triggering biopsy for PI-RADS four lesions and PSAD >= 0.10 ng/mL ml(-1) was the strategy with greatest net benefit at 30 and 40% risk probability (0.307 and 0.271, respectively). Conclusions: PI-RADSv2.1 category four with PSAD >= 0.10 ng/mL ml(-1) was the biopsy-triggering cut-off with the highest net benefit in the range of expected prevalence for csPCa. Advances in knowledge: 0.10 ng/mL ml(-1) is the PSAD threshold with higher clinical utility in stratifying the risk for prostate cancer of PI-RADSv.2.1 categories.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 36 条
  • [1] A Systematic Review of the Existing Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 (PI-RADSv2) Literature and Subset Meta-Analysis of PI-RADSv2 Categories Stratified by Gleason Scores
    Barkovich, Emil Jernstedt
    Shankar, Prasad R.
    Westphalen, Antonio C.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2019, 212 (04) : 847 - 854
  • [2] Prebiopsy Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Combined with Prostate-specific Antigen Density in Detecting and Ruling out Gleason 7-10 Prostate Cancer in Biopsy-naive Men
    Boesen, Lars
    Norgaard, Nis
    Logager, Vibeke
    Balslev, Ingegerd
    Bisbjerg, Rasmus
    Thestrup, Karen-Cecilie
    Jakobsen, Henrik
    Thomsen, Henrik S.
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY ONCOLOGY, 2019, 2 (03): : 311 - 319
  • [3] Assessment of the Diagnostic Accuracy of Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Cancer in Biopsy-Naive Men The Biparametric MRI for Detection of Prostate Cancer (BIDOC) Study
    Boesen, Lars
    Norgaard, Nis
    Logager, Vibeke
    Balslev, Ingegerd
    Bisbjerg, Rasmus
    Thestrup, Karen-Cecilie
    Winther, Mads D.
    Jakobsen, Henrik
    Thomsen, Henrik S.
    [J]. JAMA NETWORK OPEN, 2018, 1 (02)
  • [4] Which measurement method should be used for prostate volume for PI-RADS? A comparison of ellipsoid and segmentation methods
    Colvin, Robert
    Walker, David
    Hafron, Jason
    Seifman, Brian
    Nandalur, Sirisha
    Gangwish, David
    Nandalur, Kiran R.
    [J]. CLINICAL IMAGING, 2021, 80 : 454 - 458
  • [5] Efficacy and safety of long-term treatment with the dual 5α-reductase inhibitor dutasteride in men with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia
    Debruyne, F
    Barkin, J
    van Erps, P
    Reis, M
    Tammela, TLJ
    Roehrborn, C
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2004, 46 (04) : 488 - 495
  • [6] The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma Definition of Grading Patterns and Proposal for a New Grading System
    Epstein, Jonathan I.
    Egevad, Lars
    Amin, Mahul B.
    Delahunt, Brett
    Srigley, John R.
    Humphrey, Peter A.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGICAL PATHOLOGY, 2016, 40 (02) : 244 - 252
  • [7] Combined Use of Prostate-specific Antigen Density and Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Biopsy Decision Planning: A Retrospective Multi-institutional Study Using the Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging Outcome Database
    Falagario, Ugo Giovanni
    Jambor, Ivan
    Lantz, Anna
    Ettala, Otto
    Stabile, Armando
    Taimen, Pekka
    Aronen, Hannu J.
    Knaapila, Juha
    Perez, Ileana Montoya
    Gandaglia, Giorgio
    Fossati, Nicola
    Martini, Alberto
    Cucchiara, Vito
    Picker, Wolfgang
    Haug, Erik
    Ratnani, Parita
    Haines, Kenneth
    Lewis, Sara
    Sujit, Nair
    Selvaggio, Oscar
    Sanguedolce, Francesca
    Macarini, Luca
    Cormio, Luigi
    Nordstrom, Tobias
    Tewari, Ash
    Briganti, Alberto
    Bostrom, Peter J.
    Carrieri, Giuseppe
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY ONCOLOGY, 2021, 4 (06): : 971 - 979
  • [8] Avoiding Unnecessary Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and Biopsies: Negative and Positive Predictive Value of MRI According to Prostate-specific Antigen Density, 4Kscore and Risk Calculators
    Falagario, Ugo Giovanni
    Martini, Alberto
    Wajswol, Ethan
    Treacy, Patrick-Julien
    Ratnani, Parita
    Jambor, Ivan
    Anastos, Harry
    Lewis, Sara
    Haines, Kenneth
    Cormio, Luigi
    Carrieri, Giuseppe
    Rastinehad, Ardeshir R.
    Wiklund, Peter
    Tewari, Ash
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY ONCOLOGY, 2020, 3 (05): : 700 - 704
  • [9] Comparison of PI-RADS Versions 2.0 and 2.1 for MRI-based Calculation of the Prostate Volume
    Ghafoor, Soleen
    Becker, Anton S.
    Woo, Sungmin
    Andrieu, Pamela I. Causa
    Stocker, Daniel
    Gangai, Natalie
    Hricak, Hedvig
    Vargas, Hebert Alberto
    [J]. ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 2021, 28 (11) : 1548 - 1556
  • [10] MRI findings in men on active surveillance for prostate cancer: does dutasteride make MRI visible lesions less conspicuous? Results from a placebo-controlled, randomised clinical trial
    Giganti, Francesco
    Moore, Caroline M.
    Robertson, Nicola L.
    McCartan, Neil
    Jameson, Charles
    Bott, Simon R. J.
    Winkler, Mathias
    Gambarota, Giulio
    Whitcher, Brandon
    Castro, Ramiro
    Emberton, Mark
    Allen, Clare
    Kirkham, Alex
    [J]. EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2017, 27 (11) : 4767 - 4774