Comparison of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 1 and version 2 and combination with apparent diffusion coefficient as a predictor of biopsy outcome
- 1 January 2019
- journal article
- research article
- Vol. 40 (1), 41-50
Abstract
PURPOSE: The main aim of the study was to compare the diagnostic performance of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) versions 1 and 2 for detection of prostate carcinoma (PCa) and clinically significant prostate carcinoma (CSPCa). The second aim was to evaluate the potential benefit of adding the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and prostate specific antigen (PSA) density to the standard evaluation protocol. METHODS: A total of 167 consecutive patients with elevated PSA underwent magnetic resonance imaging. The images were evaluated prospectively using both versions of the PI-RADS and the results compared with 12-core template biopsy and magnetic resonance/transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves were compared for each scoring system using DeLong's test. The area under the curve (AUC) was calculated for ADC and PSA density for lesions scored 4. RESULTS: PI-RADS V2 had high discriminative ability for PCa prediction with an AUC of 0.824 (95% CI 0.763 to 0.885), compared to an AUC of 0.724 (95% CI 0.654 to 0.794) for PI-RADS V1 (p = 0.0335). ADC demonstrated a higher discriminative ability with an AUC of 0.702 (95% CI 0.548 to 0.856) in CSPCa prediction. Using the obtained ADC threshold of 828x10<^>(-6) mmA<^>(2)/s improved specificity to 86.73% with a sensitivity of 60.38%. CONCLUSION: PI-RADS version 2 exhibited significantly higher discriminative ability for PCa and CSPCa detection compared to PI-RADS version 1. Using the ADC can improve the tumor predictability of PI-RADS version 2 in lesions scored 4.Keywords
This publication has 27 references indexed in Scilit:
- The Correlation between Apparent Diffusion Coefficient and Tumor Cellularity in Patients: A Meta-AnalysisPLOS ONE, 2013
- Comparison of apparent diffusion coefficient values among different MRI platforms: a multicenter phantom studyDiagnostic and Interventional Radiology, 2013
- ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012European Radiology, 2012
- Multiparametric 3T Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Detect Cancer: Histopathological Correlation Using Prostatectomy Specimens Processed in Customized Magnetic Resonance Imaging Based MoldsJournal of Urology, 2011
- Diffusion-weighted Endorectal MR Imaging at 3 T for Prostate Cancer: Tumor Detection and Assessment of AggressivenessRadiology, 2011
- Relationship between Apparent Diffusion Coefficients at 3.0-T MR Imaging and Gleason Grade in Peripheral Zone Prostate CancerRadiology, 2011
- Lessons learned: end‐user assessment of a skills laboratory based training programme for urology traineesBJU International, 2011
- Assessment of Aggressiveness of Prostate Cancer: Correlation of Apparent Diffusion Coefficient With Histologic Grade After Radical ProstatectomyAmerican Journal of Roentgenology, 2011
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Detection, Localisation, and Characterisation of Prostate Cancer: Recommendations from a European Consensus MeetingEuropean Urology, 2010
- Variability in Absolute Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values across Different Platforms May Be Substantial: A Multivendor, Multi-institutional Comparison StudyRadiology, 2008