A Model for Predicting Clinically Significant fi cant Prostate Cancer Using Prostate MRI and Risk Factors

被引:1
|
作者
Lacson, Ronilda [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Haj-Mirzaian, Arya [1 ,2 ]
Burk, Kristine [1 ,2 ,4 ]
Glazer, Daniel I. [1 ,2 ,5 ]
Naik, Sachin [1 ,2 ]
Khorasani, Ramin [1 ,2 ,3 ,6 ]
Kibel, Adam S. [2 ,7 ]
机构
[1] Brigham & Womens Hosp, Dept Radiol, One Brigham Circle,1620 Tremont St, Boston, MA 02120 USA
[2] Harvard Med Sch, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[3] Brigham & Womens Hosp, Ctr Evidence Based Imaging, Boston, MA 02120 USA
[4] Mass Gen Brigham, Qual & Patient Safety, Boston, MA USA
[5] Brigham & Womens & Hosp, Dept Radiol, Cross Sect Intervent Radiol, Boston, MA USA
[6] Mass Gen Brigham, Radiol Qual & Safety, Boston, MA USA
[7] Brigham & Womens Hosp, Dept Surg & Chair, Dept Urol, Boston, MA USA
基金
美国医疗保健研究与质量局;
关键词
Key Words: Prostate cancer; prostate MRI; prostate biopsy; predictive model; predictive value of testing;
D O I
10.1016/j.jacr.2024.02.035
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
Purpose: The aim of this study was to develop and validate a predictive model for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) using prostate MRI and patient risk factors. Methods: In total, 960 men who underwent MRI from 2015 to 2019 and biopsy either 6 months before or 6 months after MRI were identified. Men diagnosed with csPCa were identified, and csPCa risk was modeled using known patient factors (age, race, and prostatespecific antigen [PSA] level) and prostate MRI findings (location, Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System score, extraprostatic extension, dominant lesion size, and PSA density). csPCa was defined as Gleason score sum >= 7. Using a derivation cohort, a multivariable logistic regression model and a point-based scoring system were developed to predict csPCa. Discrimination and calibration were assessed in a separate independent validation cohort. Results: Among 960 MRI reports, 552 (57.5%) were from men diagnosed with csPCa. Using the derivation cohort (n = 632), variables that predicted csPCa were Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System scores of 4 and 5, the presence of extraprostatic extension, and elevated PSA density. Evaluation using the validation cohort (n = 328) resulted in an area under the curve of 0.77, with adequate calibration (HosmerLemeshow P = .58). At a risk threshold of >2 points, the model identified csPCa with sensitivity of 98.4% and negative predictive value of 78.6% but prevented only 4.3% potential biopsies (0-2 points; 14 of 328). At a higher threshold of >5 points, the model identified csPCa with sensitivity of 89.5% and negative predictive value of 70.1% and avoided 20.4% of biopsies (0-5 points; 67 of 328). Conclusions: The point-based model reported here can potentially identify a vast majority of men at risk for csPCa, while avoiding biopsy in about 1 in 5 men with elevated PSA levels.
引用
收藏
页码:1419 / 1427
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Fully Automated Deep Learning Model to Detect Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer at MRI
    Cai, Jason C.
    Nakai, Hirotsugu
    Kuanar, Shiba
    Froemming, Adam T.
    Bolan, Candice W.
    Kawashima, Akira
    Takahashi, Hiroaki
    Mynderse, Lance A.
    Dora, Chandler D.
    Humphreys, Mitchell R.
    Korfiatis, Panagiotis
    Rouzrokh, Pouria
    Bratt, Alexander K.
    Conte, Gian Marco
    Erickson, Bradley J.
    Takahashi, Naoki
    RADIOLOGY, 2024, 312 (02)
  • [22] A risk-organised model for clinically significant prostate cancer early detection
    Morote, Juan
    Borque-Fernando, Angel
    Triquell, Marina
    Abascal, Jose M.
    Servian, Pol
    Planas, Jacques
    Mendez, Olga
    Esteban, Luis M.
    Tilla, Enrique
    BJUI COMPASS, 2023, 4 (04): : 420 - 422
  • [23] The Barcelona Predictive Model of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer
    Morote, Juan
    Borque-Fernando, Angel
    Triquell, Marina
    Celma, Anna
    Regis, Lucas
    Escobar, Manel
    Mast, Richard
    de Torres, Ines M.
    Semidey, Maria E.
    Abascal, Jose M.
    Sola, Carles
    Servian, Pol
    Salvador, Daniel
    Santamaria, Anna
    Planas, Jacques
    Esteban, Luis M.
    Trilla, Enrique
    CANCERS, 2022, 14 (06)
  • [24] External validation of AI for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer using biparametric MRI
    Zhang, Jun
    Yin, Xuemei
    Wang, Kexin
    Wang, Liang
    Yang, Zhenghan
    Zhang, Yaofeng
    Wu, Pengsheng
    Zhao, Chenglin
    ABDOMINAL RADIOLOGY, 2025, 50 (02) : 784 - 793
  • [25] Prediction of clinically significant prostate cancer using polygenic risk models in Asians
    Song, Sang Hun
    Kim, Eunae
    Woo, Eunjin
    Kwon, Eunkyung
    Yoon, Sungroh
    Kim, Jung Kwon
    Lee, Hakmin
    Oh, Jong Jin
    Lee, Sangchul
    Hong, Sung Kyu
    Byun, Seok-Soo
    INVESTIGATIVE AND CLINICAL UROLOGY, 2022, 63 (01) : 42 - 52
  • [26] INTEGRATION OF POLYGENIC RISK SCORE (PRS) WITH MULTIPARAMETRIC MRI IN MEN AT RISK FOR CLINICALLY SIGNIFICANT PROSTATE CANCER
    Plym, Anna
    Madueke, Ikenna
    Naik, Sachin
    Penney, Kathryn L.
    Mucci, Lorelei A.
    Khorasani, Rhamin
    Kibel, Adam S.
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2023, 209 : E1045 - E1045
  • [27] Integration of Polygenic Risk Score (PRS) with multiparametric MRI in men at risk for clinically significant prostate cancer
    Plym, A.
    Madueke, I. C.
    Naik, S.
    Penney, K. L.
    Mucci, L. A.
    Khorasani, R.
    Kibel, A. S.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2023, 83 : S104 - S105
  • [28] Can transrectal prostate ultrasound compete with multiparametric MRI in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer?
    Grey, Alistair D. R.
    Connor, Martin J.
    Tam, Joseph
    Loch, Tillmann
    TRANSLATIONAL ANDROLOGY AND UROLOGY, 2020, 9 (03) : 1492 - 1500
  • [29] Impact of prostate MRI image quality on diagnostic performance for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa)
    Cheng, Yue
    Zhang, Lei
    Wu, Xiaohui
    Zou, Yi
    Niu, Yao
    Wang, Liang
    ABDOMINAL RADIOLOGY, 2024, 49 (11) : 4113 - 4124
  • [30] Incidence of clinically significant prostate cancer after negative prostate MRI - comparison to general population
    Pylvalainen, Juho
    Hoffstrom, Jaakko
    Kenttamies, Anu
    Auvinen, Anssi
    Mirtti, Tuomas
    Rannikko, Antti
    CANCER RESEARCH, 2022, 82 (12)