Predictors of prostate cancer cetection in MRI PI-RADS 3 lesions - Reality of a terciary center

被引:1
|
作者
Araujo, Debora [1 ]
Gromicho, Alexandre [2 ]
Dias, Jorge [1 ]
Bastos, Samuel [1 ]
Maciel, Rui Miguel [1 ]
Sabenca, Ana [1 ]
Xambre, Luis
机构
[1] Ctr Hosp Vila Nova De Gaia Espinho EPE, Urol Dept, Vila Nova De Gaia, Portugal
[2] Ctr Hosp Funchal, Urol Dept, Madeira, Portugal
关键词
Prostate cancer; PI-RADS category 3 lesions; Prostate multiparametric MRI; RISK STRATIFICATION; EQUIVOCAL LESIONS; BIOPSY;
D O I
10.4081/aiua.2023.11830
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Introduction and objectives: The Prostate I nificant maging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score reports the likelihood of a clinically significant prostate cancer (CsPCa) based on various multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) characteristics. The PI-RADS category 3 is an intermediate status, with an equivocal risk of malignancy. The PSA density (PSAD) has been proposed as a tool to facilitate biopsy decisions on PI-RADS cat-egory 3 lesions. The objective of this study is to determine the frequency of CsPCa, assess the diagnostic value of targeted biopsy and identify clinical predictors to improve the CsPCa detection rate in PI-RADS category 3 lesions.Methods: Between 1st January 2017 and 31st December 2022, a total of 1661 men underwent a prostate biopsy at our institu-tion. Clinical and mpMRI data of men with PI-RADS 3 lesions was reviewed. The study population was divided into two groups: target group, including those submitted to systematic plus targeted biopsy versus non-target group when only system-atic or saturation biopsy were performed. Patients with PI-RADS 3 lesions were divided into three categories based on pathological biopsy results: benign, clinically insignificant dis-ease (score Gleason = 6 or International Society of Urologic Pathologic (ISUP) 1) and clinically significant cancer (score Gleason >= 7 (3+4) or ISUP >= 2) according to target and non-target group. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify clinical predictors to improve the CsPCa detection rate in PI-RADS category 3 lesions.Results: A total of 130 men with PIRADS 3 index lesions were identified. Pathologic results were benign in 77 lesions (59.2%), 19 (14.6%) were clinically insignificant (Gleason score 6) and 34 (26.2%) were clinically significant (Gleason score 7 or high-er). Eighty-seven of the patients were included in the target group (66.9%) and 43 in the non-target group (33.1%). The CsPCa detection was higher in the non-target group (32.6%, n = 14 vs 23.0%, n = 20 respectively). When systematic and tar-get biopsies were jointly performed, if the results of systematic biopsies are not considered and only the results of target biop-sies are taken into account, a CsPCa diagnosis would be missed on 9 patients. The differences of insignificant cancer and CsPCa rates among the target or non-target group were not statistically significant (p = 0.50 and p = 0.24, respectively). on multivariate analysis, the abnormal DRE and lesions localized in Peripheral zone (PZ) were significantly associated with a presence of CsPCa in PI-RADS 3 lesions (oR = 3.61, 95% CI [1.22,10.721, p = 0.02 and oR = 3.31, 95% CI [1.35, 8.111, p = 0.01, respec-tively). A higher median PSAD significantly predisposed for CsPCa on univariate analyses (p = 0.05), however, was not sig-I nificant in the multivariate anal ysis (p = 0.76). In our population, using 0.10 ng/ml/ml as a cut-off to perform biopsy, 41 patients would have avoided biopsy (31.5%), but 5 cases of CsPCa would not have been detected (3.4%). We could not identify any statisti-cal significance between other clinical and imagiological vari-ables and CsPCa detection.Conclusions: PI-RADS 3 lesions were associated with a low likeli-hood of CsPCa detection. A systematic biopsy associated or not with target biopsy is essential in PI-RADS 3 lesions, and targeted biopsy did not demonstrate to be superior in the detection of CsPCa. The presence of abnormal DRE and lesions localized in PZ potentially predict the presence of CsPCa in biopsied PI-RADS 3 lesions.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Preoperative MRI PI-RADS scores are associated with prostate cancer upstaging on surgical pathology
    Pockros, Benjamin
    Stensland, Kristian D.
    Parries, Molly
    Frankenberger, Edward
    Canes, David
    Moinzadeh, Alireza
    PROSTATE, 2022, 82 (03): : 352 - 358
  • [42] Prostate cancer in PI-RADS scores 1 and 2 version 2.1: a comparison to previous PI-RADS versions
    Bogner, Katja
    Engelhard, Karl
    Wuest, Wolfgang
    Hamel, Sajad
    ABDOMINAL RADIOLOGY, 2022, 47 (06) : 2187 - 2196
  • [43] Prostate cancer in PI-RADS scores 1 and 2 version 2.1: a comparison to previous PI-RADS versions
    Katja Bogner
    Karl Engelhard
    Wolfgang Wuest
    Sajad Hamel
    Abdominal Radiology, 2022, 47 : 2187 - 2196
  • [44] Correlation between Intraprostatic PSMA Uptake and MRI PI-RADS of [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MRI in Patients with Prostate Cancer: Comparison of PI-RADS Version 2.0 and PI-RADS Version 2.1
    Zhao, Jing
    Mangarova, Dilyana B.
    Brangsch, Julia
    Kader, Avan
    Hamm, Bernd
    Brenner, Winfried
    Makowski, Marcus R.
    CANCERS, 2020, 12 (12) : 1 - 13
  • [45] Perilesional Biopsies Increase Detection of Significant Prostate Cancer in Men with PI-RADS 4/5 Lesions: Validation of the PI-RADS Steering Committee Recommendation
    Lahoud, John
    Doan, Paul
    Kim, Lawrence
    Patel, Manish I.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2021, 80 (02) : 260 - 261
  • [46] PI-RADS CATEGORIES ON INITIAL PROSTATE MRI ARE ASSOCIATED WITH ACTIVE SURVEILLANCE PROGRESSION IN PATIENTS WITH PROSTATE CANCER
    Wang, Alex Z.
    O'Connor, Luke P.
    Yerram, Nitin
    Zeng, Jonathan
    Mehralivand, Sherif
    Harmon, Stephanie
    Lebastchi, Amir H.
    Ahdoot, Michael
    Telfer, Siobhan
    Gomella, Patrick H.
    Gurram, Sandeep
    Chalfin, Heather
    Nandanan, Naveen
    Choyke, Peter L.
    Merino, Maria J.
    Wood, Bradford J.
    Turkbey, Baris
    Pinto, Peter A.
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2020, 203 : E609 - E609
  • [47] Comparison of PI-RADS version 2 and PI-RADS version 2.1 for the detection of transition zone prostate cancer
    Tamada, Tsutomu
    Kido, Ayumu
    Takeuchi, Mitsuru
    Yamamoto, Akira
    Miyaji, Yoshiyuki
    Kanomata, Naoki
    Sone, Teruki
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2019, 121
  • [48] THE PROSTATE HEALTH INDEX IMPROVES PREDICTIVE VALUE IN PATIENTS WITH PI-RADS 3 LESIONS
    Pan, PanPoHsun
    Fan, Yu-Hua
    Lin, Tzu-Ping
    Chen, Wei-Ren
    Huang, Tzu-Hao
    Wei, Tzu-Chun
    Huang, I-Shen
    Lin, Chih-Chieh
    Huang, Eric Y. H.
    Chung, Hsiao-Jen
    Huang, William J. S.
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2020, 203 : E1101 - E1102
  • [49] Are upgraded DCE-positive PI-RADS 3 lesions truly suspicious for clinically significant prostate cancer?
    Patrick Asbach
    Anwar R. Padhani
    European Radiology, 2023, 33 : 5825 - 5827
  • [50] PI-RADS version 2.1: one small step for prostate MRI
    Barrett, T.
    Rajesh, A.
    Rosenkrantz, A. B.
    Choyke, P. L.
    Turkbey, B.
    CLINICAL RADIOLOGY, 2019, 74 (11) : 841 - 852