A nomogram based on biparametric magnetic resonance imaging for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer in biopsy-naive patients

被引:3
|
作者
Hu, Beibei [1 ]
Zhang, Huili [1 ]
Zhang, Yueyue [2 ]
Jin, Yongming [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Jiangsu Vocat Coll Med, Dept Med Imaging, Yancheng, Peoples R China
[2] Soochow Univ, Affiliated Hosp 2, Dept Radiol, Suzhou, Peoples R China
[3] Southeast Univ, Affiliated Yancheng Hosp, Sch Med, Dept Radiol, Yancheng, Peoples R China
[4] Yancheng Third Peoples Hosp, Yancheng, Peoples R China
关键词
bpMRI; Prostate cancer; Diagnosis; Model; Nomogram; MRI; COMBINATION; DIAGNOSIS; ACCURACY; DENSITY;
D O I
10.1186/s40644-023-00606-2
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose This study aimed to develop and validate a model based on biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in biopsy-naive patients. Method This retrospective study included 324 patients who underwent bpMRI and MRI targeted fusion biopsy (MRGB) and/or systematic biopsy, of them 217 were randomly assigned to the training group and 107 were assigned to the validation group. We assessed the diagnostic performance of three bpMRI-based scorings in terms of sensitivity and specificity. Subsequently, 3 models (Model 1, Model 2, and Model 3) combining bpMRI scorings with clinical variables were constructed and compared with each other using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves (AUC). The statistical significance of differences among these models was evaluated using DeLong's test. Results In the training group, 68 of 217 patients had pathologically proven csPCa. The sensitivity and specificity for Scoring 1 were 64.7% (95% CI 52.2%-75.9%) and 80.5% (95% CI 73.3%-86.6%); for Scoring 2 were 86.8% (95% CI 76.4%-93.8%) and 73.2% (95% CI 65.3%-80.1%); and for Scoring 3 were 61.8% (95% CI 49.2%-73.3%) and 80.5% (95% CI 73.3%-86.6%), respectively. Multivariable regression analysis revealed that scorings based on bpMRI, age, and prostatespecific antigen density (PSAD) were independent predictors of csPCa. The AUCs for the 3 models were 0.88 (95% CI 0.83-0.93), 0.90 (95% CI 0.85-0.94), and 0.88 (95% CI 0.83-0.93), respectively. Model 2 showed significantly higher performance than Model 1 (P = 0.03) and Model 3 (P < 0.01). Conclusion All three scorings had favorite diagnostic accuracy. While in conjunction with age and PSAD the prediction power was significantly improved, and the Model 2 that based on Scoring 2 yielded the highest performance.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Diagnostic Role of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted Biopsy for Prostate Cancer in Biopsy-Naive Men: A Meta-Analysis
    Tu, Xiang
    Liu, Zhenhua
    Zhang, Chichen
    Chang, Tiancong
    Xu, He
    Bao, Yige
    Li, Jiakun
    Jin, Kun
    Yuan, Qiming
    Qiu, Shi
    Yang, Lu
    Wei, Qiang
    UROLOGIA INTERNATIONALIS, 2020, 104 (3-4) : 187 - 198
  • [42] 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.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY ONCOLOGY, 2019, 2 (03): : 311 - 319
  • [43] Clinical and Radiological Factors for Predicting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in Biopsy-Naive Patients With PI-RADS 3 Lesions
    Zhang, Zhiyu
    Hu, Can
    Lin, Yuxin
    Song, Ouyang
    Gong, Dongkui
    Zhang, Xuefeng
    Wang, Nan
    TECHNOLOGY IN CANCER RESEARCH & TREATMENT, 2024, 23
  • [44] Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer in biopsy-naive men: direct comparison of systematic biopsy, multiparametric MRI- and contrast-ultrasound-dispersion imaging-targeted biopsy
    Mannaerts, Christophe K. as
    Engelbrecht, Marc R. W.
    Postema, Arnoud W.
    Kollenburg, Rob A. A.
    Hoeks, Caroline M. A.
    Savci-Heijink, Cemile Dilara
    Van Sloun, Ruud J. G.
    Wildeboer, Rogier R.
    De Reijke, Theo M.
    Mischi, Massimo
    Wijkstra, Hessel
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2020, 126 (04) : 481 - 493
  • [45] Nomograms for predicting clinically significant prostate cancer in men with PI-RADS-3 biparametric magnetic resonance imaging
    Liang, Zhen
    Feng, Tianrui
    Zhou, Yi
    Yang, Yongjiao
    Sun, Yujiao
    Zhou, Zhien
    Yan, Weigang
    Cao, Fenghong
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CANCER RESEARCH, 2024, 14 (01):
  • [46] Clinically significant prostate cancer detection rate in biopsy-naive patients with mpMRI and microultrasound topographically discordant lesions: A single-center prospective analysis
    Dagnino, F.
    Avolio, P.
    Maffei, D.
    Aljoulani, M.
    Piccolini, A.
    De Carne, F.
    Moretto, S.
    Fasulo, V
    Paciotti, M. P.
    Saitta, C.
    Beatrici, E.
    Saita, A.
    Hurle, R. H.
    Lazzeri, M.
    Casale, P.
    Buffi, N. M.
    Lughezzani, G.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2024, 85 : S1096 - S1096
  • [47] MR Imaging-guided Strategies for Detection of Prostate Cancer in Biopsy-Naive Men
    Temiz, Mustafa Zafer
    RADIOLOGY, 2017, 285 (03) : 1052 - 1053
  • [48] Should Prebiopsy Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging be Offered to All Biopsy-naive Men Undergoing Prostate Biopsy?
    Ahmad, Ardalan E.
    Finelli, Antonio
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2016, 69 (03) : 426 - 427
  • [49] Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer by Transperineal Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Targeted Prostate Biopsy in Smaller Prostate
    Wu, Shulin
    Dahl, Douglas
    Kim, Michelle
    Lin, Sharron
    Crotty, Rory
    Cornejo, Kristine
    Harisinghani, Mukesh
    Feldman, Adam
    Wu, Chin-Lee
    LABORATORY INVESTIGATION, 2022, 102 (SUPPL 1) : 697 - 698
  • [50] Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer by Transperineal Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Targeted Prostate Biopsy in Smaller Prostate
    Wu, Shulin
    Dahl, Douglas
    Kim, Michelle
    Lin, Sharron
    Crotty, Rory
    Cornejo, Kristine
    Harisinghani, Mukesh
    Feldman, Adam
    Wu, Chin-Lee
    MODERN PATHOLOGY, 2022, 35 (SUPPL 2) : 697 - 698