Impact of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System, Version 2, on MRI Diagnosis for Extracapsular Extension of Prostate Cancer

被引:41
|
作者
Matsuoka, Yoh [1 ]
Ishioka, Junichiro [1 ]
Tanaka, Hiroshi [2 ]
Kimura, Tomo [2 ]
Yoshida, Soichiro [1 ]
Saito, Kazutaka [1 ]
Fujii, Yasuhisa [1 ]
Kihara, Kazunori [1 ]
机构
[1] Tokyo Med & Dent Univ, Grad Sch, Dept Urol, Bunkyo Ku, 1-5-45 Yushima, Tokyo 1138519, Japan
[2] Ochanomizu Surugadai Clin, Dept Radiol, Tokyo, Japan
关键词
extracapsular extension; MRI; prostate cancer; Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2; 2005; INTERNATIONAL-SOCIETY; ISUP CONSENSUS CONFERENCE; RADS SCORING SYSTEM; RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY; MULTIPARAMETRIC MRI; CARCINOMA; SPECIMENS; CRITERIA; CONTACT; BIOPSY;
D O I
10.2214/AJR.16.17163
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
OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study is to validate the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System, version 2 (PI-RADSv2), in assessing extracapsular extension (ECE), compared with PI-RADS, version 1 (PI-RADSv1). MATERIALS AND METHODS. A total of 210 patients with clinically localized prostate cancer underwent MRI and radical prostatectomy. Two readers independently interpreted the MR images. In PI-RADSv1, 5-point ECE risk scoring was used. In PI-RADSv2, ECE criteria included morphologic features and a tumor-capsule contact length (CL) greater than 10 mm. The diagnostic performance of each PI-RADS version and the cutoff CL were evaluated. RESULTS. ECE was found in 56 patients (26.7%). In PI-RADSv1, maximal accuracy was achieved with a risk score of 3 or greater. At this threshold, positive findings on PI-RADSv1 and PI-RADSv2 were identified in 21.0-34.3% and 49.0-51.4% of patients, respectively. Compared with PI-RADSv1, PI-RADSv2 had higher negative predictive values (84.9-89.1% vs 96.3-97.1%, respectively; p = 0.003 and 0.021, for each reader). PI-RADSv1 and PI-RADSv2 had positive predictive values of 56.9-70.5% and 49.1-50.5%, respectively (p = 0.025 and 0.300, respectively). Interobserver kappa values for PI-RADSv1 and PI-RADSv2 were 0.511 and 0.781, respectively. The best cutoff CL was greater than 10 mm among patients without morphologic features of ECE. For patients positive for ECE on the basis of PI-RADSv2 but not PI-RADSv1, 73.3-74.1% of prostate cancer cases with a biopsy Gleason score of 7 or less and 35.7-44.4% of cases with a biopsy Gleason score of 8 or higher were overstaged. CONCLUSION. PI-RADSv2 reduces understaging and improves interobserver agreement in ECE assessment. However, overstaging is a concern, and the biopsy Gleason score may have a complementary role in reducing overstaging.
引用
收藏
页码:W76 / W84
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] IMPACT OF THE PROSTATE IMAGING REPORTING AND DATA SYSTEM VERSION 2 (PI-RADS V2) ON THE ASSESSMENT OF EXTRACAPSULAR EXTENSION IN PROSTATE CANCER: A MULTIREADER STUDY
    Matsuoka, Yoh
    Ishioka, Junichiro
    Tanaka, Hiroshi
    Inoue, Masaharu
    Ito, Masaya
    Yoshida, Soichiro
    Yokoyama, Minato
    Numao, Noboru
    Saito, Kazutaka
    Fujii, Yasuhisa
    Kihara, Kazunori
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2016, 195 (04): : E988 - E988
  • [2] Impact of a Structured Reporting Template on Adherence to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 and on the Diagnostic Performance of Prostate MRI for Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer
    Shaish, Hiram
    Feltus, Whitney
    Steinman, Jonathan
    Hecht, Elizabeth
    Wenske, Sven
    Ahmed, Firas
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF RADIOLOGY, 2018, 15 (05) : 749 - 754
  • [3] Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 for MRI of Prostate Cancer: Can We Do Better?
    Sackett, Jonathan
    Choyke, Peter L.
    Turkbey, Baris
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2019, 212 (06) : 1244 - 1252
  • [4] Validation of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 Using an MRI-Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy in Prostate Cancer Diagnosis
    Kim, See Hyung
    Choi, Mi Sun
    Kim, Mi Jung
    Kim, Young Hwan
    Cho, Seung Hyun
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2017, 209 (04) : 800 - 805
  • [5] Interreader Variability of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 in Detecting and Assessing Prostate Cancer Lesions at Prostate MRI
    Budovec, Joseph J.
    Mulligan, Margaret
    Mautz, Alan
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2019, 212 (06) : 1205 - 1205
  • [6] Validation of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 for the Detection of Prostate Cancer
    Hofbauer, Sebastian L.
    Maxeiner, Andreas
    Kittner, Beatrice
    Heckmann, Robin
    Reimann, Maximillian
    Wiemer, Laura
    Asbach, Patrick
    Haas, Matthias
    Penzkofer, Tobias
    Stephan, Carsten
    Friedersdorff, Frank
    Fuller, Florian
    Miller, Kurt
    Cash, Hannes
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2018, 200 (04): : 767 - 772
  • [7] The Effectiveness of Prostate Imaging and Reporting and Data System Version 2 in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer with Screening Parameters Correlation
    Arik, Seref Barbaros
    Guvenir, Deniz
    Bozlar, Ugur
    Tasar, Mustafa
    Turgut, Bekir
    ARCHIVOS ESPANOLES DE UROLOGIA, 2022, 75 (05): : 416 - 422
  • [8] Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2.1: 2019 Update of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2
    Turkbey, Baris
    Rosenkrantz, Andrew B.
    Haider, Masoom A.
    Padhani, Anwar R.
    Villeirs, Geert
    Macura, Katarzyna J.
    Tempany, Clare M.
    Choyke, Peter L.
    Cornud, Francois
    Margolis, Daniel J.
    Thoeny, Harriet C.
    Verma, Sadhna
    Barentsz, Jelle
    Weinreb, Jeffrey C.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2019, 76 (03) : 340 - 351
  • [9] Standardizing Biparametric MRI to Simplify and Improve Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System, Version 2, in Prostate Cancer Management
    Scialpi, Michele
    Martorana, Eugenio
    D'Andrea, Alfredo
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2016, 207 (04) : W74 - W75
  • [10] Interreader variability in prostate MRI reporting using Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2.1
    Brembilla, Giorgio
    Dell'Oglio, Paolo
    Stabile, Armando
    Damascelli, Anna
    Brunetti, Lisa
    Ravelli, Silvia
    Cristel, Giulia
    Schiani, Elena
    Venturini, Elena
    Grippaldi, Daniele
    Mendola, Vincenzo
    Rancoita, Paola Maria Vittoria
    Esposito, Antonio
    Briganti, Alberto
    Montorsi, Francesco
    Del Maschio, Alessandro
    De Cobelli, Francesco
    EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2020, 30 (06) : 3383 - 3392