• Sonia Gaur, Stephanie Harmon, Sherif Mehralivand, Sandra Bednarova, Brian P Calio, Dordaneh Sugano, Abhinav Sidana, Maria J Merino, Peter A Pinto, Bradford J Wood, Joanna H Shih, Peter L Choyke, and Baris Turkbey.
• Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
• J Magn Reson Imaging. 2018 Nov 1; 48 (5): 1326-1335.

BackgroundProstate Imaging-Reporting and Data System v. 2 (PI-RADSv2) provides standardized nomenclature for interpretation of prostate multiparametric MRI (mpMRI). Inclusion of additional features for categorization may provide benefit to stratification of disease.PurposeTo prospectively compare PI-RADSv2 to a qualitative in-house system for detecting prostate cancer on mpMRI.Study TypeProspective.PopulationIn all, 338 patients who underwent mpMRI May 2015-May 2016, with subsequent MRI/transrectal ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy.Field Strength3T mpMRI (T2 W, diffusion-weighted [DW], apparent diffusion coefficient [ADC] map, b-2000 DWI acquisition, and dynamic contrast-enhanced [DCE] MRI).AssessmentOne genitourinary radiologist prospectively read mpMRIs using both in-house and PI-RADSv2 5-category systems.Statistical TestIn lesion-based analysis, overall and clinically significant (CS) tumor detection rates (TDR) were calculated for all PI-RADSv2 and in-house categories. The ability of each scoring system to detect cancer was assessed by area under receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC). Within each PI-RADSv2 category, lesions were further stratified by their in-house categories to determine if TDRs can be increased by combining features of both systems.ResultsIn 338 patients (median prostate-specific antigen [PSA] 6.5 [0.6-113.6] ng/mL; age 64 [44-84] years), 733 lesions were identified (47% tumor-positive). Predictive abilities of both systems were comparable for all (AUC 76-78%) and CS cancers (AUCs 79%). The in-house system had higher overall and CS TDRs than PI-RADSv2 for categories 3 and 4 (P < 0.01 for both), with the greatest difference between the scoring systems seen in lesions scored category 4 (CS TDRs: in-house 65%, PI-RADSv2 22.1%). For lesions categorized as PI-RADSv2 = 4, characterization of suspicious/indeterminate extraprostatic extension (EPE) and equivocal findings across all mpMRI sequences contributed to significantly different TDRs for both systems (TDR range 19-75%, P < 0.05).Data ConclusionPI-RADSv2 behaves similarly to an existing validated system that relies on the number of sequences on which a lesion is seen. This prospective evaluation suggests that sequence positivity and suspicion of EPE can enhance PI-RADSv2 category 4 cancer detection.Level Of Evidence1 Technical Efficacy: Stage 3 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2018;47:1326-1335.© 2018 International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine.

28 keywords...

hide…