Validation of the PI-RADS language: predictive values of PI-RADS lexicon descriptors for detection of prostate cancer

Prior Negative Biopsy, PSA Density, and Anatomic Location Impact Cancer Detection Rate of MRI-Targeted PI-RADS Index Lesions

BACKGROUND

MRI fusion prostate biopsy has improved the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (CSC). Continued refinements in predicting the pre-biopsy probability of CSC are essential for optimal patient counseling. We investigated potential factors related to improved cancer detection rates (CDR) of CSC in patients with PI-RADS ≥ 3 lesions.

METHODS

The pathology of 980 index lesions in 980 patients sampled by transrectal mpMRI-targeted prostate biopsy across four medical centers between 2017-2020 was reviewed. PI-RADS lesion distribution included 291 PI-RADS-5, 374 PI-RADS-4, and 315 PI-RADS-3. We compared CDR of index PI-RADS ≥ 3 lesions based on location (TZ) vs. (PZ), PSA density (PSAD), and history of prior negative conventional transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS).

RESULTS

Mean age, PSA, prostate volume, and level of prior negative TRUS biopsy were 66 years (43-90), 7.82 ng/dL (5.6-11.2), 54 cm3 (12-173), and 456/980 (46.5%), respectively. Higher PSAD, no prior history of negative TRUS biopsy, and PZ lesions were associated with higher CDR. Stratified CDR highlighted significant variance across subgroups. CDR for a PI-RADS-5 score, PZ lesion with PSAD ≥ 0.15, and prior negative biopsy was 77%. Conversely, the CDR rate for a PI-RADS-4 score, TZ lesion with PSAD < 0.15, and prior negative biopsy was significantly lower at 14%.

CONCLUSIONS

For index PI-RADS ≥ 3 lesions, CDR varied significantly based on location, prior history of negative TRUS biopsy, and PSAD. Such considerations are critical when counseling on the merits and potential yield of prostate needle biopsy.

Different diagnostic strategies combining prostate health index and magnetic resonance imaging for predicting prostate cancer: A multicentre study

OBJECTIVE

To explore how prostate health index (PHI) and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) should be used in concert to improve diagnostic capacity for clinically significant prostate cancers (CsCaP) in patients with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) between 4 and 20 ng/ml.

METHODS

About 426 patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria were included in this study. Univariable and multivariable logistic analyses were performed to analyze the association between the clinical indicators and CaP/CsCaP. We used the Delong test to compare the differences in the area under the curve (AUC) values of four models for CaP and CsCaP. Decision curve analysis (DCA) and calibration plots were used to assess predictive performance. We compared clinical outcomes of different diagnostic strategies constructed using different combinations of the models by the chi-square test and the McNemar test.

RESULTS

The AUC of PHI-MRI (a risk prediction model based on PHI and mpMRI) was 0.859, which was significantly higher than those of PHI (AUC = 0.792, P < 0.001) and mpMRI (AUC = 0.797, P < 0.001). PHI-MRI had a higher net benefit on DCA for predicting CaP and CsCaP in comparison to PHI and mpMRI. Adding the PHI-MRI in diagnostic strategies for CsCaP, such as use PHI-MRI alone or sequential use of PHI followed by PHI-MRI, could reduce the number of biopsies by approximately 20% compared to use PHI followed by mpMRI (256 vs 316, 257 vs 316, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The PHI-MRI model was superior to PHI and MRI alone. It may reduce the number of biopsies and ensure the detection rate of CsCaP under an appropriate sensitivity at the cost of an increased number of MRI scans.

Diagnostic efficacy and interobserver agreement among readers with variable experience of the Prostate Imaging for Recurrence Reporting system with whole-mount histology after androgen deprivation therapy as a reference

Background

The Prostate Imaging for Recurrence Reporting (PI-RR) system was recently proposed to assess the local recurrence of prostate cancer (PCa), but its exact performance for the prostate after radiotherapy or radical prostatectomy is difficult to determine. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance and interreader agreement of this system using whole-mount histology of the prostate after androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) as the standard of reference.

Methods

In total, 119 patients with PCa post-ADT underwent multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) before prostatectomy. Three radiologists analyzed the MRI images independently, scoring imaging findings according to PI-RR. Spearman correlation was performed to assess the relationship between the percentage of sectors with residual cancer and PI-RR score. The diagnostic performance for detection of residual cancer was assessed on a per-sector basis. The chi-squared test was used to compare the cancer detection rate (CDR) among readers. Overall and pairwise interreader agreement in assigning PI-RR categories and residual cancer sectors with a score ≥3 or ≥4 were evaluated with the Cohen kappa coefficient.

Results

Histology revealed 209 sectors with residual cancer. The percentage of pathologically positive sectors increased with the increase in PI-RR score for all readers. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) at a cutoff of score 3 ranged from 74.2% to 83.7%, 86.4% to 92.7%, 51.3% to 64.3%, and 95.4% to 96.9%, respectively, and at a cutoff of score 4, they ranged from 47.4% to 56.5%, 97.9% to 98.6%, 82.5% to 85.3%, and 91.6% to 92.9%, respectively. There was no significant difference among the CDR of readers. In PI-RR categories and detection of residual cancer sectors, overall interreader agreement was moderate for all readers, but agreement was higher between the more experienced readers (moderate to substantial) than between the more and less experienced readers (fair to moderate).

Conclusions

MRI scoring with the PI-RR assessment provided accurate evaluation of PCa after ADT, but readers' experience influenced interreader agreement and cancer diagnosis.

PI-RADS v2.1 evaluation of prostate "nodule in nodule" variants: clinical, imaging, and pathological features

OBJECTIVES

To analyze the correlation among the imaging features of prostate "nodule in nodule," clinical prostate indices, and pathology results.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the prostate images from 47 male patients who underwent MRI scans and pathological biopsy from January 2022 to July 2023. Two radiologists (R1/R2) evaluated the morphology and signal intensity of the "nodule in nodule" in a double-blind manner and calculated the PI-RADS v2.1 score, which was compared with clinical prostate indices and pathological results.

RESULTS

34.04% (16/47) of patients were pathologically diagnosed with clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). Total prostate-specific antigen (tPSA), free/t PSA, PSA density (PSAD), and prostate gland volume (PGV) were significantly different between csPCa patients and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) patients with prostate "nodule in nodule". R1/R2 detected 17/17 prostate "nodule in nodule" pathologically confirmed as csPCa on MRI; 10.60% (16/151) (R1) and 11.11% (17/153) (R2) had diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) PI-RADS v2.1 score of 4, and 0.66% (1/151) (R1) had a score of 3. The percentages of encapsulated, circumscribed, and atypical nodules and obscured margins were 0.00% (0/151), 0.00% (0/151), 5.96% (9/151), and 5.30% (8/151), respectively, for R1, and 0.00% (0/153), 0.00% (0/153), 5.88% (9/153), and 4.58% (7/153) for R2.

CONCLUSION

When the inner nodules of "nodule in nodule" lesions in PI-RADS v2.1 category 1 in the TZ show incomplete capsulation or obscured margins, they are considered atypical nodules and might be upgraded to PI-RADS v2.1 category 3 if they exhibit marked diffusion restriction. However, further validation is needed.

CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

This study first analyzed the relationship between clinical and pathological findings and the size, margin, and multimodal MRI manifestations of the prostate "nodule in nodule." These findings could improve the diagnostic accuracy of PI-RADS v2.1 for prostate lesions.

KEY POINTS

• The margin of the prostate inner nodules affects the PI-RADS v2.1 score. • The morphology of prostate "nodule in nodule" is related to their pathology. • The PI-RADS v2.1 principle requires consideration of prostate "nodule in nodule" variants.

Characterization of high-grade prostate cancer at multiparametric MRI: assessment of PI-RADS version 2.1 and version 2 descriptors across 21 readers with varying experience (MULTI study)

OBJECTIVE

To assess PI-RADSv2.1 and PI-RADSv2 descriptors across readers with varying experience.

METHODS

Twenty-one radiologists (7 experienced (≥ 5 years) seniors, 7 less experienced seniors and 7 juniors) assessed 240 'predefined' lesions from 159 pre-biopsy multiparametric prostate MRIs. They specified their location (peripheral, transition or central zone) and size, and scored them using PI-RADSv2.1 and PI-RADSv2 descriptors. They also described and scored 'additional' lesions if needed. Per-lesion analysis assessed the 'predefined' lesions, using targeted biopsy as reference; per-lobe analysis included 'predefined' and 'additional' lesions, using combined systematic and targeted biopsy as reference. Areas under the curve (AUCs) quantified the performance in diagnosing clinically significant cancer (csPCa; ISUP ≥ 2 cancer). Kappa coefficients (κ) or concordance correlation coefficients (CCC) assessed inter-reader agreement.

RESULTS

At per-lesion analysis, inter-reader agreement on location and size was moderate-to-good (κ = 0.60-0.73) and excellent (CCC ≥ 0.80), respectively. Agreement on PI-RADSv2.1 scoring was moderate (κ = 0.43-0.47) for seniors and fair (κ = 0.39) for juniors. Using PI-RADSv2.1, juniors obtained a significantly lower AUC (0.74; 95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 0.70-0.79) than experienced seniors (0.80; 95%CI 0.76-0.84; p = 0.008) but not than less experienced seniors (0.74; 95%CI 0.70-0.78; p = 0.75). As compared to PI-RADSv2, PI-RADSv2.1 downgraded 17 lesions/reader (interquartile range [IQR]: 6-29), of which 2 (IQR: 1-3) were csPCa; it upgraded 4 lesions/reader (IQR: 2-7), of which 1 (IQR: 0-2) was csPCa. Per-lobe analysis, which included 60 (IQR: 25-73) 'additional' lesions/reader, yielded similar results.

CONCLUSIONS

Experience significantly impacted lesion characterization using PI-RADSv2.1 descriptors. As compared to PI-RADSv2, PI-RADSv2.1 tended to downgrade non-csPCa lesions, but this effect was small and variable across readers.

Quality checkpoints in the MRI-directed prostate cancer diagnostic pathway

Multiparametric MRI of the prostate is now recommended as the initial diagnostic test for men presenting with suspected prostate cancer, with a negative MRI enabling safe avoidance of biopsy and a positive result enabling MRI-directed sampling of lesions. The diagnostic pathway consists of several steps, from initial patient presentation and preparation to performing and interpreting MRI, communicating the imaging findings, outlining the prostate and intra-prostatic target lesions, performing the biopsy and assessing the cores. Each component of this pathway requires experienced clinicians, optimized equipment, good inter-disciplinary communication between specialists, and standardized workflows in order to achieve the expected outcomes. Assessment of quality and mitigation measures are essential for the success of the MRI-directed prostate cancer diagnostic pathway. Quality assurance processes including Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System, template biopsy, and pathology guidelines help to minimize variation and ensure optimization of the diagnostic pathway. Quality control systems including the Prostate Imaging Quality scoring system, patient-level outcomes (such as Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System MRI score assignment and cancer detection rates), multidisciplinary meeting review and audits might also be used to provide consistency of outcomes and ensure that all the benefits of the MRI-directed pathway are achieved.

Inter-Reader Variability Using PI-RADS v2 Versus PI-RADS v2.1: Most New Disagreement Stems from Scores 1 and 2

PURPOSE

To analyze possible differences in the inter-reader variability between PI-RADS version 2 (v2) and version 2.1 (v2.1) for the classification of prostate lesions using multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) of the prostate.

METHODS

In this retrospective and randomized study, 239 annotated and histopathologically correlated prostate lesions (104 positive and 135 negative for prostate cancer) were rated twice by three experienced uroradiologists using PI-RADS v2 and v2.1 with an interval of at least two months between readings. Results were tabulated across readers and reading timepoints and inter-reader variability was determined using Fleiss' kappa (κ). Thereafter, an additional analysis of the data was performed in which PI-RADS scores 1 and 2 were combined, as they have the same clinical consequences.

RESULTS

PI-PI-RADS v2.1 showed better inter-reader agreement in the peripheral zone (PZ), but poorer inter-reader agreement in the transition zone (TZ) (PZ: κ = 0.63 vs. κ = 0.58; TZ: κ = 0.47 vs. κ = 0.57). When PI-RADS scores 1 and 2 were combined, the use of PI-RADS v2.1 resulted in almost perfect inter-reader agreement in the PZ and substantial agreement in the TZ (PZ: κ = 0.81; TZ: κ = 0.80).

CONCLUSION

PI-RADS v2.1 improves inter-reader agreement in the PZ. New differences in inter-reader agreement were mainly the result of the assignment of PI-RADS v2.1 scores 1 and 2 to lesions in the TZ. Combining scores 1 and 2 improved inter-reader agreement both in the TZ and in the PZ, indicating that refined definitions may be warranted for these PI-RADS scores.

KEY POINTS

· PI-RADSv2.1 improves inter-reader agreement in the PZ but not in the TZ.. · New differences derived from PI-RADSv2.1 scores 1 and 2 in the TZ.. · Combined PI-RADSv2.1 scores of 1 and 2 yielded better inter-reader agreement.. · PI-RADSv2.1 appears to provide more precise description of lesions in the PZ.. · Improved inter-reader agreement in the PZ stresses the importance of appropriate lexicon description..

CITATION FORMAT

· Beetz N, Haas M, Baur A et al. Inter-Reader Variability Using PI-RADS v2 Versus PI-RADS v2.1: Most New Disagreement Stems from Scores 1 and 2. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2022; 194: 852 - 861.

[Financing perspectives for multiparametric magnetic resonance prostatography]

BACKGROUND

Not only is the evidence for multiparametric magnetic resonance prostatography clearly proven based on current research, the S3 guideline for prostate cancer recommends its use prior to invasive biopsy. Remuneration through the GKV does not occur.

OBJECTIVES

The negotiations concerning the inclusion in the EBM (German Uniform Evaluation Standard) Catalogue of statutory health insurance funds take place in a highly politicized environment and under economic priorities. The routes that are possible in the complex registration procedure are described.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Radiology associations (Berufsverband der Deutschen Radiologen [BDR] und Deutsche Röntgengesellschaft [DRG]) have supported their methods with evidence and quality assurance. Special contracts with health insurance funds, coordinated at the level of the federal states, pave the way and accelerate accreditation.

RESULTS

The definition of the service according to the EBM, the recommendation concerning remuneration as well as supporting documents and a functional quality assurance system have been made available to the Joint Valuation Committee of physicians & health insurance funds as part of the application for approval.

CONCLUSIONS

Due to the nature of the system, the presented evidence and quality assurance, as well as the development of special contracts, have inevitably been transferred to radiology and the unified work of their associations. The imaging modality prostatography shows the advancement of radiological methods for dedicated multiparametric organ diagnostics.

Characterisation of prostate cancer using texture analysis for diagnostic and prognostic monitoring

Automated classification of significant prostate cancer (PCa) using MRI plays a potential role in assisting in clinical decision-making. Multiparametric MRI using a machine-aided approach is a better step to improve the overall accuracy of diagnosis of PCa. The objective of this study was to develop and validate a framework for differentiating Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADS v2) grades (grade 2 to grade 5) of PCa using texture features and machine learning (ML) methods with diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC). The study cohort included an MRI dataset of 59 patients with clinically proven PCa. Regions of interest (ROIs) for a total of 435 lesions were delineated from the segmented peripheral zones of DWI and ADC. Six texture methods comprising 98 texture features in total (49 each of DWI and ADC) were extracted from lesion ROIs. Random forest (RF) and correlation-based feature selection methods were applied on feature vectors to select the best features for classification. Two ML classifiers, support vector machine (SVM) and K-nearest neighbour, were used and validated by 10-fold cross-validation. The proposed framework achieved high diagnostic performance with a sensitivity of 85.25% ± 3.84%, specificity of 95.71% ± 1.96%, accuracy of 84.90% ± 3.37% and area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve of 0.98 for PI-RADS v2 grades (2 to 5) classification using the RF feature selection method and Gaussian SVM classifier with combined features of DWI + ADC. The proposed computer-assisted framework can distinguish between PCa lesions with different aggressiveness based on PI-RADS v2 standards using texture analysis to improve the efficiency of PCa diagnostic performance.

Diagnostic performance of PI-RADS version 2.1 compared to version 2.0 for detection of peripheral and transition zone prostate cancer

The purpose of this study is to compare diagnostic performance of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version (v) 2.1 and 2.0 for detection of Gleason Score (GS) ≥ 7 prostate cancer on MRI. Three experienced radiologists provided PI-RADS v2.0 scores and at least 12 months later v2.1 scores on lesions in 333 prostate MRI examinations acquired between 2012 and 2015. Diagnostic performance was assessed retrospectively by using MRI/transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy and 10-core systematic biopsy as the reference. From a total of 359 lesions, GS ≥ 7 tumor was present in 135 lesions (37.60%). Area under the ROC curve (AUC) revealed slightly lower values for peripheral zone (PZ) and transition zone (TZ) scoring in v2.1, but these differences did not reach statistical significance. A significant number of score 2 lesions in the TZ were downgraded to score 1 in v2.1 showing 0% GS ≥ 7 tumor (0/11). The newly introduced diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) upgrading rule in v2.1 was applied in 6 lesions from a total of 143 TZ lesions (4.2%). In summary, PI-RADS v2.1 showed no statistically significant differences in overall diagnostic performance of TZ and PZ scoring compared to v2.0. Downgraded BPH nodules showed favorable cancer frequencies. The new DWI upgrading rule for TZ lesions was applied in only few cases.