Diagnostic accuracy of biparametric vs multiparametric MRI in clinically significant prostate cancer: Comparison between readers with different experience

Biparametric Prostate MRI: A Practical Approach to Implementation and Comparative Analysis

Prostate cancer (PCa) remains a leading cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality among men worldwide. Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) is currently the gold standard for PCa detection, diagnosis, and active surveillance. However, its reliance on dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) imaging introduces safety concerns, higher costs, and longer scan times. Biparametric MRI (bpMRI), which omits DCE, has emerged as a streamlined alternative that retains T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted imaging. This review critically examines the technical considerations, diagnostic performance, clinical applications, and limitations of bpMRI compared to mpMRI. We evaluate bpMRI's sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa), highlighting its advantages in terms of patient safety, accessibility, and cost-effectiveness. Despite promising findings, the widespread clinical adoption of bpMRI is hindered by variability in imaging protocols, limited large-scale validation, and concerns over missed subtle lesions. Future directions include standardizing bpMRI protocols, integrating artificial intelligence and biomarkers, and conducting multi-centre trials to establish its role in PCa management. bpMRI holds significant potential as a reliable and efficient imaging tool that could complement or replace mpMRI in select clinical contexts.

Correlation of clinically significant prostate cancer sites across multiparametric MRI, prostate biopsy, and whole-mount pathology for optimal prostate biopsy strategy

Data from patients with suspicious lesions on multiparametric magnetic resonance (mpMRI) and a diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) were collected. The aim was to compare csPCa sites identified through whole-mount pathological analysis (WMA) after RP with PI-RADS ≥ 3 lesions identified on mpMRI, and with csPCa foci detected through targeted-biopsy (TB) or combined targeted + systematic biopsy (TSB). A paired Student's t-test and Pearson correlation analysis were performed to evaluate the agreement between these diagnostic methods. A total of 106 patients were included in the TSB group and 95 in the TB group. The correlation between mpMRI, PB, and WMA was moderate and comparable in both groups. No correlation between PB and WMA was found in the TB group for PI-RADS3 lesions, while a moderate-strong correlation was observed when comparing mpMRI, PB, and WMA for PI-RADS > 3 lesions. About 50% of csPCa sites remained undetected by mpMRI. TSB was able to identify 16.5% more csPCa sites than TB. mpMRI is an accurate method in the diagnosis of PCa, especially for PI-RADS > 3 lesions, although some csPCa sites remained undetected. The use of TSB improved the location agreement between PB and WMA, increasing detection rates up to 79%.

Comparisons of three scoring systems based on biparametric magnetic resonance imaging for prediction of clinically significant prostate cancer

Purpose

In this study, we aimed to validate and compare three scoring systems based on biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in biopsy-naïve patients.

Method

In this study, we included patients who underwent MRI examinations between January 2018 and December 2022, with MRI-targeted fusion biopsy (MRGB) as the reference standard. The MRI findings were categorized using three bpMRI-based scorings, in all of them the diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) was the dominant sequence for peripheral zone (PZ) and T2-weighed imaging (T2WI) was the dominant sequence for transition zone (TZ). We also used the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version (PI-RADS) v2.1 to evaluate each lesion. For each scoring, we calculated the sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), positive predictive value (PPV), and area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves (AUC).

Results

The calculated AUC for three bpMRI-based scorings were 83.2% (95% CI 78.8%-87.6%), 85.0% (95% CI 80.8%-89.3%), 82.9% (95% CI 78.4%-87.5%), and 86.0% (95% CI 81.8%-90.1%), respectively. Scoring 2 exhibited significantly superior performance than scoring 1 (P = 0.01) and scoring 3 (P < 0.001). Moreover, the accuracy of scoring 2 was not decreased significantly as compared to PI-RADS v2.1 (P = 0.05). There was no significant difference between 3 bpMRI-based scorings and with PI-RADS in TZ. However, although scoring 2 yielded the highest AUC, it was still notably inferior to PI-RADS (P = 0.02).

Conclusion

All three bpMRI-based scorings demonstrated favorite diagnostic accuracy, and scoring 2 performed significantly better than the other two bpMRI-based scorings. Notably, scoring 2 was not significantly inferior to the full-sequence PI-RADS v2.1 in terms of sensitivity and specificity.

Japanese clinical practice guidelines for prostate cancer 2023

This fourth edition of the Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Prostate Cancer 2023 is compiled. It was revised under the leadership of the Japanese Urological Association, with members selected from multiple academic societies and related organizations (Japan Radiological Society, Japanese Society for Radiation Oncology, the Department of EBM and guidelines, Japan Council for Quality Health Care (Minds), Japanese Society of Pathology, and the patient group (NPO Prostate Cancer Patients Association)), in accordance with the Minds Manual for Guideline Development (2020 ver. 3.0). The most important feature of this revision is the adoption of systematic reviews (SRs) in determining recommendations for 14 clinical questions (CQs). Qualitative SRs for these questions were conducted, and the final recommendations were made based on the results through the votes of 24 members of the guideline development group. Five algorithms based on these results were also created. Contents not covered by the SRs, which are considered textbook material, have been described in the general statement. In the general statement, a literature search for 14 areas was conducted; then, based on the general statement and CQs of the Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Prostate Cancer 2016, the findings revealed after the 2016 guidelines were mainly described. This article provides an overview of these guidelines.

Rationale for adopting a combination of monoparametric MRI with the prostate-specific antigen in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer: comparison with standard biparametric and multiparametric MRI

OBJECTIVES

To compare prostate monoparametric MRI (monoMRI), which uses only diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), with biparametric (bpMRI) and multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) in detecting clinically significant cancer (CSC) and to evaluate the effect of the combination of monoMRI results and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level.

METHODS

In this study, 193 patients (average age 70.5 years; average PSA 7.9 ng/mL) underwent prebiopsy MRI and subsequent prostate biopsy from January 2020 to February 2022. Two radiologists independently reviewed the 3 MRI protocols using the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS). Interreader agreement was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and diagnostic performance was evaluated with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. The Youden index was used to determine the new cutoff value of PSA for detecting CSCs in patients with negative monoMRI results.

RESULTS

CSC was confirmed in 109 patients (56.5%). The interreader agreement on monoMRI (ICC = 0.798) was comparable to that on bpMRI and mpMRI (ICC = 0.751 and 0.714, respectively). ROC curve analysis of the 3 protocols revealed no difference in detecting CSCs (P > 0.05). Applying a new PSA cutoff value (9.5 and 7.4 ng/mL, respectively) in monoMRI-negative patients improved the sensitivity of monoMRI from 89.9% to 96.3% for Reader 1, and from 95.4% to 99.1% for Reader 2.

CONCLUSIONS

MonoMRI based solely on DWI demonstrated similar diagnostic performance to bpMRI and mpMRI in detecting CSCs, and the combination of PSA level with monoMRI has the potential to effectively triage patients with a high likelihood of CSCs.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

Monoparametric MRI conducted only with diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), may show comparable performance to biparametric and multiparametric MRI in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer. In patients with negative monoparametric MRI results, implementing a new PSA cutoff value to determine the need for a biopsy could decrease the number of missed prostate cancer.

Biparametric MRI in prostate cancer during active surveillance: is it safe?

Active surveillance (AS) is the preferred option for patients presenting with low-intermediate-risk prostate cancer. MRI now plays a crucial role for baseline assessment and ongoing monitoring of AS. The Prostate Cancer Radiological Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation (PRECISE) recommendations aid radiological assessment of progression; however, current guidelines do not advise on MRI protocols nor on frequency. Biparametric (bp) imaging without contrast administration offers advantages such as reduced costs and increased throughput, with similar outcomes to multiparametric (mp) MRI shown in the biopsy naïve setting. In AS follow-up, the paradigm shifts from MRI lesion detection to assessment of progression, and patients have the further safety net of continuing clinical surveillance. As such, bpMRI may be appropriate in clinically stable patients on routine AS follow-up pathways; however, there is currently limited published evidence for this approach. It should be noted that mpMRI may be mandated in certain patients and potentially offers additional advantages, including improving image quality, new lesion detection, and staging accuracy. Recently developed AI solutions have enabled higher quality and faster scanning protocols, which may help mitigate against disadvantages of bpMRI. In this article, we explore the current role of MRI in AS and address the need for contrast-enhanced sequences. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Active surveillance is the preferred plan for patients with lower-risk prostate cancer, and MRI plays a crucial role in patient selection and monitoring; however, current guidelines do not currently recommend how or when to perform MRI in follow-up. KEY POINTS: Noncontrast biparametric MRI has reduced costs and increased throughput and may be appropriate for monitoring stable patients. Multiparametric MRI may be mandated in certain patients, and contrast potentially offers additional advantages. AI solutions enable higher quality, faster scanning protocols, and could mitigate the disadvantages of biparametric imaging.

Advancing Prostate Cancer Staging: A Single-Step Approach With Bi-parametric and Whole-Body Diffusion MRI in an African Cohort

OBJECTIVES

 To document our initial experience using whole-body diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (WB-DWI/MRI) and bi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) as a single exam in the staging of biopsy-proven prostate cancers.

METHODS

This retrospective study involved 120 African men with biopsy-confirmed prostate cancer (PCa). All the participants had a single exam that included both a bpMRI and a WB-DWI/MRI. The results were analyzed based on the American Urological Association's risk stratification system and evaluated using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

The combined imaging approach confirmed PCa in all cases, identifying pelvic lymph node metastases in 21 (17.5%) patients. Among 72 high-risk patients, bpMRI+WB-DWI/MRI detected pelvic lymph node metastases in 18 (25.0%), bone metastases in 15 (20.8%), retroperitoneal lymph node metastases in six (8.3%), and extraprostatic extension in 18 (25%), with no solid organ metastases observed.

CONCLUSION

The combination of WB-DWI/MRI and bpMRI in a single-step approach demonstrates diagnostic potential in primary prostate cancer staging for high-risk groups, with the added advantage of shorter examination times, lower patients' costs, and elimination of the risks of adverse events associated with the use of contrast agents and exposure to radiation.

Assessment of the accuracy of biparametric MRI/TRUS fusion-guided biopsy for index tumor evaluation using postoperative pathology specimens

BACKGROUND

Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) is widely used for the diagnosis, surveillance, and staging of prostate cancer. However, it has several limitations, including higher costs, longer examination times, and the use of gadolinium-based contrast agents. This study aimed to investigate the accuracy of preoperatively assessed index tumors (ITs) using biparametric MRI (bpMRI)/transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) fusion biopsy compared with radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens.

METHODS

We included 113 patients diagnosed with prostate cancer through bpMRI/TRUS fusion-guided biopsies of lesions with a Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) category ≥ 3. These patients underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP) at our institution between July 2017 and March 2023. We examined the localization of preoperative and postoperative ITs, the highest Gleason score (GS), and tumor diameter in these patients.

RESULTS

The preoperative cT stage matched the postoperative pT stage in 53 cases (47%), while 31 cases (27%) were upstaged, and 29 cases (26%) were downstaged (Weighted Kappa = 0.21). The preoperative and postoperative IT localizations were consistent in 97 cases (86%). The concordance rate between Gleason groups in targeted biopsies and RP specimens was 51%, with an upgrade in 25 cases (23%) and a downgrade in 27 cases (25%) (Weighted Kappa = 0.42). The maximum diameter of the IT and the maximum cancer core length on biopsy were correlated with the RP tumor's maximum diameter (p < 0.001 for both).

CONCLUSION

The diagnostic accuracy of bpMRI/TRUS fusion biopsy is comparable to mpMRI, suggesting that it can be a cost-effective and time-saving alternative.

Benefit of dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) imaging for prostate cancer detection depending on readers experience in prostate MRI

AIM

To investigate the relevance of dynamic contrast enhanced imaging (DCE) within multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPC) depending on reader experience.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Consecutive patients with 3 T mpMRI and subsequent combined MRI/ultrasound fusion-guided targeted and systematic biopsy from January to September 2019 were included. All mpMRI examinations were read separately by two less experienced (R1; <500 prostate MRI) and two expert radiologists (R2; >5,000 prostate MRI) in consensus and blinded re-read as biparametric MRI (bpMRI). The primary endpoint was the performance comparison of mpMRI versus bpMRI of R1 and R2.

RESULTS

Fifty-three of 124 patients had csPC (43%). The PI-RADS agreement of bpMRI and mpMRI was fair for R1 (κ = 0.373) and moderate for R2 (κ = 0.508). R1 assessed 11 csPC with PI-RADS ≤3 (20.8%) on mpMRI and 12 (22.6%) on bpMRI (R2: 1 [1.9%] and 6 [11.3%], respectively). Sensitivity for csPC of mpMRI was 79.3% (NPV 79.3%) for R1 and 98.1% (NPV 97.5%) for R2 (bpMRI: 77.4% [NVP 75.5%] and 86.8% [NPV 84.4%], respectively). Specificity of mpMRI for csPC was 59.2% for R1 and 54.9% for R2 (bpMRI: 52.1% and 53.5%, respectively). Overall accuracy of mpMRI was 79.8% for R1 compared to bpMRI 66.9% (p=0.017; R2: 87.1% and 81.5%; p=0.230).

CONCLUSION

Prostate MRI benefits from reader experience. Less experienced readers missed a relevant proportion of csPC with mpMRI and even more with bpMRI. The overall performance of expert readers was comparable for mpMRI and bpMRI but DCE enabled detection of some further ISUP 2 PC.

Progress of Multiparameter Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Bladder Cancer: A Comprehensive Literature Review

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been proven to be an indispensable imaging method in bladder cancer, and it can accurately identify muscular invasion of bladder cancer. Multiparameter MRI is a promising tool widely used for preoperative staging evaluation of bladder cancer. Vesical Imaging-Reporting and Data System (VI-RADS) scoring has proven to be a reliable tool for local staging of bladder cancer with high accuracy in preoperative staging, but VI-RADS still faces challenges and needs further improvement. Artificial intelligence (AI) holds great promise in improving the accuracy of diagnosis and predicting the prognosis of bladder cancer. Automated machine learning techniques based on radiomics features derived from MRI have been utilized in bladder cancer diagnosis and have demonstrated promising potential for practical implementation. Future work should focus on conducting more prospective, multicenter studies to validate the additional value of quantitative studies and optimize prediction models by combining other biomarkers, such as urine and serum biomarkers. This review assesses the value of multiparameter MRI in the accurate evaluation of muscular invasion of bladder cancer, as well as the current status and progress of its application in the evaluation of efficacy and prognosis.

Abbreviated MRI Protocols in the Abdomen and Pelvis

Abbreviated MRI (AMRI) protocols rely on the acquisition of a limited number of sequences tailored to a specific question. The main objective of AMRI protocols is to reduce exam duration and costs, while maintaining an acceptable diagnostic performance. AMRI is of increasing interest in the radiology community; however, challenges limiting clinical adoption remain. In this review, we will address main abdominal and pelvic applications of AMRI in the liver, pancreas, kidney, and prostate, including diagnostic performance, pitfalls, limitations, and cost effectiveness will also be discussed. Level of Evidence: 3 Technical Efficacy Stage: 3.

Quantitative Analysis of Prostate MRI: Correlation between Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Fingerprinting and Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI Parameters

This research aimed to assess the relationship between contrast-enhanced (CE) magnetic resonance fingerprinting (MRF) values and dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI parameters including (Ktrans, Kep, Ve, and iAUC). To evaluate the correlation between the MRF-derived values (T1 and T2 values, CE T1 and T2 values, T1 and T2 change) and DCE-MRI parameters and the differences in the parameters between prostate cancer and noncancer lesions in 68 patients, two radiologists independently drew regions-of-interest (ROIs) at the focal prostate lesions. Prostate cancer was identified in 75% (51/68) of patients. The CE T2 value was significantly lower in prostate cancer than in noncancer lesions in the peripheral zone and transition zone. Ktrans, Kep, and iAUC were significantly higher in prostate cancer than noncancer lesions in the peripheral zone (p < 0.05), but not in the transition zone. The CE T1 value was significantly correlated with Ktrans, Ve, and iAUC in prostate cancer, and the CE T2 value was correlated to Ve in noncancer. Some CE MRF values are different between prostate cancer and noncancer tissues and correlate with DCE-MRI parameters. Prostate cancer and noncancer tissues may have different characteristics regarding contrast enhancement.

Deep-learning prostate cancer detection and segmentation on biparametric versus multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging: Added value of dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging

OBJECTIVES

To develop diagnostic algorithms of multisequence prostate magnetic resonance imaging for cancer detection and segmentation using deep learning and explore values of dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging in multiparametric imaging, compared with biparametric imaging.

METHODS

We collected 3227 multiparametric imaging sets from 332 patients, including 218 cancer patients (291 biopsy-proven foci) and 114 noncancer patients. Diagnostic algorithms of T2-weighted, T2-weighted plus dynamic contrast-enhanced, biparametric, and multiparametric imaging were built using 2578 sets, and their performance for clinically significant cancer was evaluated using 649 sets.

RESULTS

Biparametric and multiparametric imaging had following region-based performance: sensitivity of 71.9% and 74.8% (p = 0.394) and positive predictive value of 61.3% and 74.8% (p = 0.013), respectively. In side-specific analyses of cancer images, the specificity was 72.6% and 89.5% (p < 0.001) and the negative predictive value was 78.9% and 83.5% (p = 0.364), respectively. False-negative cancer on multiparametric imaging was smaller (p = 0.002) and more dominant with grade group ≤2 (p = 0.028) than true positive foci. In the peripheral zone, false-positive regions on biparametric imaging turned out to be true negative on multiparametric imaging more frequently compared with the transition zone (78.3% vs. 47.2%, p = 0.018). In contrast, T2-weighted plus dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging had lower specificity than T2-weighted imaging (41.1% vs. 51.6%, p = 0.042).

CONCLUSIONS

When using deep learning, multiparametric imaging provides superior performance to biparametric imaging in the specificity and positive predictive value, especially in the peripheral zone. Dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging helps reduce overdiagnosis in multiparametric imaging.

Bi-parametric prostate MRI with a recall system for contrast enhanced imaging: Improving accessibility while maintaining quality

PURPOSE

To review the efficacy of a recall system for bi-parametric non-contrast prostate MRI (bp-MRI).

METHODS

A bi-parametric protocol was instituted in July 2020 for all patients who had a prostate MRI requested, excluding those after treatment of prostate cancer, patients with hip prosthesis or pacemaker, and those who lived out-of-town. The protocol consisted of tri-planar T2-weighted and diffusion weighted images (DWI) (b = 50, 800 s/mm2 for ADC map; b = 1,500 s/mm2 acquired separately) in accordance with the Prostate Imaging Reporting & Data system (PI-RADS) v2.1 guidelines. After interpretation of bp-MRI exams, patients with equivocal (PI-RADS 3) lesions in peripheral zone (PZ) or any technical limitations were recalled for contrast administration.

RESULTS

Out of 909 bp-MRI scans performed from July 2020 to April 2021, only 52 (5.7 %) were recalled, of which 46 (88.5 %) attended. Amongst these, 41/52 (78.8 %) were recalled for PZ PI-RADS 3 lesions, while the rest of 11 (21.2 %) cases were recalled for technical reasons. Mean time to subsequent recall scan was 11.6 days. On assessment of post-contrast imaging, 29/46 (63 %) cases were upgraded to PI-RADS 4 while 17/46 (37 %) remained PI-RADS 3. This system avoided contrast-agent use in 857 patients, with contrast cost savings of €64,620 (US$68,560) and 214 hours 15 minutes of scanner time was saved. This allowed 255 additional bp-MRI scans to be performed, reducing the waitlist from 1 year to 2-3 weeks.

CONCLUSION

A bi-parametric prostate MRI protocol with a robust recall system for contrast administration not only saved time eliminating the marked backlog but was also more cost efficient without compromising the quality of patient care.

Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Study in the mpMRI of the Prostate-Unnecessary or Underutilised? A Narrative Review

The aim of this review is to summarise recent scientific literature regarding the clinical use of DCE-MRI as a component of multiparametric resonance imaging of the prostate. This review presents the principles of DCE-MRI acquisition and analysis, the current role of DCE-MRI in clinical practice with special regard to its role in presently available categorisation systems, and an overview of the advantages and disadvantages of DCE-MRI described in the current literature. DCE-MRI is an important functional sequence that requires intravenous administration of a gadolinium-based contrast agent and gives information regarding the vascularity and capillary permeability of the lesion. Although numerous studies have confirmed that DCE-MRI has great potential in the diagnosis and monitoring of prostate cancer, its role is still inadequate in the PI-RADS categorisation. Moreover, there have been numerous scientific discussions about abandoning the intravenous application of gadolinium-based contrast as a routine part of MRI examination of the prostate. In this review, we summarised the recent literature on the advantages and disadvantages of DCE-MRI, focusing on an overview of currently available data on bpMRI and mpMRI, as well as on studies providing information on the potential better usability of DCE-MRI in improving the sensitivity and specificity of mpMRI examinations of the prostate.

Effects of dynamic contrast enhancement on transition zone prostate cancer in Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2.1

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study was to analyse the effects of dynamic contrast enhanced (DCE)-MRI on transitional-zone prostate cancer (tzPCa) and clinically significant transitional-zone prostate cancer (cs-tzPCa) in Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) Version 2.1.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The diagnostic efficiencies of T2-weighted imaging (T2WI) + diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), T2WI + dynamic contrast-enhancement (DCE), and T2WI + DWI + DCE in tzPCa and cs-tzPCa were compared using the score of ≥ 4 as the positive threshold and prostate biopsy as the reference standard.

RESULTS

A total of 425 prostate cases were included in the study: 203 cases in the tzPCa group, and 146 in the cs-tzPCa group. The three sequence combinations had the similar areas under the curves in diagnosing tzPCa and cs-tzPCa (all P < 0.05). The sensitivity of T2WI + DCE and T2WI + DWI + DCE (84.7% and 85.7% for tzPCa; 88.4% and 89.7% for cs-tzPCa, respectively) in diagnosing tzPCa and cs-tzPCa was significantly greater than that of T2WI + DWI (79.3% for tzPCa; 82.9% for cs-tzPCa). The specificity of T2WI + DWI (86.5% for tzPCa; 74.9% for cs-tzPCa) were significantly greater than those of T2WI + DCE and T2WI + DWI + DCE (68.0% and 68.5% for tzPCa; 59.1% and 59.5% for cs-tzPCa, respectively) (all P > 0.05). The diagnostic efficacies of T2WI + DCE and T2WI + DWI + DCE had no significant differences (all P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

DCE can improve the sensitivity of diagnosis for tzPCa and cs-tzPCa, and it is useful for small PCa lesion diagnosis.

Diagnostic Performance Evaluation of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Detection of Prostate Cancer with Supervised Machine Learning Methods

Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer-related death in men. Its early and correct diagnosis is of particular importance to controlling and preventing the disease from spreading to other tissues. Artificial intelligence and machine learning have effectively detected and graded several cancers, in particular prostate cancer. The purpose of this review is to show the diagnostic performance (accuracy and area under the curve) of supervised machine learning algorithms in detecting prostate cancer using multiparametric MRI. A comparison was made between the performances of different supervised machine-learning methods. This review study was performed on the recent literature sourced from scientific citation websites such as Google Scholar, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science up to the end of January 2023. The findings of this review reveal that supervised machine learning techniques have good performance with high accuracy and area under the curve for prostate cancer diagnosis and prediction using multiparametric MR imaging. Among supervised machine learning methods, deep learning, random forest, and logistic regression algorithms appear to have the best performance.

Could Biparametric MRI Replace Multiparametric MRI in the Management of Prostate Cancer?

Prostate cancer (PCa) is a worldwide epidemiological problem, since it is one of the most prevalent types of neoplasia among men, and the third-leading cause of cancer-related deaths, after lung and colorectal tumors. Unfortunately, the early stages of PCa have a wide range of unspecific symptoms. For these reasons, early diagnosis and accurate evaluation of suspicious lesions are crucial. Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) is currently the imaging modality of choice for diagnostic screening and local staging of PCa, but also has a leading role in guiding biopsies and in treatment biparametric MRI (bpMRI) could partially replace mpMRI due to its lack of adverse reactions caused by contrast agents, relatively lower costs, and shorter acquisition time. Further, 31 relevant articles regarding the advantages and disadvantages of the aforementioned imaging techniques were scanned. As a result, while bpMRI has comparable accuracy in detecting PCa, its roles in the other steps of PCa management are limited.

The diagnostic performance in clinically significant prostate cancer with PI-RADS version 2.1: simplified bpMRI versus standard mpMRI

OBJECTIVES

To compare the diagnostic performance for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) between bpMRI with only axial T2WI (simplified bpMRI) and standard-multiparametric MRI (mpMRI).

METHODS

A total of 569 patients who underwent mpMRI followed by biopsy or prostatectomy were enrolled in this retrospective study. According to PI-RADS v2.1, three radiologists (A, B, C) from three centers blinded to clinical variables were assigned scores on lesions with simplified bpMRI and then with mpMRI 2 weeks later. Diagnostic performance of simplified bpMRI was compared with mpMRI using histopathology as reference standard.

RESULTS

For all the three radiologists, the diagnostic sensitivity was significantly higher with mpMRI than with simplified bpMRI (P < 0.001 to P = 0.035); and although specificity was also higher with mpMRI than with simplified bpMRI for radiologist B and radiologist C, it was statistically significant only for radiologist B (P = 0.011, P = 0.359, respectively). On the contrary, for radiologist A, specificity was higher with simplified bpMRI than with mpMRI (P = 0.001). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was significantly higher for mpMRI than for simplified bpMRI except for radiologist A (radiologist A: 0.903 vs 0.913, P = 0.1542; radiologist B: 0.861 vs 0.834 P = 0.0013; and radiologist C: 0.884 vs 0.848, P = 0.0003). Interobserver reliability of PI-RADS v2.1 showed good agreement for both simplified bpMRI (kappa = 0.665) and mpMRI (kappa = 0.739).

CONCLUSION

Although the detection of csPCa with simplified bpMRI was comparatively lower than that with mpMRI, the diagnostic performance was still high in simplified bpMRI. Our data justify using mpMRI outperforms simplified bpMRI for prostate cancer screening and imply simplified bpMRI as a potential screening tool.

Comparison between biparametric and multiparametric MRI in predicting muscle invasion by bladder cancer based on the VI-RADS

This study aimed to compare the diagnostic validity of biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) with that of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) based on the Vesicle Imaging-Reporting and Data System (VI-RADS) in predicting muscle invasion by bladder cancer (BCa). We retrospectively examined 357 patients with an initial diagnosis of BCa who underwent preoperative MRI; 257 and 100 patients underwent mpMRI and bpMRI, respectively. Two urogenital radiologists evaluated all bpMRI and mpMRI scans using VI-RADS, and the diagnostic validity of VI-RADS for predicting muscle invasion by BCa was analyzed based on histopathology of the first and/or second transurethral resection of bladder tumors and radical cystectomy. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted with the calculation of area under the curves (AUCs), and the level of significance was P < 0.05. Both groups showed optimal performance with a VI-RADS score ≥ 3. BpMRI showed comparable diagnostic performance to mpMRI (reader 1: AUC, 0.903 [0.827-0.954] vs. 0.935 [0.884-0.968], p = 0.510; and reader 2: AUC, 0.901 [0.814-0.945] vs. 0.915 [0.874-0.946]; p = 0.655). The inter-reader agreement between both readers was excellent (Cohen's kappa value = 0.942 and 0.905 for bpMRI and mpMRI, respectively). This comparative study suggests that bpMRI has comparable diagnostic performance to mpMRI and may be an alternative option to predict muscle invasion by BCa.

Biparametric prostate MRI: impact of a deep learning-based software and of quantitative ADC values on the inter-reader agreement of experienced and inexperienced readers

Objective

To investigate the impact of an artificial intelligence (AI) software and quantitative ADC (qADC) on the inter-reader agreement, diagnostic performance, and reporting times of prostate biparametric MRI (bpMRI) for experienced and inexperienced readers.

Materials and methods

A total of 170 multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) of patients with suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa) were retrospectively reviewed by one experienced and one inexperienced reader three times, following a wash-out period. First, only the bpMRI sequences, including T2-weighted imaging (T2WI), diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) sequences, and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps, were used. Then, bpMRI and quantitative ADC values were used. Lastly, bpMRI and the AI software were used. Inter-reader agreement between the two readers and between each reader and the mpMRI original reports was calculated. Detection rates and reporting times were calculated for each group.

Results

Inter-reader agreement with respect to mpMRI was moderate for bpMRI, Quantib, and qADC for both the inexperienced (weighted k of 0.42, 0.45, and 0.41, respectively) and the experienced radiologists (weighted k of 0.44, 0.46, and 0.42, respectively). Detection rate of PCa was similar between the inexperienced (0.24, 0.26, and 0.23) and the experienced reader (0.26, 0.27 and 0.27), for bpMRI, Quantib, and qADC, respectively. Reporting times were lower for Quantib (8.23, 7.11, and 9.87 min for the inexperienced reader and 5.62, 5.07, and 6.21 min for the experienced reader, for bpMRI, Quantib, and qADC, respectively).

Conclusions

AI and qADC did not have a significant impact on the diagnostic performance of both readers. The use of Quantib was associated with lower reporting times.

Comparison between biparametric and multiparametric MRI diagnosis strategy for prostate cancer in the peripheral zone using PI-RADS version 2.1

PURPOSE

To compare and analyse the diagnostic value of PI-RADS v2.1 when used with biparametric MRI (bpMRI) versus multiparametric MRI (mpMRI), DWI versus T2WI to detect peripheral-zone prostate cancer (pzPCa) and clinically significant peripheral-zone prostate cancer (cs-pzPCa).

METHODS

The diagnostic efficiencies of mpMRI and bpMRI as well as DWI and T2WI in pzPCa and cs-pzPCa were compared using a PI-RADS score of ≥ 4 as the positive threshold and prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy as the reference standards.

RESULTS

A total of 307 prostate cases were included in the study, including 142 in the non-pzPCa group, 165 in the pzPCa group, and 130 in the cs-pzPCa group. The AUCs of mpMRI and bpMRI were 0.717 and 0.733 (P = 0.317), respectively, for the diagnosis of pzPCa (sensitivities: 89.1% and 81.8%; specificities: 54.2% and 64.8%, both P < 0.001) and 0.594 and 0.602 (P = 0.756), respectively, for the diagnosis of cs-pzPCa (sensitivities: 93.1% and 86.2%, P = 0.004; specificities: 25.7% and 34.3%, P = 0.250). The AUCs of DWI and T2WI were 0.733 and 0.749 (P = 0.308), respectively, for the diagnosis of pzPCa (sensitivities: 81.8% and 84.2%; specificities: 64.8% and 66.2%, both P > 0.05) and 0.602 and 0.581 (P = 0.371), respectively, for the diagnosis of cs-pzPCa (sensitivities: 86.2% and 87.7%; specificities: 34.3% and 28.6%, both P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

mpMRI and bpMRI as well as DWI and T2WI using PI-RADS v2.1 exhibited similar diagnostic efficiency in pzPCa and cs-pzPCa.

Current Status of Biparametric MRI in Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: Literature Analysis

The role of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) in the detection of prostate cancer is well-established. Based on the limited role of dynamic contrast enhancement (DCE) in PI-RADS v2.1, the risk of potential side effects, and the increased cost and time, there has been an increase in studies advocating for the omission of DCE from MRI assessments. Per PI-RADS v2.1, DCE is indicated in the assessment of PI-RADS 3 lesions in the peripheral zone, with its most pronounced effect when T2WI and DWI are of insufficient quality. The aim of this study was to evaluate the methodology and reporting in the literature from the past 5 years regarding the use of DCE in prostate MRI, especially with respect to the indications for DCE as stated in PI-RADS v2.1, and to describe the different approaches used across the studies. We searched for studies investigating the use of bpMRI and/or mpMRI in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer between January 2017 and April 2022 in the PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases. Through the search process, a total of 269 studies were gathered and 41 remained after abstract and full-text screening. The following information was extracted from the eligible studies: general clinical and technical characteristics of the studies, the number of PI-RADS 3 lesions, different definitions of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa), biopsy thresholds, reference standard methods, and number and experience of readers. Forty-one studies were included in the study. Only 51% (21/41) of studies reported the prevalence of csPCa in their equivocal lesion (PI-RADS category 3 lesions) subgroups. Of the included studies, none (0/41) performed a stratified sub-analysis of the DCE benefit versus MRI quality and 46% (19/41) made explicit statements about removing MRI scans based on a range of factors including motion, noise, and image artifacts. Furthermore, the number of studies investigating the role of DCE using readers with varying experience was relatively low. This review demonstrates that a high proportion of the studies investigating whether bpMRI can replace mpMRI did not transparently report information inherent to their study design concerning the key indications of DCE, such as the number of clinically insignificant/significant PI-RADS 3 lesions, nor did they provide any sub-analyses to test image quality, with some removing bad quality MRI scans altogether, or reader-experience-dependency indications for DCE. For the studies that reported on most of the DCE indications, their conclusions about the utility of DCE were heavily definition-dependent (with varying definitions of csPCa and of the PI-RADS category biopsy significance threshold). Reporting the information inherent to the study design and related to the specific indications for DCE as stated in PI-RADS v2.1 is needed to determine whether DCE is helpful or not. With most of the recent literature being retrospective and not including the data related to DCE indications in particular, the ongoing dispute between bpMRI and mpMRI is likely to linger.

Current Value of Biparametric Prostate MRI with Machine-Learning or Deep-Learning in the Detection, Grading, and Characterization of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review

Prostate cancer detection with magnetic resonance imaging is based on a standardized MRI-protocol according to the PI-RADS guidelines including morphologic imaging, diffusion weighted imaging, and perfusion. To facilitate data acquisition and analysis the contrast-enhanced perfusion is often omitted resulting in a biparametric prostate MRI protocol. The intention of this review is to analyze the current value of biparametric prostate MRI in combination with methods of machine-learning and deep learning in the detection, grading, and characterization of prostate cancer; if available a direct comparison with human radiologist performance was performed. PubMed was systematically queried and 29 appropriate studies were identified and retrieved. The data show that detection of clinically significant prostate cancer and differentiation of prostate cancer from non-cancerous tissue using machine-learning and deep learning is feasible with promising results. Some techniques of machine-learning and deep-learning currently seem to be equally good as human radiologists in terms of classification of single lesion according to the PIRADS score.

Bi-parametric MRI/TRUS fusion targeted repeat biopsy after systematic 10-12 core TRUS-guided biopsy reveals more significant prostate cancer especially in anteriorly located tumors

Background

MRI and fusion guided biopsy have an increased role in the diagnosis of prostate cancer.

Purpose

To demonstrate the possible advantages with Bi-parametric MRI fusion-guided repeat biopsy over systematic 10-12-core biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer.

Material and Methods

Four hundred and twenty-three consecutive men, with previous systematic 10-12-core TRUS-guided biopsy, and with suspicion of, or diagnosis of, low-risk prostate cancer underwent fusion-guided prostate biopsy between February 2015 and February 2017. The material was retrospectively assessed. In 220 cases no previous cancer was diagnosed, and in 203 cases confirmatory fusion guided biopsy was performed prior to active monitoring. MRI was classified according to PI-RADS. Systematic biopsy was compared to fusion guided biopsy for the detection of cancer, and PI-RADS was compared to the Gleason score.

Results

Fusion guided biopsy detected significantly more cancers than systematic (p < .001). Gleason scores were higher in the fusion biopsy group (p < .001). Anterior tumors were present in 54% of patients. Fusion biopsy from these lesions showed cancer in 53% with previously negative biopsy in systematic biopsies and 66% of them were upgraded from low risk to intermediate or high-risk cancers.

Conclusion

These results show superior detection rate and grading of bi-parametric MRI/TRUS fusion targeted repeat biopsy over systematic 10-12 core biopsies. Fusion guided biopsy detects more significant cancers despite using fewer cores. The risk group was changed for many patients initially selected for active surveillance due to upgrading of tumors. Bi-parametric MRI shows promising results in detecting anterior tumors in patients with suspected prostate cancer.

Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy and validity of biparametric MRI and multiparametric MRI-based VI-RADS scoring in bladder cancer; is contrast material really necessary in detecting muscle invasion?

PURPOSE

(1) To evaluate the accuracy and validity of the biparametric MRI (bp-MRI), including T2-weigthed image (WI) and DWI sequences, and the availability of an alternative to the multiparametric MRI (mp-MRI), for the muscle-invasiveness assessment of bladder cancer (BC). (2) To evaluate the diagnostic performance and agreement of readers with different experiences in the abdominal imaging of using both protocols.

METHODS

Preoperative bladder mp-MRI was performed on 128 patients with a initial diagnosis of BC. Two sets of images, set 1 (bp-MRI) and set 2 (mp-MRI), were independently evaluated by both readers. Descriptive statistics, including sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and area under the curve (AUC), for VI-RADS scores were calculated using ≥ 4 as the cutoff for muscle invasion for each reader and image sets. Inter-reader agreement was evaluated using the Cohen's kappa coefficient.

RESULTS

The sensitivity ranged between 90.3-93.5% and 87.1-90.3%, specificity ranged between 96.6-99.1% and 91.6-96.6%, accuracy ranged between 96-97.3% and 91.3-94.6%, and AUC ranged between 0.947-0.951 and 0.919-0.921, for bp-MRI and mp-MRI, and reader 1 and reader 2, respectively. No significant differences were shown in diagnostic performance for either reader between both the protocols (p = 0.238 and 0.318). There was excellent agreement among the readers in the VI-RADS scores, using both protocols.

CONCLUSION

A bp-MRI protocol has a diagnostic accuracy comparable to an mp-MRI protocol for the detection of muscle-invasive BC using the VI-RADS criteria. Also, in both MRI protocols, the reader's experience does not appear to significantly affect diagnostic performance when using the VI-RADS criteria.

Diagnostic accuracy of bi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging in suspected prostate cancer: Correlation of scan results with biopsy findings in a series of 266 patients

Objectives:

This study aimed to determine the diagnostic accuracy of bi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) for clinically significant (CS) prostate cancer (PCa), and to assess the suitability of a new diagnostic pathway using bpMRI and prostate-specific antigen density (PSAd) to determine the need for biopsy.

Methods:

A total of 386 patients referred to one UK cancer centre with suspected PCa across 12 months from 2017 to 2018 underwent bpMRI, with a Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) score assigned. Of these, 266 (69%) were biopsied, with 150 CS-PCa (a Gleason score of 7 or a Gleason score of 3 with core length ⩾5 mm) detected: a 57% diagnostic yield. Imaging, PSAd and biopsy results were collated, and a confusion matrix was calculated.

Results:

Twenty-three men with PIRADS 1 were biopsied, with two CS-PCa detected: PSAd M=0.19 ( SD=0.07). Twenty-one men with PIRADS 2 lesions were biopsied, with one CS-PCa detected: PSAd was 0.28. Seventy-five men with PIRADS 3 were biopsied, with 25 CS-PCa detected: PSAd M=0.26 ( SD=0.16). Fifty-seven men with PIRADS 4 were biopsied, with 46 CS-PCa detected: PSAd M=0.26 ( SD=0.16). Ninety men with PIRADS 5 were biopsied, with 83 CS-PCa detected: PSAd M=0.55 ( SD=0.63). Among the 266 biopsied patients, a pathway offering biopsy if PIRADS is ⩾3 or PSAd ⩾0.1 spares 11 (4.2%) biopsies compared to baseline practice, with a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 10.1%, for biopsy-detected CS-PCa. The diagnostic yield is 61.8%.

Conclusion:

BpMRI is comparable to multi-parametric MRI for assessing need for biopsy in suspected PCa, albeit with lower specificity. A diagnostic pathway using bpMRI and PSAd can be safely used to avoid biopsy in men at low risk, increasing diagnostic yield of biopsy while reducing overdiagnosis and avoiding the risks and costs associated with gadolinium contrast.

Level of evidence:

Level 4.

Emerging role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in identifying clinically relevant localized prostate cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To explore the recent advances and utility of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in the diagnosis and risk-stratification of prostate cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

Low-risk, clinically insignificant prostate cancer has a decreased risk of morbidity or mortality. Meanwhile, patients with intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer may significantly benefit from interventions like radiation or surgery. To appropriately risk stratify these patients, MRI has emerged as the imaging modality in the last decade to assist in defining prostate cancer significance, location, and biologic aggressiveness. Traditional 12-core transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy is associated with over-detection, and ultimately over-treatment of clinically insignificant disease, and the under-detection of clinically significant disease. Biopsy accuracy is improved with MRI-guided targeted biopsy and with the use of standardized risk stratification imaging score systems. Cancer detection accuracy is further improved with combined biopsy techniques that include both systematic and MRI-targeted biopsy that aid in detection of MRI-invisible lesions.

SUMMARY

mpMRI is an area of expanding innovation that continues to refine the diagnostic accuracy of prostate biopsies. As mpMRI-targeted biopsy in prostate cancer becomes more commonplace, advances like artificial intelligence and less invasive dynamic metabolic imaging will continue to improve the utility of MRI.

[Clinical impact of abbreviated unenhanced prostate protocols in magnetic resonance imaging]

BACKGROUND

According to the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) v2.1 multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) with gadolinium-(Gd)-based contrast agents is the diagnostic standard of care in the detection of prostate cancer (PCa). Recent data suggest equivalent performance of biparametric MRI (bpMRI) and mpMRI in defined indications.

OBJECTIVES

Evaluation of the current role of abbreviated or unenhanced protocols in MRI of the prostate in various clinical settings.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Evaluation of clinical trials, guidelines and expert opinions.

RESULTS

The use of dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI sequences is associated with contrast agent-associated risks and has significant impact on the imaging procedure and costs. Arguments for and against the use of contrast agent in prostate protocols as well as equivalence from bpMRI and mpMRI are discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, bpMRI can only be performed if very good image quality is available and in the hands of a radiologist with extensive experience in reading prostate MRI. There is a need for prospective studies to qualify bpMRI as the diagnostic method for the primary diagnosis of PCa.

Comparison of Sensitivity and Specificity of Biparametric versus Multiparametric Prostate MRI in the Detection of Prostate Cancer in 431 Men with Elevated Prostate-Specific Antigen Levels

(1) Background: the study of dynamic contrast enhancement (DCE) has a limited role in the detection of prostate cancer (PCa), and there is a growing interest in performing unenhanced biparametric prostate-MRI (bpMRI) instead of the conventional multiparametric-MRI (mpMRI). In this study, we aimed to retrospectively compare the performance of the mpMRI, which includes DCE study, and the unenhanced bpMRI, composed of only T2-weighted imaging and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), in PCa detection in men with elevated prostate-specific-antigen (PSA) levels. (2) Methods: a 1.5 T MRI, with an endorectal-coil, was performed on 431 men (aged 61.5 ± 8.3 years) with a PSA ≥4.0 ng/mL. The bpMRI and mpMRI tests were independently assessed in separate sessions by two readers with 5 (R1) and 3 (R2) years of experience. The histopathology or ≥2 years follow-up served as a reference standard. The sensitivity and specificity were calculated with their 95% CI, and McNemar’s and Cohen’s κ statistics were used. (3) Results: in 195/431 (45%) of histopathologically proven PCa cases, 62/195 (32%) were high-grade PCa (GS ≥ 7b) and 133/195 (68%) were low-grade PCa (GS ≤ 7a). The PCa could be excluded by histopathology in 58/431 (14%) and by follow-up in 178/431 (41%) of patients. For bpMRI, the sensitivity was 164/195 (84%, 95% CI: 79–89%) for R1 and 156/195 (80%, 95% CI: 74–86%) for R2; while specificity was 182/236 (77%, 95% CI: 72–82%) for R1 and 175/236 (74%, 95% CI: 68–80%) for R2. For mpMRI, sensitivity was 168/195 (86%, 95% CI: 81–91%) for R1 and 160/195 (82%, 95% CI: 77–87%) for R2; while specificity was 184/236 (78%, 95% CI: 73–83%) for R1 and 177/236 (75%, 95% CI: 69–81%) for R2. Interobserver agreement was substantial for both bpMRI (κ = 0.802) and mpMRI (κ = 0.787). (4) Conclusions: the diagnostic performance of bpMRI and mpMRI were similar, and no high-grade PCa was missed with bpMRI.

Can high b-value 3.0 T biparametric MRI with the Simplified Prostate Image Reporting and Data System (S-PI-RADS) be used in biopsy-naïve men?

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the clinical value of high b-value 3.0 T biparametric magnetic resonance with the Simplified Prostate Image Reporting and Data System (S-PI-RADS) in biopsy-naïve men.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of the data of 224 patients who underwent prostate biopsy (cognitive fusion targeted biopsy combined with systematic biopsy) after a high b-value 3.0 T magnetic resonance examination at Haikou Hospital from July 2018 to July 2020 was performed. Two radiologists performed multi-parameter magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) with the prostate imaging report and data system version 2 (PI-RADS v2) and biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bp-MRI) with the simplified prostate image reporting and data system (S-PI-RADS). The detection efficacy of the two regimens was evaluated by classifying prostate cancer (PCa) and clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) according to pathology, and the statistical significance of the differences between the two regimens was determined by Z-test.

RESULTS

The area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) values of mp-MRI based on PI-RADS v2 and bp-MRI based on S-PI-RADS to detect PCa were 0.905 and 0.892, respectively, while the AUC values for the detection of csPCa were 0.919 and 0.906, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the two tests (Z values were 0.909 and 1.145, p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

There was no significant difference in the detection efficacy of high b-value bp-MRI based on the S-PI-RADS score for prostate cancer and clinically significant prostate cancer compared with the standard PI-RADS v2 score with mp-MRI protocols, which can be applied clinically.

Evaluation of Weighted Diffusion Subtraction for Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) is an important method for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) diagnosis; however, the Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) requires the subjective assessment of "markedly hypointense or not" on apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) map. We hypothesize that weighted diffusion subtraction (WDS) images, created by weighted subtraction of high and low b-value DWIs, might better show areas of ADC values below a set threshold, thus decreasing the subjectivity of the assessment.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the diagnostic ability of WDS for csPCa by comparing scores based on WDS images (DWI/WDS) with those based on PI-RADS DWI (DWI/ADC).

STUDY TYPE

Retrospective.

SUBJECTS

Eighty-six PCa patients.

FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCES

3.0 T; DWI.

ASSESSMENT

Four readers assessed the probability of csPCa in lesions (overall, in the peripheral zone [PZ] and transitional zone [TZ]) using 5-point DWI/ADC and DWI/WDS scores. Prostatectomy specimens were the reference standard. ADC values and contrast between csPCa and normal prostate tissue on ADC maps and WDS images were calculated with reference to the pathological map.

STATISTICAL TESTS

Diagnostic ability was evaluated by Jackknife alternative free-response receiver-operating characteristic curve. Figure of merit (FOM), sensitivity, and positive predictive value (PPV) between the DWI/ADC and DWI/WDS scores were compared using paired t-test. Inter-reader agreement was analyzed using κ statistics, and the significance probability was calculated using the Z statistic. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare contrast between csPCa and normal prostate tissue on ADC maps and WDS images. A P value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

FOM and sensitivity of the DWI/WDS scores were significantly better than those of the DWI/ADC scores overall, in the PZ and TZ (FOM: overall, 0.715 vs. 0.783; PZ, 0.756 vs. 0.815; TZ, 0.653 vs. 0.738. Sensitivity: overall, 0.512 vs. 0.607; PZ, 0.485 vs. 0.573; TZ, 0.636 vs. 0.761). For PPV, a statistically significant difference was observed overall (0.727 vs. 0.777). The κ value of DWI/WDS score was significantly higher than that of DWI/ADC score overall and in the PZ (overall, 0.614 vs. 0.792; PZ, 0.609 vs. 0.797). Contrast was significantly higher overall in the PZ and TZ in WDS images (median, 1.26, 1.19, and 1.61) than in ADC maps (0.46, 0.47, and 0.41).

DATA CONCLUSION

WDS images performed better than ADC maps in the diagnosis of csPCa and in inter-reader agreement of the diagnosis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4 Technical Efficacy Stage: 2.

Bladder cancer: do we need contrast injection for MRI assessment of muscle invasion? A prospective multi-reader VI-RADS approach

OBJECTIVES

(1) To investigate whether a contrast-free biparametric MRI (bp-MRI) including T2-weighted images (T2W) and diffusion-weighted images (DWI) can be considered an accurate alternative to the standard multiparametric MRI (mp-MRI), consisting of T2, DWI, and dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) imaging for the muscle-invasiveness assessment of bladder cancer (BC), and (2) to evaluate how the diagnostic performance of differently experienced readers is affected according to the type of MRI protocol.

METHODS

Thirty-eight patients who underwent a clinically indicated bladder mp-MRI on a 3-T scanner were prospectively enrolled. Trans-urethral resection of bladder was the gold standard. Two sets of images, set 1 (bp-MRI) and set 2 (mp-MRI), were independently reviewed by four readers. Descriptive statistics, including sensitivity and specificity, were calculated for each reader. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed, and the areas under the curve (AUCs) were calculated for the bp-MRI and the standard mp-MRI. Pairwise comparison of the ROC curves was performed.

RESULTS

The AUCs for bp- and mp-MRI were respectively 0.91-0.92 (reader 1), 0.90 (reader 2), 0.95-0.90 (reader 3), and 0.90-0.87 (reader 4). Sensitivity was 100% for both protocols and specificity ranged between 79.31 and 89.66% and between 79.31 and 83.33% for bp-MRI and mp-MRI, respectively. No significant differences were shown between the two MRI protocols (p > 0.05). No significant differences were shown accordingly to the reader's experience (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

A bp-MRI protocol consisting of T2W and DWI has comparable diagnostic accuracy to the standard mp-MRI protocol for the detection of muscle-invasive bladder cancer. The experience of the reader does not significantly affect the diagnostic performance using VI-RADS.

KEY POINTS

• The contrast-free MRI protocol shows a comparable accuracy to the standard multiparametric MRI protocol in the bladder cancer muscle-invasiveness assessment. • VI-RADS classification helps non-expert radiologists to assess the muscle-invasiveness of bladder cancer. • DCE should be carefully interpreted by less experienced readers due to inflammatory changes representing a potential pitfall.

Bi- or multiparametric MRI in a sequential screening program for prostate cancer with PSA followed by MRI? Results from the Göteborg prostate cancer screening 2 trial

Objectives

The PIRADS Steering Committee has called for “higher quality data before making evidence-based recommendations on MRI without contrast enhancement as an initial diagnostic work up,” however, recognizing biparametric (bp) MRI as a reasonable option in a low-risk setting such as screening. With bpMRI, more men can undergo MRI at a lower cost and they can be spared the invasiveness of intravenous access. The aim of this study was to assess cancer detection in bpMRI vs mpMRI in sequential screening for prostate cancer (PCa).

Methods

Within the ongoing Göteborg PCa screening 2 trial, we assessed cancer detection in 551 consecutive participants undergoing prostate MRI. In the same session, readers first assessed bpMRI and then mpMRI. Four targeted biopsies were performed for lesions scored PIRADS 3–5 with bpMRI and/or mpMRI.

Results

Cancer was detected in 84/551 cases (15.2%; 95% CI: 12.4–18.4) with mpMRI and in 83/551 cases (15.1%; 95% CI: 12.3–18.2%) with bpMRI. The relative risk (RR) for cancer detection with bpMRI compared to mpMRI was 0.99 (95% one-sided CI: > 94.8); bpMRI was non-inferior to mpMRI (10% non-inferiority margin). bpMRI resulted in fewer false positives, 45/128 (35.2%), compared to mpMRI, 52/136 (38.2%), RR = 0.92; 95% CI: 0.84–0.98. Of 8 lesions scored positive only with mpMRI, 7 were false positives. The PPV for MRI and targeted biopsy was 83/128 (64.8%) for bpMRI and 84/136 (61.8%) for mpMRI, RR = 1.05, 95% CI: 1.01–1.10.

Conclusions

In a PSA-screened population, bpMRI was non-inferior to mpMRI for cancer detection and resulted in fewer false positives.

Key Points

• In screening for prostate cancer with PSA followed by MRI, biparametric MRI allows radiologists to detect an almost similar number of prostate cancers and score fewer false positive lesions compared to multiparametric MRI.

• In a screening program, high sensitivity should be weighed against cost and risks for healthy men; a large number of men can be saved the exposure of gadolinium contrast medium by adopting biparametric MRI and at the same time allowing for a higher turnover in the MRI room.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00330-021-07907-9.

Prostate Cancer Diagnostic Algorithm as a "Road Map" from the First Stratification of the Patient to the Final Treatment Decision

The diagnostics of prostate cancer are currently based on three pillars: prostate biomarker panel, imaging techniques, and histological verification. This paper presents a diagnostic algorithm that can serve as a "road map": from initial patient stratification to the final decision regarding treatment. The algorithm is based on a review of the current literature combined with our own experience. Diagnostic algorithms are a feature of an advanced healthcare system in which all steps are consciously coordinated and optimized to ensure the proper individualization of the treatment process. The prostate cancer diagnostic algorithm was created using the prostate specific antigen and in particular the Prostate Health Index in the first line of patient stratification. It then continued on the diagnostic pathway via imaging techniques, biopsy, or active surveillance, and then on to the treatment decision itself. In conclusion, the prostate cancer diagnostic algorithm presented here is a functional tool for initial patient stratification, comprehensive staging, and aggressiveness assessment. Above all, emphasis is placed on the use of the Prostate Health Index (PHI) in the first stratification of the patients as a predictor of aggressiveness and clinical stage of prostrate cancer (PCa). The inclusion of PHI in the algorithm significantly increases the accuracy and speed of the diagnostic procedure and allows to choose the optimal pathway just from the beginning. The use of advanced diagnostic techniques allows us to move towards to a more advanced level of cancer care. This diagnostics algorithm has become a standard of care in our hospital. The algorithm is continuously validated and modified based on our results.

Accuracy of Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Reader Experience Matters

Background

Prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly used in the detection, image-guided biopsy, and active surveillance of prostate cancer. The accuracy of prostate MRI may differ based on factors including imaging technique, patient population, and reader experience.

Objective

To determine whether the accuracy of prostate MRI varies with reader experience.

Design, setting, and participants

We rescored regions of interest from 194 consecutive patients who had undergone MRI/ultrasonography fusion biopsy. Original prostate MRI scans had been interpreted by one of 33 abdominal radiologists (AR group). More than 14 mo later, rescoring was performed by two blinded, prostate MRI radiologists (PR group). Likert scoring was used for both original MRI reports and rescoring.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

Test performance (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value [PPV], and negative predictive value [NPV]) of prostate MRI was defined for the AR and PR groups. A Likert score of 4–5 was considered test positive and clinically significant prostate carcinoma (csPCa; Gleason grade group [GGG] ≥2) was considered outcome positive.

Results and limitations

MRI-positive lesions (Likert 4–5) scored by the PR group resulted in csPCa more frequently than those scored by the AR group (64.9% vs 39.3%). MRI-negative lesions (Likert 2–3) were more likely to result in a clinically insignificant biopsy (benign pathology or GGG 1) when scored by the PR versus the AR group (91.8% vs 76.6%). Sensitivity and specificity of MRI to detect csPCa were higher for the PR group than for the AR group (sensitivity 85.9% vs 70.7%; specificity 77.3% vs 46.8%). Overall diagnostic accuracy was higher for the PR group than for the AR group (80.1% vs 54.6%).

Conclusions

Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of prostate MRI were higher for the PR group than for the AR group.

Patient summary

We examined the accuracy of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in two groups of radiologists. Experienced radiologists were more likely to detect clinically significant prostate cancer on MRI.

Comparison between biparametric and multiparametric MR imaging of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2.1 in detection of prostate cancer

Background

Prostate cancer (PCa) is considered to be the commonest cancer among males. Early and precise diagnosis of PCa is essential for adequate treatment. Multiparametric MR imaging (mpMRI) is actually the most precise imaging technique used for early diagnosis of PCa. The aim of this work was to assess the diagnostic capability of biparametric MRI (bpMRI) and multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) of PI-RADS V2.1 in detection of prostate cancer (PCa). This prospective study was carried on 60 male patients with high PSA. bpMRI and mpMRI were performed for all patients using a 3-T MRI scanner. The diagnostic performance of bpMRI of PI-RADS V2.1 was compared to that of mpMRI of PI-RADS V 2.1. The diagnosis of Pca was confirmed by transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy and the results of open prostatectomy specimens.

Results

When considering PI-RADS categories 1, 2, and 3 as benign and categories 4 and 5 as malignant, mpMRI had higher sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy when compared with bpMRI (sensitivity was 88.6% for mpMRI versus 60% for bpMRI and diagnostic accuracy was 91.7% for mpMRI versus 75% for bpMRI). When considering PI-RADS categories 1 and 2 as benign and PI-RADS categories 3.4 and 5 as malignant, the sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy of bpMRI and mpMRI were comparable (sensitivity was 94.3% for both bpMRI and mpMRI and diagnostic accuracy was 86.7% for both bpMRI and mpMRI).

Conclusion

Considering PI-RADS scores 4 and 5 as malignant, mpMRI had higher sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy when compared with bpMRI; however, when considering PI-RADS scores 3, 4, and 5 as malignant, both bpMRI and mpMRI had similar diagnostic accuracy.

PI-RADS Committee Position on MRI Without Contrast Medium in Biopsy-Naive Men With Suspected Prostate Cancer: Narrative Review

The steadily increasing demand for diagnostic prostate MRI has led to concerns regarding the lack of access to and the availability of qualified MRI scanners and sufficiently experienced radiologists, radiographers, and technologists to meet the demand. Solutions must enhance operational benefits without compromising diagnostic performance, quality, and delivery of service. Solutions should also mitigate risks such as decreased reader confidence and referrer engagement. One approach may be the implementation of MRI without the use gadolinium-based contrast medium (bipara-metric MRI), but only if certain prerequisites such as high-quality imaging, expert interpretation quality, and availability of patient recall or on-table monitoring are mandated. Alternatively, or in combination, a clinical risk-based approach could be used for protocol selection, specifically, which biopsy-naive men need MRI with contrast medium (multiparametric MRI). There is a need for prospective studies in which biopsy decisions are made according to MRI without contrast enhancement. Such studies must define clinical and operational benefits and identify which patient groups can be scanned successfully without contrast enhancement. These higher-quality data are needed before the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) Committee can make evidence-based recommendations about MRI without contrast enhancement as an initial diagnostic approach for prostate cancer workup.

PI-RADSv2.1: Current status

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has played an increasing role in the detection and local staging of prostate cancer over the last 15 years. Prostate mpMRI, due to various factors, is prone to high inter-reader variability necessitating standardized reporting guidelines that provide accurate and actionable information to the ordering clinician. The Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System version 2.1 (PI-RADSv2.1) was released in March 2019 as an update to PI-RADSv2.0 with the hope of further standardizing the reporting process of prostate mpMRI, improving the detection of clinically significant cancer, reducing the biopsy rate of indolent tumors, and decreasing inter-reader variability. Early data show an improved performance of PI-RADSv2.1 over PI-RADSv2.0. Updates included in PI-RADSv2.1 and its current experience in clinic will be reviewed in this review.

Comparison of Biparametric and Multiparametric MRI for Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Detection With PI-RADS Version 2.1

BACKGROUND

Biparametric MRI (bpMRI) without dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) results in an elimination of adverse events, shortened examination time, and reduced costs, compared to multiparametric MRI (mpMRI). The ability of bpMRI to detect clinically significant prostate cancer (csPC) with the Prostate Imaging and Reporting Data System version 2.1 (PI-RADS v2.1) compared to standard mpMRI has not been studied extensively.

PURPOSE

To compare the interobserver reliability and diagnostic performance for detecting csPC of bpMRI and mpMRI using PI-RADS v2.1.

STUDY TYPE

Retrospective.

POPULATION

In all, 103 patients with elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels who underwent mpMRI and subsequent MRI-ultrasonography fusion-guided prostate-targeted biopsy (MRGB) with or without prostatectomy.

FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCES

T₂ -weighted imaging (T₂ WI), diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), and DCE-MRI at 3T.

ASSESSMENT

Three readers independently assessed each suspected PC lesion, assigning a score of 1-5 for T₂ WI, a score of 1-5 for DWI, and positive and negative for DCE-MRI according to PI-RADS v2.1 and determined the overall PI-RADS assessment category of bpMRI (T₂ WI and DWI) and mpMRI (T₂ WI, DWI, and DCE-MRI). The reference standard was MRGB or prostatectomy-derived histopathology.

STATISTICAL TESTING

Statistical analysis was performed using the kappa statistic and McNemar and Delong tests.

RESULTS

Of the 165 suspected PC lesions in 103 patients, 81 were diagnosed with csPC and 84 with benign conditions. Interobserver variability of PI-RADS assessment category showed good agreement for bpMRI (kappa value = 0.642) and mpMRI (kappa value = 0.644). For three readers, the diagnostic sensitivity was significantly higher for mpMRI than for bpMRI (P < 0.001 to P = 0.016, respectively), whereas diagnostic specificity was significantly higher for bpMRI than for mpMRI (P < 0.001 each). For three readers, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was higher for bpMRI than for mpMRI; however, the difference was significant only for Reader 1 and Reader 3 (Reader 1: 0.823 vs. 0.785, P = 0.035; Reader 2: 0.852 vs. 0.829, P = 0.099; and Reader 3: 0.828 vs. 0.773, P = 0.002).

DATA CONCLUSION

For detecting csPC using PI-RADS v2.1, the interobserver reliability and diagnostic performance of bpMRI was comparable with those of mpMRI.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4 TECHNICAL EFFICACY STAGE: 2.

Assessment of DCE Utility for PCa Diagnosis Using PI-RADS v2.1: Effects on Diagnostic Accuracy and Reproducibility

The role of dynamic contrast-enhanced-MRI (DCE-MRI) for Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) scoring is a controversial topic. In this retrospective study, we aimed to measure the added value of DCE-MRI in combination with T2-weighted (T2W) and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) using PI-RADS v2.1, in terms of reproducibility and diagnostic accuracy, for detection of prostate cancer (PCa) and clinically significant PCa (CS-PCa, for Gleason Score ≥ 7). 117 lesions in 111 patients were identified as suspicion by multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) and addressed for biopsy. Three experienced readers independently assessed PI-RADS score, first using biparametric MRI (bpMRI, including DWI and T2W), and then multiparametric MRI (also including DCE). The inter-rater and inter-method agreement (bpMRI- vs. mpMRI-based scores) were assessed by Cohen's kappa (κ). Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis was performed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy for PCa and CS-PCa detection among the two scores. Inter-rater agreement was excellent for the three pairs of readers (κ ≥ 0.83), while the inter-method agreement was good (κ ≥ 0.73). Areas under the ROC curve (AUC) showed similar high-values (0.8 ≤ AUC ≤ 0.85). The reproducibility of PI-RADS v2.1 scoring was comparable and high among readers, without relevant differences, depending on the MRI protocol used. The inclusion of DCE did not influence the diagnostic accuracy.

Diagnostic accuracy of biparametric versus multiparametric prostate MRI: assessment of contrast benefit in clinical practice

PURPOSE

To assess the added value of dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) in prostate MR in clinical practice.

METHODS

Two hundred sixty-four patients underwent prostate MRI, with T2 and DWI sequences initially interpreted, prior to full multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) interpretation using a Likert 1-5 scale. A prospective opinion was given on likely benefit of contrast prior to review of the DCE sequence, and retrospectively following full mpMRI review. The final histology result following targeted and/or systematic biopsy of the prostate was used for outcome purposes.

RESULTS

Biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) and mpMRI were assigned the same score in 86% of cases; when dichotomising to a negative or positive MRI (Likert score ≥ 3), concordance increased to 92.8%. At Likert score ≥ 3 bpMRI detected 89.9% of all cancers and 93.5% clinically significant prostate cancers (csPCa) and mpMRI 90.7% and 94.6%, respectively. mpMRI had fewer false positives than bpMRI (11.4% vs 18.9%) and a lower Likert 3 rate (8.3% vs 17%), conferring higher specificity (74% vs 67%), but similar sensitivity (95% versus 94%) and ROC-AUC (90% vs 89%). At a positive MRI threshold of Likert ≥ 4, mpMRI had a higher sensitivity than bpMRI (89% versus 80%) and detected more csPCa (89.2% versus 79.6%). DCE was prospectively considered of potential benefit in 27.3%, but readers would only recall 11% of patients for DCE sequences, mainly to assess score 3 peripheral zone lesions. Following full mpMRI review, DCE was considered helpful in 28.4% of cases; in 23/75 (30.6%) of these cases this only became apparent after reviewing the sequence, reasons included increased confidence, presence of "safety-net" lesions or inflammatory lesions.

CONCLUSION

BpMRI has equivalent cancer detection rates to mpMRI; however, mpMRI had fewer Likert 3 call rates and increased specificity and was subjectively considered of benefit by readers in 28.4% of cases.

KEY POINTS

• bpMRI has similar cancer detection rates to the full mpMRI protocol at a positive MRI threshold of Likert 3. • mpMRI had fewer intermediate category 3 calls (8.3%) than bpMRI (17%) and fewer false positives than bpMRI (11.4% vs 18.9%), conferring higher specificity (74% vs 67%). • Readers considered DCE beneficial in 28.4% of cases, but in a relatively high number (30.6%) this only became apparent after reviewing the sequence.

Biparametric versus multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate: detection of clinically significant cancer in a perfect match group

Background

Biparametric (bp) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) could be an alternative MRI for the detection of the clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa).

Purpose

To compare the accuracies of prostate cancer detection and localization between prebiopsy bpMRI and postbiopsy multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) taken on different days, using radical prostatectomy specimens as the reference standards.

Material and methods

Data of 41 total consecutive patients who underwent the following examinations and procedures between September 2015 and March 2017 were collected: (1) magnetic resonance- and/or ultrasonography-guided biopsy after bpMRI; (2) postbiopsy mpMRI; and (3) radical prostatectomy with csPCa. Two radiologists scored suspected lesions on bpMRI and mpMRI independently using Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2. The diagnostic accuracy of detecting csPCa and the Dice similarity coefficient were obtained. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) ratios were also obtained for quantitative comparison between bpMRI and mpMRI.

Results

Diagnostic accuracies on bpMRI and mpMRI were 0.83 and 0.82 for reader 1; 0.80 and 0.82 for reader 2. There are no significantly different values of diagnostic sensitivities or specificities between the readers or between MRI protocols. Intra-observer Dice similarity coefficient was significantly lower in reader 2, compared to that in reader 1 between the two MRI protocols. The range of mean ADC ratio was 0.281-0.635. There was no statistically significant difference in the ADC ratio between bpMRI and mpMRI.

Conclusions

Diagnostic performance of bpMRI without dynamic contrast enhancement MRI is not significantly different from mpMRI with dynamic contrast enhancement MRI in the detection of csPCa.

Multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer diagnosis: current status and future directions

The current diagnostic pathway for prostate cancer has resulted in overdiagnosis and consequent overtreatment as well as underdiagnosis and missed diagnoses in many men. Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) of the prostate has been identified as a test that could mitigate these diagnostic errors. The performance of mpMRI can vary depending on the population being studied, the execution of the MRI itself, the experience of the radiologist, whether additional biomarkers are considered and whether mpMRI-targeted biopsy is carried out alone or in addition to systematic biopsy. A number of challenges to implementation remain, such as ensuring high-quality execution and reporting of mpMRI and ensuring that this diagnostic pathway is cost-effective. Nevertheless, emerging clinical trial data support the adoption of this technology as part of the standard of care for the diagnosis of prostate cancer.

Comparison of biparametric and multiparametric MRI in the diagnosis of prostate cancer

PURPOSE

To compare the diagnostic accuracy of biparametric MRI (bpMRI) and multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) for prostate cancer (PCa) and clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) and to explore the application value of dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI in prostate imaging.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This study retrospectively enrolled 235 patients with suspected PCa in our hospital from January 2016 to December 2017, and all lesions were histopathologically confirmed. The lesions were scored according to the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADS V2). The bpMRI (T2-weighted imaging [T2WI], diffusion-weighted imaging [DWI]/apparent diffusion coefficient [ADC]) and mpMRI (T2WI, DWI/ADC and DCE) scores were recorded to plot the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. The area under the curve (AUC), accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value (PPV) for each method were calculated and compared. The patients were further stratified according to bpMRI scores (bpMRI ≥3, and bpMRI = 3, 4, 5) to analyse the difference in DCE MRI between PCa and non-PCa lesions (as well as between csPCa and non-csPCa).

RESULTS

The AUC values for the bpMRI and mpMRI protocols for PCa were comparable (0.790 [0.732-0.840] and 0.791 [0.733-0.841], respectively). The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of bpMRI for PCa were 76.2, 79.5, 72.6, 75.8, and 76.6%, respectively, and the values for mpMRI were 77.4, 84.4, 69.9, 75.2, and 80.6%, respectively. The AUC values for the bpMRI and mpMRI protocols for the diagnosis of csPCa were similar (0.781 [0.722-0.832] and 0.779 [0.721-0.831], respectively). The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of bpMRI for csPCa were 74.0, 83.8, 66.9, 64.8, and 85.0%, respectively; and 73.6, 87.9, 63.2, 63.2, and 87.8%, respectively, for mpMRI. For patients with bpMRI scores ≥3, positive DCE results were more common in PCa and csPCa lesions (both P = 0.001). Further stratification analysis showed that for patients with a bpMRI score = 4, PCa and csPCa lesions were more likely to have positive DCE results (P = 0.003 and P < 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The diagnostic accuracy of bpMRI is comparable with that of mpMRI in the detection of PCa and the identification of csPCa. DCE MRI is helpful in further identifying PCa and csPCa lesions in patients with bpMRI ≥3, especially bpMRI = 4, which may be conducive to achieving a more accurate PCa risk stratification. Rather than omitting DCE, we think further comprehensive studies are required for prostate MRI.