Detection of clinically signifi cant prostate cancer with PIRADS v2 scores, PSA density, and ADC values in regions with and without mpMRI visible lesions

Quantitative Evaluation of Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values, ISUP Grades and Prostate-Specific Antigen Density Values of Potentially Malignant PI-RADS Lesions

The aim of this study was to demonstrate the correlation between ADC values and the ADC/PSAD ratio for potentially malignant prostate lesions classified into ISUP grades and to determine threshold values to differentiate benign lesions (noPCa), clinically insignificant (nsPCa) and clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). We enrolled a total of 403 patients with 468 prostate lesions, of which 46 patients with 50 lesions were excluded for different reasons. Therefore, 357 patients with a total of 418 prostate lesions remained for the final evaluation. For all lesions, ADC values were measured; they demonstrated a negative correlation with ISUP grades (p < 0.001), with a significant difference between csPCa and a combined group of nsPCa and noPCa (ns-noPCa, p < 0.001). The same was true for the ADC/PSAD ratio, but only the ADC/PSAD ratio proved to be a significant discriminator between nsPCa and noPCa (p = 0.0051). Using the calculated threshold values, up to 31.6% of biopsies could have been avoided. Furthermore, the ADC/PSAD ratio, with the ability to distinguish between nsPCa and noPCa, offers possible active surveillance without prior biopsy.

Clinical value of minimum apparent diffusion coefficient for prediction of clinically significant prostate cancer in the transition zone

BACKGROUND

This study investigated the association between apparent diffusion coefficients in Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System 4/5 lesions and clinically significant prostate cancer in the transition zone.

METHODS

We included 102 patients who underwent transperineal cognitive fusion targeted biopsy for Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System 4/5 lesions in the transition zone between 2016 and 2020. The association between apparent diffusion coefficients and prostate cancers in the transition zone was analyzed.

RESULTS

The detection rate of prostate cancer was 49% (50/102), including clinically significant prostate cancer in 37.3% (38/102) of patients. The minimum apparent diffusion coefficients in patients with clinically significant prostate cancer were 494.5 ± 133.6 µm2/s, which was significantly lower than 653.8 ± 172.5 µm2/s in patients with benign histology or clinically insignificant prostate cancer. Age, prostate volume, transition zone volume, and mean and minimum apparent diffusion coefficients were associated with clinically significant prostate cancer. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that only the minimum apparent diffusion coefficient value (odds ratio: 0.994; p < 0.001) was an independent predictor of clinically significant prostate cancer. When the cutoff value of the minimum apparent diffusion coefficient was less than 595 µm2/s, indicating the presence of prostate cancer in the transition zone, the detection rate increased to 59.2% (29/49) in this cohort.

CONCLUSION

The minimum apparent diffusion coefficient provided additional value to indicate the presence of clinically significant prostate cancer in the transition zone. It may help consider the need for subsequent biopsies in patients with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System 4/5 lesions and an initial negative targeted biopsy.

Prostate cancer in PI-RADS scores 1 and 2 version 2.1: a comparison to previous PI-RADS versions

PURPOSE

To evaluate the validity of PI-RADS categories 1 and 2 version 2.1 (V2.1) as predictors of the absence of carcinoma and to reevaluate lesions that were analysed as suspicious prior to PI-RADS or according to PI-RADS versions 1 and 2 and classified as PI-RADS 1 or 2 in V2.1.

METHODS

Retrospective evaluation of 1170 multiparametric MRIs performed at one academic teaching hospital (2012-2019). Study cohort comprised 188 men that achieved PI-RADS scores 1 or 2 (V2.1) and underwent systematic and targeted biopsy, split into one group with suspect findings in the original reports that were created prior to PI-RADS or with version 1 and 2, and another group with unremarkable reports. Differences in presence of prostate cancer and PSA density were assessed by Chi-square and Fisher's exact test, and the negative predictive value (NPV) for both groups was conducted.

RESULTS

The NPV for clinically significant carcinoma (csCa) was 89.1% for 55 men with suspect findings in the original report and 93.2% for 133 men with negative MRI. There was no difference between the groups regarding the detection of csCa (p = 0.103). PSA density was significantly higher in the group with suspect original reports (p = 0.015).

CONCLUSION

A PI-RADS score 1 or 2 appears less likely to miss existing prostate cancer, although a small amount of csCa can be overlooked. In case of clinical suspicion or elevated PSA density and PI-RADS score 1 or 2, an individual decision has to be taken if biopsy is necessary or if monitoring is sufficient.

US lesion visibility predicts clinically significant upgrade of prostate cancer by systematic biopsy

Purpose

To identify predictors of when systematic biopsy leads to a higher overall prostate cancer grade compared to targeted biopsy.

Methods and materials

918 consecutive patients who underwent prostate MRI followed by MRI/US fusion biopsy and systematic biopsies from January 2015 to November 2019 at a single academic medical center were retrospectively identified. The outcome was upgrade of PCa by systematic biopsy, defined as cases when systematic biopsy led to a Gleason Grade (GG) ≥ 2 and greater than the maximum GG detected by targeted biopsy. Generalized linear regression and conditional logistic regression were used to analyze predictors of upgrade.

Results

At the gland level, the presence of an US-visible lesion was associated with decreased upgrade (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.44–0.93, p = 0.02). At the sextant level, upgrade was more likely to occur through the biopsy of sextants with MRI-visible lesions (OR 2.58, 95% CI 1.87–3.63, p < 0.001), US-visible lesions (OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.14–2.93, p = 0.01), and ipsilateral lesions (OR 3.89, 95% CI 2.36–6.42, p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Systematic biopsy is less valuable in patients with an US-visible lesion, and more likely to detect upgrades in sextants with imaging abnormalities. An approach that takes additional samples from regions with imaging abnormalities may provide analogous information to systematic biopsy.

Comparison of PI-RADS Versions 2.0 and 2.1 for MRI-based Calculation of the Prostate Volume

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

Prostate gland volume (PGV) should be routinely included in MRI reports of the prostate. The recently updated Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2.1 includes a change in the recommended measurement method for PGV compared to version 2.0. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the agreement of MRI-based PGV calculations with the volumetric manual slice-by-slice prostate segmentation as a reference standard using the linear measurements per PI-RADS versions 2.0 and 2.1. Furthermore, to assess inter-reader agreement for the different measurement approaches, determine the influence of an enlarged transition zone on measurement accuracy and to assess the value of the bullet formula for PGV calculation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ninety-five consecutive treatment-naive patients undergoing prostate MRI were retrospectively analyzed. Prostates were manually contoured and segmented on axial T2-weighted images. Four different radiologists independently measured the prostate in three dimensions according to PI-RADS v2.0 and v2.1, respectively. MRI-based PGV was calculated using the ellipsoid and bullet formulas. Calculated volumes were compared to the reference manual segmentations using Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Inter-reader agreement was calculated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

RESULTS

Inter-reader agreement was excellent for the ellipsoid and bullet formulas using PI-RADS v2.0 (ICC 0.985 and 0.987) and v2.1 (ICC 0.990 and 0.994), respectively. The median difference from the reference standard using the ellipsoid formula derived PGV was 0.4 mL (interquartile range, -3.9 to 5.1 mL) for PI-RADS v2.0 (p = 0.393) and 2.6 mL (interquartile range, -1.6 to 7.3 mL) for v2.1 (p < 0.001) with a median difference of 2.2 mL. The bullet formula overestimated PGV by a median of 13.3 mL using PI-RADS v2.0 (p < 0.001) and 16.0 mL using v2.1 (p < 0.001). In the presence of an enlarged transition zone the PGV tended to be higher than the reference standard for PI-RADS v2.0 (median difference of 4.7 mL; p = 0.018) and for v2.1 (median difference of 5.7 mL, p < 0.001) using the ellipsoid formula.

CONCLUSION

Inter-reader agreement was excellent for the calculated PGV for both methods. PI-RADS v2.0 measurements with the ellipsoid formula yielded the most accurate volume estimates. The differences between PI-RADS v2.0 and v2.1 were statistically significant although small in absolute numbers but may be of relevance in specific clinical scenarios like prostate-specific antigen density calculation. These findings validate the use of the ellipsoid formula and highlight that the bullet formula should not be used for prostate volume estimation due to systematic overestimation.

Patient- and tumor-level risk factors for MRI-invisible prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Multiparametric MRI is highly sensitive for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer, but has a 10-20% false negative rate. It is unknown if there are clinical factors that predict MRI invisibility. We sought to identify predictors of MRI-invisible (MRI(-)) disease.

METHODS

Men undergoing MRI/US-fusion targeted + systematic biopsy by two surgeons at our institution from 2015 to 2018 were reviewed. Patient demographics, clinical data, MRI metrics, and biopsy pathology results were obtained by chart review. An MRI(-) tumor was defined as a positive systematic biopsy in a zone without an MRI lesion. Factors associated with presence of MRI(-) tumors were identified using stepwise multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of 194 men included in the analysis, 79 (41%) and 25 (13%) men had GG1+ and GG2+ MRI(-) tumors, respectively. On multivariable analysis, only Black race was associated with presence of GG1+ MRI(-) tumors (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.02-4.96). Black race (OR 3.5, 95% CI 1.24-9.87) and higher PSA density (OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.34-3.20) were associated with presence of GG2+ MRI(-) tumors. In non-Black and Black men, detection of MRI(-) tumors on systematic biopsy upgraded patients from no disease to GG2+ disease 1% and 11% of the time, respectively, and from GG1 to GG2+ disease 42% and 60% of the time, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Black race and PSA density were associated with presence of MRI(-) prostate cancer. Further study on racial differences is warranted based on these results. Surgeons should consider pre-biopsy risk factors before deciding to omit systematic prostate biopsy regardless of mpMRI results.

Performance of prostate health index and PSA density in a diverse biopsy‐naïve cohort with mpMRI for detecting significant prostate cancer

Objective

To compare Prostate Health Index (PHI) and prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) density as secondary tests after multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in improving the detection accuracy of Gleason grade group (GG) 2‐5 prostate cancer (PCa) and in decreasing unnecessary biopsies in a multiethnic biopsy‐naïve population.

Methods

From February 2017 to February 2020, we recruited consecutive biopsy‐naïve men in participating urology clinics for elevated PSA levels. They all had a PHI score, mpMRI, and prostate biopsy. Experienced genitourinary radiologists read all mpMRI studies based on PIRADS version 2.0. Logistic regression models were used to generate receiver operating characteristic curves. Models were tested for effect modification between Race (Black vs White) and both PHI and PSA density, and Race and PIRADS to determine if race impacted their prediction accuracy. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of PHI and PSA density thresholds were calculated by PIRADS scores. The primary outcome was GG2‐5 PCa, that is, Gleason score ≥3 + 4.

Results

The study included 143 men, of which 65 (45.5%) were self‐reported Black. Median age was 62.0 years and 55 men (38.4%) had GG2‐5 PCa. Overall, 18.1% had PIRADS 1‐2, 32.9% had PIRADS 3, and 49.0% had PIRADS 4‐5. For the binary logistic regressions, the interactions between PIRADS and Race (P = .08), Log (PHI) and Race (P = .17), and Log (PSA density) and Race (P = .42) were not statistically significant. Within PIRADS 3 lesions, a PHI ≥49 prevented unnecessary biopsies in 55% of men and missed no GG2‐5 PCa, yielding a negative predictive value of 100%. There was no reliable PHI or PSA density threshold to avoid PCa biopsies in PIRADS 1‐2 or 4‐5.

Conclusions

PHI and PSA density can be used after mpMRI to improve the detection of GG2‐5 PCa in a biopsy‐naïve cohort. PHI may be superior to PSA density in PIRADS 3 lesions by avoiding 55% of unnecessary biopsies. Using both PHI and PSA density in series may further increase specificity and lead to fewer unnecessary biopsies, but further larger studies are warranted to determine the optimal threshold of each biomarker.

Detection of N,N-diacetyllactosamine (LacdiNAc) containing free prostate-specific antigen for early stage prostate cancer diagnostics and for identification of castration-resistant prostate cancer patients

Prostate cancer (PCa) is one of the most common cancer types among men and also acommon cause of death globally. With an increasing incidence, there is aneed for low-cost, reliable biomarkers present in samples, which could be provided non-invasively (without a need to perform prostate biopsy). Glycosylation changes of free-PSA (fPSA) are considered cancer-specific, while the level of different PSA forms can increase under other than cancerous conditions. In the present study, we investigated the role ofN,N-diacetyllactosamine (LacdiNAc) epitope of fPSA (i.e. glycoprofile of fPSA or gPSA) in combination with total-PSA (tPSA), prostate volume, and tPSA density (tPSA level divided by prostate volume i.e. PSAd) as biomarkers for monitoring of PCa development and progression in 105 men. Furthermore, we applied an genetic (evolutionary) algorithm to identify any suspicious individuals in abenign cohort having benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). We identified 3 suspicious men originally diagnosed with BPH using gPSA analysis. In thefollow-up we found out that two men should not be considered as BPH patients since multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) identified one man with clinically significant PCa via Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System (PI RADS v2 = 4) and the second man was with High-gradeprostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HG PIN), commonly described as apre-cancerous stage. Moreover, in the study we described for the first time that changed LacdiNAc on PSA can be applied to identify prostatitis patients and most importantly this is the first study suggesting that changed glycosylation on PSA can be applied to identify castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPCa) patients.

Ancillary imaging and clinical features for the characterization of prostate lesions: A proposed approach to reduce false positives

The relatively low specificity and positive predictive value of the Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) can lead to considerable false-positive results and unnecessary biopsies. The aim of this study was to propose ancillary features (AFs) indicating clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) or benign tissues in PI-RADS category ≥3 lesions and determine the usefulness of these AFs in reducing false-positive assessments of suspicious lesions in men at csPCa risk. This was a retrospective study, which included 199 men. A 3T, including turbo spin echo T₂ -weighted, echo-planar diffusion-weighted, and spoiled gradient echo dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) images, was used. Five AFs (prostate-specific antigen density ≥0.15 ng/mL² ; size ≥10 mm; heterogeneous T2 signal intensity; circumscribed nodule in the junction of peripheral and transition zone; and DCE time curves) indicating csPCa or non-csPCa were evaluated by three independent readers. The sensitivity and specificity of each AF were calculated. Inter-reader agreement was evaluated using κ statistics. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine significant AFs. The reduction in positive call rates and csPCa detection rates with combined AF use were calculated and compared with the findings obtained with PI-RADS use alone. The sensitivities and specificities of the AFs indicating csPCa were 72.1%-96.5% and 27.4%-75.2% for reader 1, 66.3%-96.5% and 23.9%-62.0% for reader 2, and 67.4%-96.5% and 34.5%-78.8% for reader 3, with moderate to substantial inter-reader agreement (Fleiss κ, 0.551-0.643). The combined use of two or more AFs for assessing PI-RADS ≥3 lesions resulted in a 19.6%-30.7% reduction in positive calls (p < .05) compared to PI-RADS use alone while preserving the csPCa detection rates (p ≥ .06) for three readers. The use of AFs in combination with PI-RADS can reduce positive calls and false positives without csPCa under-detection.

Positive Predictive Value of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 for the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

CONTEXT

The variability of the positive predictive value (PPV) represents a significant factor affecting the diagnostic performance of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI).

OBJECTIVE

To analyze published studies reporting mpMRI PPV and the reasons behind the variability of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection rates on targeted biopsies (TBx) according to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2 categories.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A search of PubMed, Cochrane library's Central, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Scopus databases, from January 2015 to June 2020, was conducted. The primary and secondary outcomes were to evaluate the PPV of PI-RADS version 2 in detecting csPCa and any prostate cancer (PCa), respectively. Individual authors' definitions for csPCa and PI-RADS thresholds for positive mpMRI were accepted. Detection rates, used as a surrogate of PPV, were pooled using random-effect models. Preplanned subgroup analyses tested PPV after stratification for PI-RADS scores, previous biopsy status, TBx technique, and number of sampled cores. PPV variation over cancer prevalence was evaluated.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Fifty-six studies, with a total of 16 537 participants, were included in the quantitative synthesis. The PPV of suspicious mpMRI for csPCa was 40% (95% confidence interval 36-43%), with large heterogeneity between studies (I² 94%, p < 0.01). PPV increased according to PCa prevalence. In subgroup analyses, PPVs for csPCa were 13%, 40%, and 69% for, respectively, PI-RADS 3, 4, and 5 (p < 0.001). TBx missed 6%, 6%, and 5% of csPCa in PI-RADS 3, 4, and 5 lesions, respectively. In biopsy-naïve and prior negative biopsy groups, PPVs for csPCa were 42% and 32%, respectively (p = 0.005). Study design, TBx technique, and number of sampled cores did not affect PPV.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis underlines that the PPV of mpMRI is strongly dependent on the disease prevalence, and that the main factors affecting PPV are PI-RADS version 2 scores and prior biopsy status. A substantially low PPV for PI-RADS 3 lesions was reported, while it was still suboptimal in PI-RADS 4 and 5 lesions. Lastly, even if the added value of a systematic biopsy for csPCa is relatively low, this rate can improve patient risk assessment and staging.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Targeted biopsy of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System 3 lesions should be considered carefully in light of additional individual risk assessment corroborating the presence of clinically significant prostate cancer. On the contrary, the positive predictive value of highly suspicious lesions is not high enough to omit systematic prostate sampling.

Negative Biopsy Histology in Men With PI-RADS Score 5 in Daily Clinical Practice: Incidence of Granulomatous Prostatitis

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the biopsy histology of men who underwent transperineal multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)/transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy for Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score 5 lesions.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From January 2016 to June 2019, 105 men with PI-RADS score 5 underwent mpMRI/transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy combined with systematic prostate biopsy. All the patients underwent a 3.0 Tesla pelvic mpMRI for the first time before prostate biopsy. In detail, the detection rate for clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa) and the follow-up of the patients without proven diagnosis of PCa has been reported.

RESULTS

In 91 (86.7%) of 105 patients, a stage T1c PCa was diagnosed, and 89 (84.5%) of 105 of them were classified as clinically significant PCa. Among the 16 (15.5%) of 105 patients with absence of cancer, 5 (31.5%) of 16 had an aspecific granulomatous prostatitis, 1 (6.2%) of 16 had a specific granulomatous prostatitis secondary to prostatic Mycobacterium Tubercolosis, and 10 (62.3%) of 16 had a diagnosis of normal parenchyma. The 6 patients with granulomatous prostatitis underwent specific antibiotic therapy followed by laboratory (ie, semen and urine cultures) and clinical evaluation. Six months from prostate biopsy, none of the 16 patients underwent repeat prostate biopsy because prostate-specific antigen (PSA) (15/16 cases) plus PSA density significantly decreased; in addition, in all the cases the initial PI-RADS score 5 was downgraded at mpMRI revaluation to PI-RADS score ≤ 3.

CONCLUSION

The reduction of PSA plus PSA density values and the downgrading of PI-RADS score to ≤ 3 allow avoiding a repeated prostate biopsy in men with initial mpMRI PI-RADS score 5 lesion and negative biopsy histology.

Investigating the equivalent performance of biparametric compared to multiparametric MRI in detection of clinically significant prostate cancer

PURPOSE

PIRADS v2 stipulates that dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) imaging be used to categorize diffusion-weighted-imaging (DWI) score 3 (DWI 3) peripheral zone (PZ) lesions as PIRADS score 3 (PIRADS 3; DCE -) or PIRADS 4 (DCE +). It's controversial for the value of DCE in improving clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection. We aimed to figure out whether DCE improves csPCa detection and explore new available measures to improve csPCa detection.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively enrolled 375 patients who underwent mp MRI before MRI/ultrasound (US) fusion-targeted biopsy (TB) with transperineal systematic biopsy (SB). All lesions were classified as DWI 3/DCE -, DWI 3/DCE +, DWI 4/PIRADS 4 lesions. Detection rates of csPCa for each lesion group were analyzed. The diagnostic performance of each approach was analyzed by receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis and decision curve analysis.

RESULTS

Totally, 109 DWI 3 or DWI 4 single lesions in PZ were analyzed (n = 109). The rates of csPCa detection for Group A, Group B, Group C is 10.3%, 13.9%, 55.9%, respectively (A vs. B, p = 0.625; B vs. C, p < 0.001). ROC analysis and decision curve analysis showed the method of combining Age, PSA Density (PSAD) and the mean apparent diffusion coefficient value (ADC_mean) outperforms individual approaches for csPCa detection.

CONCLUSION

For DWI 3 lesions in PZ, DCE sequence has not additional value for improving detection of csPCa. The integration of clinical characteristics and bpMRI parameter improves the detection of csPCa.