Intra-practice Urologist-level Variation in Targeted Fusion Biopsy Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To examine the extent to which the urologist performing biopsy contributes to variation in prostate cancer detection during fusion-guided prostate biopsy.

METHODS

All men in the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC) clinical registry who underwent fusion biopsy at Michigan Medicine from August 2017 to March 2019 were included. The primary outcomes were clinically significant cancer detection rate (defined as Gleason Grade ≥2) in targeted cores and clinically significant cancer detection on targeted cores stratified by PI-RADS score. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 1133 fusion biopsies performed by 5 providers were included. When adjusting for patient age, PSA, race, family history, prostate volume, clinical stage, and PI-RADS score, there was no significant difference in targeted clinically significant cancer detection rates across providers (range = 38.5%-46.9%, adjusted P-value = .575). Clinically significant cancer detection rates ranged from 11.1% to 16.7% in PI-RADS 3 (unadjusted P = .838), from 24.6% to 43.4% in PI-RADS 4 (adjusted P = .003), and from 69.4% to 78.8% in PI-RADS 5 (adjusted P = .766) lesions.

CONCLUSION

There was a statistically significant difference in clinically significant prostate cancer detection in PI-RADS 4 lesions across providers. These findings suggest that even among experienced providers, variation at the urologist level may contribute to differences in clinically significant cancer detection rates within PI-RADS 4 lesions. However, the relative impact of biopsy technique, radiologist interpretation, and MR acquisition protocol requires further study.

Contrast-enhanced CT immediately following percutaneous microwave ablation of cT1a renal cell carcinoma: Optimizing cancer outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of intra-procedural contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) and same-session repeat ablation (SSRA) on primary efficacy, the complete eradication of tumor after the first ablation session as confirmed on first imaging follow-up, of clinically localized T1a (cT1a) renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

METHODS

398 consecutive patients with cT1a RCC were treated with cryoablation between 10/2003 and 12/2017, radiofrequency (RFA) or microwave ablation (MWA) between 1/2010 and 12/2017. SSRA was performed for residual tumor identified on intra-procedural CECT. Kruskal-Wallis and Pearson's chi-squared tests were performed to assess differences in continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Multivariate linear regression was used to determine predictors for primary efficacy and decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate.

RESULTS

347 consecutive patients (231 M, mean age 67.5 ± 9.1 years) were included. Median tumor diameter was smaller [2.5 vs 2.7 vs 2.6 (p = 0.03)] and RENAL Nephrometry Score (NS) was lower [6 vs 7 vs 7 (p = 0.009] for MWA compared to the RFA and cryoablation cohorts, respectively. Primary efficacy was higher in the MWA cohort [99.4% (170/171)] compared to the RFA [91.4% (85/93)] and cryoablation [92.8% (77/83)] cohorts (p = 0.001). Microwave ablation and SSRA was associated with higher primary efficacy on multivariate linear regression (p = 0.01-0.03).

CONCLUSION

MWA augmented by SSRA, when residual tumor is identified on intra-procedural CECT, may improve primary efficacy for cT1a RCC.

Multicenter Evaluation of Multiparametric MRI Clear Cell Likelihood Scores in Solid Indeterminate Small Renal Masses

Background Solid small renal masses (SRMs) (≤4 cm) represent benign and malignant tumors. Among SRMs, clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is frequently aggressive. When compared with invasive percutaneous biopsies, the objective of the proposed clear cell likelihood score (ccLS) is to classify ccRCC noninvasively by using multiparametric MRI, but it lacks external validation. Purpose To evaluate the performance of and interobserver agreement for ccLS to diagnose ccRCC among solid SRMs. Materials and Methods This retrospective multicenter cross-sectional study included patients with consecutive solid (≥25% approximate volume enhancement) SRMs undergoing multiparametric MRI between December 2012 and December 2019 at five academic medical centers with histologic confirmation of diagnosis. Masses with macroscopic fat were excluded. After a 1.5-hour training session, two abdominal radiologists per center independently rendered a ccLS for 50 masses. The diagnostic performance for ccRCC was calculated using random-effects logistic regression modeling. The distribution of ccRCC by ccLS was tabulated. Interobserver agreement for ccLS was evaluated with the Fleiss κ statistic. Results A total of 241 patients (mean age, 60 years ± 13 [SD]; 174 men) with 250 solid SRMs were evaluated. The mean size was 25 mm ± 8 (range, 10-39 mm). Of the 250 SRMs, 119 (48%) were ccRCC. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value for the diagnosis of ccRCC when ccLS was 4 or higher were 75% (95% CI: 68, 81), 78% (72, 84), and 76% (69, 81), respectively. The negative predictive value of a ccLS of 2 or lower was 88% (95% CI: 81, 93). The percentages of ccRCC according to the ccLS were 6% (range, 0%-18%), 38% (range, 0%-100%), 32% (range, 60%-83%), 72% (range, 40%-88%), and 81% (range, 73%-100%) for ccLSs of 1-5, respectively. The mean interobserver agreement was moderate (κ = 0.58; 95% CI: 0.42, 0.75). Conclusion The clear cell likelihood score applied to multiparametric MRI had moderate interobserver agreement and differentiated clear cell renal cell carcinoma from other solid renal masses, with a negative predictive value of 88%. © RSNA, 2022 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Mileto and Potretzke in this issue.

Interrater Agreement of Bosniak Classification Version 2019 and Version 2005 for Cystic Renal Masses at CT and MRI

Background The Bosniak classification system for cystic renal masses was updated in 2019 in part to improve agreement compared with the 2005 version. Purpose To compare and investigate interrater agreement of Bosniak version 2019 and Bosniak version 2005 at CT and MRI. Materials and Methods In this retrospective single-center study, a blinded eight-reader assessment was performed in which 195 renal masses prospectively considered Bosniak IIF-IV (95 at CT, 100 at MRI, from 2006 to 2019 with version 2005) were re-evaluated with Bosniak versions 2019 and 2005. Radiologists (four faculty members, four residents) who were blinded to the initial clinical reading and histopathologic findings assessed all feature components and reported the overall Bosniak class for each system independently. Agreement was assessed with Gwet agreement coefficients. Uni- and multivariable linear regression models were developed to identify predictors of dispersion in the final Bosniak class assignment that could inform system refinement. Results A total of 185 patients were included (mean age, 63 years ± 13 [standard deviation]; 118 men). Overall interrater agreement was similar between Bosniak version 2019 and version 2005 (Gwet agreement coefficient: 0.51 [95% CI: 0.45, 0.57] vs 0.46 [95% CI: 0.42, 0.51]). This was true for experts (0.54 vs 0.49) and novices (0.50 vs 0.47) and at CT (0.56 vs 0.51) and MRI (0.52 vs 0.43). Nine percent of masses prospectively considered cystic using Bosniak version 2005 criteria were considered solid using version 2019 criteria. In general, masses were more commonly classified in lower categories when radiologists used Bosniak version 2019 criteria compared with version 2005 criteria. The sole predictor of dispersion in Bosniak version 2019 class assignment was dispersion in septa or wall quality (ie, smooth vs irregular thickening vs nodule; 72% [MRI] and 60% [CT] overall model variance explained; multivariable P < .001). Conclusion Overall interrater agreement was similar between Bosniak version 2019 and version 2005; disagreements in septa or wall quality were common and strongly predictive of variation in Bosniak class assignment. © RSNA, 2021 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Eberhardt in this issue.

Bosniak Classification of Cystic Renal Masses, Version 2019: A Pictorial Guide to Clinical Use

Cystic renal masses are commonly encountered in clinical practice. In 2019, the Bosniak classification of cystic renal masses, originally developed for CT, underwent a major revision to incorporate MRI and is referred to as the Bosniak Classification, version 2019. The proposed changes attempt to (a) define renal masses (ie, cystic tumors with less than 25% enhancing tissue) to which the classification should be applied; (b) emphasize specificity for diagnosis of cystic renal cancers, thereby decreasing the number of benign and indolent cystic masses that are unnecessarily treated or imaged further; (c) improve interobserver agreement by defining imaging features, terms, and classes of cystic renal masses; (d) reduce variation in reported malignancy rates for each of the Bosniak classes; (e) incorporate MRI and to some extent US; and (f) be applicable to all cystic renal masses encountered in clinical practice, including those that had been considered indeterminate with the original classification. The authors instruct how, using CT, MRI, and to some extent US, the revised classification can be applied, with representative clinical examples and images. Practical tips, pitfalls to avoid, and decision tree rules are included to help radiologists and other physicians apply the Bosniak Classification, version 2019 and better manage cystic renal masses. An online resource and mobile application are also available for clinical assistance. An invited commentary by Siegel and Cohan is available online. ^©RSNA, 2021.

Effect of iodinated contrast material on post-operative eGFR when administered during renal mass ablation

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of intravenous iodinated contrast on estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) when administered immediately after thermal ablation of clinically localized T1a (cT1a) renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

METHODS

This HIPAA-compliant, dual-center retrospective study was performed under a waiver of informed consent. Three hundred forty-two consecutive patients with cT1a biopsy-proven RCC were treated with percutaneous ablation between January 2010 and December 2017. Immediate post-ablation contrast-enhanced CT was the routine standard of care at one institution (contrast group), but not the other (control group). One-month pre- and 6-month post-ablation eGFR were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test or the Kruskal-Wallis test. Multivariate linear regression was used to determine the effect of contrast on eGFR. A 1:1 propensity score matching was performed for all patients with a logistic model using patient, tumor, and procedural covariates.

RESULTS

In total, 246 patients (158 M; median age 69 years, IQR 62-74) were included. Median tumor diameter (2.4 vs 2.5, p = 0.23) and RENAL nephrometry scores (6 vs 6, p = 0.92), surrogates for ablation zone size, were similar. Baseline kidney function was similar for the control and contrast groups, respectively (median eGFR: 70 vs 74 mL/min/1.73 m², p = 0.29). There was an expected mild decline in eGFR after ablation (control: 70 vs 60 mL/min/1.73 m², p < 0.001; contrast: 75 vs 71 mL/min/1.73 m², p = 0.001). Intravenous iodinated contrast was not associated with a decline in eGFR on multivariate linear regression (1.91, 95% CI - 3.43-7.24, p = 0.46) or 1:1 propensity score-matched model (- 0.33, 95% CI - 6.81-6.15, p = 0.92).

CONCLUSION

Intravenous iodinated contrast administered during ablation of cT1a RCC has no effect on eGFR.

KEY POINTS

• Intravenous iodinated contrast administered during thermal ablation of clinically localized T1a renal cell carcinoma has no effect on kidney function. • Thermal ablation of clinically localized T1a renal cell carcinoma results in a mild decline in kidney function. • A decline in kidney function is similar for radiofrequency and microwave ablation of clinically localized T1a renal cell carcinoma.

Radiologic-Histopathologic Correlation of Transvaginal US and Risk-reducing Salpingo-oophorectomy for Women at High Risk for Tubo-ovarian Carcinoma

Purpose

To examine radiologic-histopathologic correlation and the diagnostic performance of transvaginal US prior to risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) in women at high risk for tubo-ovarian carcinoma (TOC).

Materials and Methods

This retrospective study included 147 women (mean age, 49 years; age range, 28-75 years) at high risk for TOC who underwent transvaginal US within 6 months of planned RRSO between May 1, 2007, and March 14, 2018. Histopathologic results were reviewed. Fellowship-trained abdominal radiologists reinterpreted transvaginal US findings by using standardized descriptors. Descriptive statistical analysis and multiple logistic regression were performed.

Results

Of the 147 women, 136 had mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, Lynch syndrome, BRIP1, and RAD51D genes, and 11 had a family history of TOC. Histopathologic reports showed 130 (88.4%) benign nonneoplastic results, 10 (6.8%) benign neoplasms, five (3.4%) malignant neoplasms, and two (1.4%) isolated p53 signature lesions. Transvaginal US results showed benign findings in 95 (64.6%) women and abnormal findings in 11 (7.5%) women; one or both ovaries were not visualized in 41 (27.9%) women. Hydrosalpinx was absent in all TOC and p53 signature lesions at transvaginal US. Transvaginal US had 20% sensitivity (one of five), 93% specificity (132 of 142), 9% positive predictive value (one of 11), and 97% negative predictive value (132 of 136) for TOC. Cancer was detected in one of five women at transvaginal US, and three of five false-negative lesions were microscopic or very small.

Conclusion

Preoperative transvaginal US had low sensitivity for detecting TOC in women at high risk for TOC. Clinically relevant precursors and early cancers were too small to be detected.Keywords: Genital/Reproductive, UltrasoundSupplemental material is available for this article.© RSNA, 2020.

Bosniak Classification of Cystic Renal Masses, Version 2019: An Update Proposal and Needs Assessment

Cystic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is almost certainly overdiagnosed and overtreated. Efforts to diagnose and treat RCC at a curable stage result in many benign neoplasms and indolent cancers being resected without clear benefit. This is especially true for cystic masses, which compared with solid masses are more likely to be benign and, when malignant, less aggressive. For more than 30 years, the Bosniak classification has been used to stratify the risk of malignancy in cystic renal masses. Although it is widely used and still effective, the classification does not formally incorporate masses identified at MRI or US or masses that are incompletely characterized but are highly likely to be benign, and it is affected by interreader variability and variable reported malignancy rates. The Bosniak classification system cannot fully differentiate aggressive from indolent cancers and results in many benign masses being resected. This proposed update to the Bosniak classification addresses some of these shortcomings. The primary modifications incorporate MRI, establish definitions for previously vague imaging terms, and enable a greater proportion of masses to enter lower-risk classes. Although the update will require validation, it aims to expand the number of cystic masses to which the Bosniak classification can be applied while improving its precision and accuracy for the likelihood of cancer in each class.

Biologic Significance of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Invisibility in Localized Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is used widely for prostate cancer (PCa) evaluation. Approximately 35% of aggressive tumors, however, are not visible on mpMRI. We sought to identify the molecular alterations associated with mpMRI-invisible tumors and determine whether mpMRI visibility is associated with PCa prognosis.

METHODS

Discovery and validation cohorts included patients who underwent mpMRI before radical prostatectomy and were found to harbor both mpMRI-visible (Prostate Imaging and Reporting Data System 3 to 5) and -invisible (Prostate Imaging and Reporting Data System 1 or 2) foci on surgical pathology. Next-generation sequencing was performed to determine differential gene expression between mpMRI-visible and -invisible foci. A genetic signature for tumor mpMRI visibility was derived in the discovery cohort and assessed in an independent validation cohort. Its association with long-term oncologic outcomes was evaluated in a separate testing cohort.

RESULTS

The discovery cohort included 10 patients with 26 distinct PCa foci on surgical pathology, of which 12 (46%) were visible and 14 (54%) were invisible on preoperative mpMRI. Next-generation sequencing detected prioritized genetic mutations in 14 (54%) tumor foci (n = 8 mpMRI visible, n = 6 mpMRI invisible). A nine-gene signature (composed largely of cell organization/structure genes) associated with mpMRI visibility was derived (area under the curve = 0.89), and the signature predicted MRI visibility with 75% sensitivity and 100% specificity (area under the curve = 0.88) in the validation cohort. In the testing cohort (n = 375, median follow-up 8 years) there was no significant difference in biochemical recurrence, distant metastasis, or cancer-specific mortality in patients with predicted mpMRI-visible versus -invisible tumors (all P > .05).

CONCLUSION

Compared with mpMRI-invisible disease, mpMRI-visible tumors are associated with underexpression of cellular organization genes. mpMRI visibility does not seem to be predictive of long-term cancer outcomes, highlighting the need for biopsy strategies that detect mpMRI-invisible tumors.

Radiogenomic characterization of multifocal prostate cancer

126

Background: Up to 20% of patients with negative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) harbor Gleason score ≥7 prostate cancer (PCa). We sought to elucidate the molecular basis of and determine the prognostic significance of PCa visibility on MRI. Methods: We identified a retrospective cohort of patients who underwent MRI prior to prostatectomy with both MRI visible (PIRADS 3 – 5) and invisible PCa. MRI for each patient was re-reviewed and co-registered with whole-mount histopathology. DNA and RNA were co-isolated from all tumor foci pre-identified on FFPE specimens. High depth, targeted DNA and RNA next generation sequencing was performed to characterize the molecular profile of each tumor focus using the Oncomine Comprehensive Panel (DNA) and a custom targeted RNAseq panel assessing PCa relevant alterations. A multigene RNAseq model was developed and validated in two independent cohorts to predict MRI visible PCa and to determine the prognostic significance of MRI visibility. Results: A total of 26 primary tumor foci from 10 patients were analyzed. Of the 14 (54%) invisible lesions on MRI, 5 (36%) were Gleason 3+4 = 7 and the remainder were Gleason 6. We detected high-confidence prioritized PCa relevant mutations in 54% (14/26) of tumor foci, 43% (6/14) of which were in MRI invisible lesions. Notable point mutations were in APC, AR, ARID1B, ATM, ATRX, BRCA2, FAT1, MAP3K1, NF1, SPEN, SPOP, and TP53. A 9-gene RNA signature, the majority of which were under-expressed cellular organization and structure genes, was developed to predict MRI visibility with an AUC of 0.89. Validation of this signature in an independent data set (n = 16) yielded an AUC of 0.88 with a specificity of 100% for predicting MRI visible tumors. Using this signature in a cohort of 375 patients with clinical follow up, we found that predicted MRI visibility status was not an independent predictor of biochemical recurrence, metastasis-free survival, or PCa specific mortality (all p > 0.05). Conclusions: We observed under-expression of cellular organization and structural genes in MRI visible tumors compared to MRI invisible cancer foci. Using our validated signature to predict MRI visibility status, we found that MRI visibility is not a significant predictor of oncological outcomes.

A Review of Innovative Teaching Methods

Teaching is one of the important roles of an academic radiologist. Therefore, it is important that radiologists are taught how to effectively educate and, in turn, to act as role models of these skills to trainees. This is reinforced by the Liaison Committee on Medical Education which has the requirement that all residents who interact with and teach medical students must undergo training in effective methods of teaching. Radiologists are likely familiar with the traditional didactic lecture-type teaching format. However, there are many newer innovative teaching methods that could be added to the radiologist's teaching repertoire, which could be used to enhance the traditional lecture format. The Association of University Radiologists Radiology Research Alliance Task Force on Noninterpretive Skills therefore presents a review of several innovative teaching methods, which include the use of audience response technology, long-distance teaching, the flipped classroom, and active learning.

Practical Presentation Pearls: Evidence-based Recommendations From the Psychology and Physiology Literature

Oral presentations remain a common teaching method in academic radiology. The goal of these presentations is to transfer knowledge from the presenter's brain to brains in the audience in a way that sticks. A number of studies from the recent psychological and physiological literature offer some rather practical and evidence-based advice on ways to optimize our oral presentations. The purpose of this paper is to summarize this work, and to give examples of how it can be harnessed to increase the efficacy of radiology presentations, whether they are for resident education, a continuing medical education course, or for a scientific presentation at a national radiology meeting.

Transcriptomic heterogeneity in multifocal prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Commercial gene expression assays are guiding clinical decision making in patients with prostate cancer, particularly when considering active surveillance. Given heterogeneity and multifocality of primary prostate cancer, such assays should ideally be robust to the coexistence of unsampled higher grade disease elsewhere in the prostate in order to have clinical utility. Herein, we comprehensively evaluated transcriptomic profiles of primary multifocal prostate cancer to assess robustness to clinically relevant multifocality.

METHODS

We designed a comprehensive, multiplexed targeted RNA-sequencing assay capable of assessing multiple transcriptional classes and deriving commercially available prognostic signatures, including the Myriad Prolaris Cell Cycle Progression score, the Oncotype DX Genomic Prostate Score, and the GenomeDX Decipher Genomic Classifier. We applied this assay to a retrospective, multi-institutional cohort of 156 prostate cancer samples. Derived commercial biomarker scores for 120 informative primary prostate cancer samples from 44 cases were determined and compared.

RESULTS

Derived expression scores were positively correlated with tumor grade (rS = 0.53-0.73; all P < 0.001), both within the same case and across the entire cohort. In cases of extreme grade-discordant multifocality (co-occurrence of grade group 1 [GG1] and ≥GG4 foci], gene expression scores were significantly lower in low- (GG1) versus high-grade (≥GG4) foci (all P < 0.001). No significant differences in expression scores, however, were observed between GG1 foci from prostates with and without coexisting higher grade cancer (all P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Multifocal, low-grade and high-grade prostate cancer foci exhibit distinct prognostic expression signatures. These findings demonstrate that prognostic RNA expression assays performed on low-grade prostate cancer biopsy tissue may not provide meaningful information on the presence of coexisting unsampled aggressive disease.

FUNDING

Prostate Cancer Foundation, National Institutes of Health (U01 CA214170, R01 CA183857, University of Michigan Prostate Specialized Program of Research Excellence [S.P.O.R.E.] P50 CA186786-05, Weill Cornell Medicine S.P.O.R.E. P50 CA211024-01A1), Men of Michigan Prostate Cancer Research Fund, University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center core grant (2-P30-CA-046592-24), A. Alfred Taubman Biomedical Research Institute, and Department of Defense.

Society of Abdominal Radiology disease-focused panel on renal cell carcinoma: update on past, current, and future goals

The disease-focused panel (DFP) program was created by the Society of Abdominal Radiology (SAR) as a mechanism to "improve patient care, education, and research" in a "particular disease or a particular aspect of a disease". The DFP on renal cell carcinoma (RCC) was proposed in 2014 and has been functional for 4 years. Although nominally focused on RCC, the scope of the DFP has included indeterminate renal masses because many cannot be assigned a specific diagnosis when detected. Since its founding, the DFP has been active in a variety of clinical, research, and educational projects to optimize the care of patients with known or suspected RCC. The DFP is utilizing multi-institutional and cross-disciplinary collaboration to differentiate benign from malignant disease, optimize the management of early stage RCC, and ultimately to differentiate indolent from aggressive cancers. Several additional projects have worked to develop a quantitative biomarker that predicts metastatic RCC response to anti-angiogenic therapy. While disease focus is the premise by which all DFPs are created, it is likely that in the future the RCC DFP will need to expand or create new panels that will focus on other specific aspects of RCC-a result that the program's founders envisioned. New knowledge creates a need for more focus.

Characteristics of PI-RADS 4 lesions within the prostatic peripheral zone: a retrospective diagnostic accuracy study evaluating 170 lesions

PURPOSE

To determine whether peripheral zone PI-RADS 4 observations can be further risk-stratified.

METHODS

This was an IRB-approved HIPAA-compliant retrospective diagnostic accuracy study. Peripheral zone PI-RADS 4 observations prospectively identified at the study institution from 8/1/2015 to 12/31/2016 (n = 170 in 149 mpMRIs) were reviewed independently by two blinded genitourinary radiologists on the basis of (a) PI-RADS v2 shape, (b) pattern of peripheral zone sparing, and (c) rationale for PI-RADS 4 designation. Reference standard was targeted MR-ultrasound fusion biopsy and detection of Gleason 7+ prostate cancer. Positive predictive values (PPVs) were calculated. Predictors were assessed with binary logistic regression.

RESULTS

PI-RADS 4 lesions with a DWI score of 4 were more likely to represent Gleason 7+ prostate cancer (p = 0.008-0.01; Reader 1 PPV: 53%; Reader 2 PPV: 48%). Pattern of peripheral zone sparing and most lesion shapes were not predictive (p > 0.05); however, oval lesions were predictive for Reader 1 (PPV = 59%, p = 0.03) and lentiform lesions were predictive for Reader 2 (PPV = 74%, p = 0.01). Lesions scored as "not meeting PI-RADS 4 criteria" had significantly lower PPV (p = 0.016-0.003; Reader 1 PPV: 14%, Reader 2 PPV: 16%).

DISCUSSION

Peripheral zone PI-RADS 4 lesions with a DWI score of 4 are more likely Gleason 7+ cancer than those with a DWI score of 3. Lesions overcalled as PI-RADS 4 have PPV similar to published PI-RADS 3 data. Lesion shape and peripheral zone sparing in general do not predict Gleason 7+ cancer within PI-RADS 4 observations.

Impact of Clinical History on Maximum PI-RADS Version 2 Score: A Six-Reader 120-Case Sham History Retrospective Evaluation

Purpose To assess the impact of clinical history on the maximum Prostate Imaging Recording and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2 (v2) score assigned to multiparametric magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of the prostate. Materials and Methods This retrospective cohort study included 120 consecutively selected multiparametric prostate MR imaging studies performed between November 1, 2016, and December 31, 2016. Sham clinical data in four domains (digital rectal examination, prostate-specific antigen level, plan for biopsy, prior prostate cancer history) were randomly assigned to each case by using a balanced orthogonal design. Six fellowship-trained abdominal radiologists independently reviewed the sham data, actual patient age, and each examination while they were blinded to interreader scoring, true clinical data, and histologic findings. Readers were told the constant sham histories were true, believed the study to be primarily investigating interrater agreement, and were asked to assign a maximum PI-RADS v2 score to each case. Linear regression was performed to assess the association between clinical variables and maximum PI-RADS v2 score designation. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were obtained to compare interreader scoring. Results Clinical information had no significant effect on maximum PI-RADS v2 scoring for any of the six readers (P = .09-.99, 42 reader-variable pairs). Distributions of maximum PI-RADS v2 scores in the research context were similar to the distribution of the scores assigned clinically and had fair-to-excellent pairwise interrater agreement (ICC range: 0.53-0.76). Overall interrater agreement was good (ICC: 0.64; 95% confidence interval: 0.57, 0.71). Conclusion Clinical history does not appear to be a substantial bias in maximum PI-RADS v2 score assignment. This is potentially important for clinical nomograms that plan to incorporate PI-RADS v2 score and clinical data into their algorithms (ie, PI-RADS v2 scoring is not confounded by clinical data).

Integration and Diagnostic Accuracy of 3T Nonendorectal coil Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Context of Active Surveillance

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the integration of 3T nonendorectal coil multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) at 2 high-volume practices that routinely use mpMRI in the setting of active surveillance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was an institutional review board-approved, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant, and dual-institution retrospective cohort study. Subjects undergoing 3T mpMRI without endorectal coil at either study institution over a 13-month period (August 1, 2015-August 31, 2016) were selected based on predefined criteria: clinical T1/T2 Gleason 6 prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen <15 ng/mL, ≥40 years old, mpMRI within 2 years of prostate biopsy, and Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) v2 score assigned. Subjects surveilled for Gleason ≥3 + 4 prostate cancer were excluded. The primary outcome was detection of Gleason ≥3 + 4 prostate cancer on magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion biopsy, standard biopsy, or prostatectomy within 6 months following mpMRI. Positive predictive values (PPVs) were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 286 subjects (N = 193 from institution 1, N = 93 from institution 2) met the criteria. Most (87% [90 of 104]) with maximum PI-RADS v2 scores of 1-2 did not receive immediate biopsy or treatment and remained on active surveillance. Incidence and PPVs for PI-RADS v2 scores of ≥3 were the following: PI-RADS 3 (n = 57 [20%], PPV 21% [6 of 29]), PI-RADS 4 (n = 96 [34%], PPV 51% [39 of 77]), and PI-RADS 5 (n = 29 [13%], PPV 71% [20 of 28]). No Gleason ≥4 + 3 prostate cancer was identified for PI-RADS v2 scores of 1-3 (0 of 43 with histology). Following mpMRI and subsequent biopsy, 21% (61 of 286) of subjects were removed from active surveillance and underwent definitive therapy.

CONCLUSION

The 3T nonendorectal coil mpMRI has been integrated into the care of patients on active surveillance and effectively stratifies risk of Gleason ≥3 + 4 prostate cancer in this population.