Evaluation of the PI-RADS Scoring System for Classifying mpMRI Findings in Men with Suspicion of Prostate Cancer. (16th December 2013)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Junker, Daniel; Schäfer, Georg; Edlinger, Michael; Kremser, Christian; Bektic, Jasmin; Horninger, Wolfgang; Jaschke, Werner; Aigner, Friedrich
• Other Names: Gravina Giovanni Luca Academic Editor.
• Is Part Of: BioMed research international. Volume 2013(2013)
• Publication Date: 2013-12-16
• Subjects: Medicine -- Periodicals; Biology -- Periodicals; Biotechnology -- Periodicals; Life sciences -- Periodicals; 610.5
• DOI: 10.1155/2013/252939
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2314-6133

Abstract

Abstract : Purpose . To evaluate the ESUR scoring system (PI-RADS) for multiparametric MRI of the prostate in clinical routine and to define a reliable way to generate an overall PI-RADS score. Methods . Retrospective analysis of all patients with a history of negative prebiopsies, who underwent 3 Tesla multiparametric MRI from October 2011 to April 2013 (n = 143 ): PI-RADS scores for each single modality were defined. To generate the overall PI-RADS score, an algorithm based approach summing up each single-modality score to a sum-score was compared to a more subjective approach, weighting the single modalities dependent on the radiologist's impression. Because of ongoing cancer suspicion 73 patients underwent targeted mpMRI-ultrasound image fusion rebiopsy. For this group thresholds for tumor incidences and malignancy were calculated. Results . 39 (53%) out of 73 targeted rebiopsies were cancer positive. The PI-RADS score correlated well with tumor incidence (AUC of 0.86, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.94) and malignancy (AUC 0.84, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.99). Regarding the sum-score a threshold of ≥10 turned out to be reliable for cancer detection (sensitivity 90%, specificity 62%) and for ≥13 for indicating higher malignancy (Gleason ≥ 4 + 3 ) (sensitivity 80%, specificity 86%). To generate the overall PI-RADS score, the use of an algorithm based approach was more reliable than that of the approach based on the radiologist's impression. Conclusion . The presented scoring system correlates well with tumor incidence and malignancy. To generate the overall PI-RADS score, it seems to be advisable to use an algorithm based instead of a subjective approach.