Intra‐ and interreader reproducibility of PI‐RADSv2: A multireader study. Issue 6 (21st December 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Smith, Clayton P.; Harmon, Stephanie A.; Barrett, Tristan; Bittencourt, Leonardo K.; Law, Yan Mee; Shebel, Haytham; An, Julie Y.; Czarniecki, Marcin; Mehralivand, Sherif; Coskun, Mehmet; Wood, Bradford J.; Pinto, Peter A.; Shih, Joanna H.; Choyke, Peter L.; Turkbey, Baris
• Is Part Of: Journal of magnetic resonance imaging. Volume 49:Issue 6(2019)
• Page Start: 1694
• Page End: 1703
• Publication Date: 2018-12-21
• Subjects: prostate cancer -- MRI -- PI‐RADS -- reader reproducibility; Magnetic resonance imaging -- Periodicals; 616
• DOI: 10.1002/jmri.26555
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1053-1807

Abstract

Abstract : Background: The Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI‐RADSv2) has been in use since 2015; while interreader reproducibility has been studied, there has been a paucity of studies investigating the intrareader reproducibility of PI‐RADSv2. Purpose: To evaluate both intra‐ and interreader reproducibility of PI‐RADSv2 in the assessment of intraprostatic lesions using multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI). Study Type: Retrospective. Population/Subjects: In all, 102 consecutive biopsy‐naïve patients who underwent prostate MRI and subsequent MR/transrectal ultrasonography (MR/TRUS)‐guided biopsy. Field Strength/Sequences: Prostate mpMRI at 3T using endorectal with phased array surface coils (TW MRI, DW MRI with ADC maps and b2000 DW MRI, DCE MRI). Assessment: Previously detected and biopsied lesions were scored by four readers from four different institutions using PI‐RADSv2. Readers scored lesions during two readout rounds with a 4‐week washout period. Statistical Tests: Kappa (κ) statistics and specific agreement (Po ) were calculated to quantify intra‐ and interreader reproducibility of PI‐RADSv2 scoring. Lesion measurement agreement was calculated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: Overall intrareader reproducibility was moderate to substantial (κ = 0.43–0.67, Po = 0.60–0.77), while overall interreader reproducibility was poor to moderate (κ = 0.24, Po = 46). Readers with more experience showed greater interreader reproducibility than readers with intermediate experience in the whole prostate ( P = 0.026) and peripheral zone ( P = 0.002). Sequence‐specific interreader agreement for all readers was similar to the overall PI‐RADSv2 score, with κ = 0.24, 0.24, and 0.23 and Po = 0.47, 0.44, and 0.54 in T2 ‐weighted, diffusion‐weighted imaging (DWI), and dynamic contrast‐enhanced (DCE), respectively. Overall intrareader and interreader ICC for lesion measurement was 0.82 and 0.71, respectively. Data Conclusion: PI‐RADSv2 provides moderate intrareader reproducibility, poor interreader reproducibility, and moderate interreader lesion measurement reproducibility. These findings suggest a need for more standardized reader training in prostate MRI. Level of Evidence: 2 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2