Lim Christopher S, McInnes Matthew D F, Flood Trevor A, Breau Rodney H, Morash Christopher, Thornhill Rebecca E, Schieda Nicola
1 Department of Medical Imaging, The Ottawa Hospital, The University of Ottawa, 1053 Carling Ave, Ottawa, ON K1Y 4E9, Canada.
2 Department of Anatomical Pathology, The Ottawa Hospital, The University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017 May;208(5):1037-1044. doi: 10.2214/AJR.16.16843. Epub 2017 Mar 7.
The purpose of this study is to assess associations between Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System, version 2 (PI-RADSv2), categories and the presence of a tumor with a Gleason score (GS) of 4 + 3 = 7 or greater or the presence of extraprostatic extension (EPE) at radical prostatectomy (RP) in patients with a GS 3 + 4 = 7 tumor at biopsy.
A total of 81 men with GS 3 + 4 = 7 prostate cancer diagnosed by transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy underwent multiparametric MRI and RP between 2012 and 2015. Two blinded radiologists assessed multiparametric MR images and assigned PI-RADSv2 assessment categories (categories 1-5) with the use of sector maps, which were compared with regard to the location of the tumor, the GS, and the presence of EPE at RP. Comparisons were performed between groups with the use of chi-square and multivariate analysis. Diagnostic accuracy was assessed using ROC curve analysis, and localization was compared using the Fisher exact test.
A total of 53.1% of men (43/81) had EPE, and 21.0% (17/81) had GS 4 + 3 = 7 prostate cancer after RP, whereas 2.5% of men (2/81) had their tumors downgraded to GS 3 + 3 = 6. No statistically significant difference in patient age, prostate specific antigen level, or clinical stage existed between groups (p > 0.05). PI-RADSv2 assessment categories were significantly higher for GS 4 + 3 = 7 tumors (p = 0.03). PI-RADSv2 showed moderate accuracy for the diagnosis of GS 4 + 3 = 7 tumors (AUC, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.54-0.77), with a category of 4 or higher having a sensitivity and specificity for diagnosis of 94.1% and 23.4%, respectively. No patient with a PI-RADSv2 category lower than 3 had a GS 4 + 3 = 7 tumor. Accuracy of tumor localization ranged from 86.4% to 92.6%, with 88.2% of errors (15/17) occurring in GS 3 + 3 = 6 or GS 3 + 4 = 7 tumors (p = 0.30). PI-RADSv2 categories were noted to be higher when EPE was present (p < 0.001). Interobserver agreement was moderate (κ = 0.43).
For GS 3 + 4 = 7 cancers detected at transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy, higher PI-RADSv2 assessment categories are associated with upgrading to GS 4 + 3 = 7 cancer and with the presence of EPE after RP. A PI-RADSv2 score of 3 or higher was 100% sensitive for diagnosing GS 4 + 3 = 7 tumors.
本研究旨在评估前列腺影像报告和数据系统第2版(PI-RADSv2)分类与活检时Gleason评分(GS)为4 + 3 = 7或更高的肿瘤的存在,或在根治性前列腺切除术(RP)时存在前列腺外侵犯(EPE)之间的关联,这些患者活检时GS为3 + 4 = 7的肿瘤。
2012年至2015年间,共有81例经直肠超声引导活检诊断为GS 3 + 4 = 7前列腺癌的男性接受了多参数MRI和RP。两名盲法放射科医生使用扇形图评估多参数MR图像并分配PI-RADSv2评估类别(1 - 5类),并就肿瘤位置、GS以及RP时EPE的存在进行比较。使用卡方检验和多变量分析在组间进行比较。使用ROC曲线分析评估诊断准确性,并使用Fisher精确检验比较定位情况。
共有53.1%的男性(43/81)存在EPE,21.0%(17/81)在RP后患有GS 4 + 3 = 7前列腺癌,而2.5%的男性(2/81)其肿瘤降级为GS 3 + 3 = 6。组间患者年龄、前列腺特异性抗原水平或临床分期无统计学显著差异(p > 0.05)。GS 4 + 3 = 7肿瘤的PI-RADSv2评估类别显著更高(p = 0.03)。PI-RADSv2对GS 4 + 3 = 7肿瘤的诊断具有中等准确性(AUC,0.65;95% CI,0.54 - 0.77),4类或更高类别对诊断的敏感性和特异性分别为94.1%和23.4%。没有PI-RADSv2类别低于3的患者患有GS 4 + 3 = 7肿瘤。肿瘤定位准确性范围为86.4%至92.6%,88.2%的错误(15/17)发生在GS 3 + 3 = 6或GS 3 + 4 = 7肿瘤中(p = 0.30)。当存在EPE时,PI-RADSv2类别更高(p < 0.001)。观察者间一致性为中等(κ = 0.43)。
对于经直肠超声引导活检检测到的GS 3 + 4 = 7癌症,较高的PI-RADSv2评估类别与升级为GS 4 + 3 = 7癌症以及RP后存在EPE相关。PI-RADSv2评分为3或更高对诊断GS 4 + 3 = 7肿瘤的敏感性为100%。