Institute of Diagnostic Radiology, Department of Medicine, Udine, UD, Italy.
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2019 Feb;49(2):546-555. doi: 10.1002/jmri.26220. Epub 2018 Sep 5.
Most studies assessing interreader agreement of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System v. 2 (PI-RADS v2) have used biopsy as the standard of reference, thus carrying the risk of not definitively noting all existent cancers.
To evaluate the interreader agreement in assessing prostate cancer (PCa) of PI-RADS v2, using whole-mount histology as the standard of reference.
Monocentric prospective cohort study.
In all, 48 patients with biopsy-proven PCa referred for radical prostatectomy, undergoing staging multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) between May 2016 to February 2017.
FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 3.0T system using high-resolution T -weighted imaging, diffusion-weighted imaging (echo-planar imaging with maximum b-value 2000 sec/mm ), and dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging (T -weighted high resolution isotropic volume examination; THRIVE) ASSESSMENT: Three radiologists blinded to final histology (2-8 years of experience) analyzed mpMRI images independently, scoring imaging findings in accordance with PI-RADS v2. On a per-lesion basis, we calculated overall and pairwise interreader agreement in assigning PI-RADS categories, as well as assessing malignancy with categories ≥3 or ≥4, and stage ≥pT3.
Cohen's kappa analysis of agreement.
On 71 lesions found on histology, there was moderate agreement in assigning PI-RADS categories to all cancers (k = 0.53) and clinically significant cancers (csPCa) (k = 0.47). Assessing csPCa with PI-RADS ≥4 cutoff provided higher agreement than PI-RADS ≥3 cutoff (k = 0.63 vs. 0.57). Interreader agreement was higher between more experienced readers, with the most experienced one achieving the highest cancer detection rate (0.73 for csPCa using category ≥4). There was substantial agreement in assessing stage ≥pT3 (k = 0.72).
We found moderate to substantial agreement in assigning the PI-RADS v2 categories and assessing the spectrum of cancers found on whole-mount histology, with category 4 as the most reproducible cutoff for csPCa. Readers' experience influenced interreader agreement and cancer detection rate.
2 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;49:546-555.
大多数评估前列腺影像报告和数据系统第 2 版(PI-RADS v2)读者间一致性的研究都使用活检作为参考标准,因此存在未能明确记录所有存在的癌症的风险。
使用全器官组织学作为参考标准,评估 PI-RADS v2 评估前列腺癌(PCa)的读者间一致性。
单中心前瞻性队列研究。
所有患者均为经活检证实的前列腺癌患者,于 2016 年 5 月至 2017 年 2 月期间因接受根治性前列腺切除术而接受分期多参数磁共振成像(mpMRI)检查。
磁场强度/序列:使用高分辨率 T1 加权成像、扩散加权成像(最大 b 值为 2000 sec/mm 的平面回波成像)和动态对比增强成像(高分辨率各向同性容积检查的 T1 加权;THRIVE)进行评估。
三位放射科医生对最终组织学结果不知情(2-8 年的经验),独立分析 mpMRI 图像,并根据 PI-RADS v2 对影像学发现进行评分。基于病变,我们计算了在分配 PI-RADS 类别、评估类别≥3 或≥4 以及≥pT3 分期的恶性肿瘤方面的总体和两两读者间一致性。
一致性的 Cohen κ 分析。
在组织学上发现的 71 个病变中,所有癌症(k=0.53)和临床显著癌症(csPCa)(k=0.47)的 PI-RADS 类别分配具有中等一致性。使用 PI-RADS≥4 作为截断值评估 csPCa 比使用 PI-RADS≥3 作为截断值具有更高的一致性(k=0.63 比 0.57)。经验更丰富的读者之间的读者间一致性更高,最有经验的读者达到了最高的癌症检出率(使用类别≥4 评估 csPCa 的检出率为 0.73)。在评估≥pT3 分期方面具有高度一致性(k=0.72)。
我们发现,在分配 PI-RADS v2 类别和评估全器官组织学上发现的癌症谱方面,具有中等至高度一致性,类别 4 是 csPCa 最具可重复性的截断值。读者的经验影响读者间一致性和癌症检出率。
2 技术功效:第 2 阶段 J. 磁共振成像 2019;49:546-555.