Campistol Miriam, Morote Juan, Triquell Marina, Regis Lucas, Celma Ana, de Torres Inés, Semidey María E, Mast Richard, Santamaría Anna, Planas Jacques, Trilla Enrique
Department of Urology, Vall d'Hebron Hospital, 08035 Barcelona, Spain.
Prostate Cancer Research Group, Vall d'Hebron, Research Institute, 08035 Barcelona, Spain.
Cancers (Basel). 2022 May 30;14(11):2702. doi: 10.3390/cancers14112702.
Tools to properly select candidates for prostate biopsy after magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) have usually been analyzed in overall populations with suspected prostate cancer (PCa). However, the performance of these tools can change regarding the Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) categories due to the different incidence of clinically significant PCa (csPCa). The objective of the study was to analyze PSA density (PSAD), MRI-ERSPC risk calculator (RC), and Proclarix to properly select candidates for prostate biopsy regarding PI-RADS categories. We performed a head-to-head analysis of 567 men with suspected PCa, PSA > 3 ng/mL and/or abnormal rectal examination, in whom two to four core transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided biopsies to PI-RADS ≥ three lesions and/or 12-core TRUS systematic biopsies were performed after 3-tesla mpMRI between January 2018 and March 2020 in one academic institution. The overall detection of csPCa was 40.9% (6% in PI-RADS < 3, 14.8% in PI-RADS 3, 55.3% in PI-RADS 4, and 88.9% in PI-RADS 5). MRI-ERSPC model exhibited a net benefit over PSAD and Proclarix in the overall population. Proclarix outperformed PSAD and MRI-ERSPC RC in PI-RADS ≤ 3. PSAD outperformed MRI-ESRPC RC and Proclarix in PI-RADS > 3, although none of them exhibited 100% sensitivity for csPCa in this setting. Therefore, tools to properly select candidates for prostate biopsy after MRI must be analyzed regarding the PI-RADS categories. While MRI-ERSPC RC outperformed PSAD and Proclarix in the overall population, Proclarix outperformed in PI-RADS ≤ 3, and no tool guaranteed 100% detection of csPCa in PI-RADS 4 and 5.
用于在磁共振成像(MRI)后正确选择前列腺活检候选者的工具通常是在疑似前列腺癌(PCa)的总体人群中进行分析的。然而,由于临床显著性前列腺癌(csPCa)的发病率不同,这些工具的性能在前列腺影像报告和数据系统(PI-RADS)类别方面可能会有所变化。本研究的目的是分析前列腺特异抗原密度(PSAD)、MRI-ERSPC风险计算器(RC)和Proclarix,以便根据PI-RADS类别正确选择前列腺活检候选者。我们对567名疑似PCa、前列腺特异抗原(PSA)>3 ng/mL和/或直肠指检异常的男性进行了直接比较分析,在2018年1月至2020年3月期间,于一家学术机构对这些男性在3特斯拉mpMRI检查后进行了两到四次经直肠超声(TRUS)引导下针对PI-RADS≥3类病变的活检和/或12针TRUS系统活检。csPCa的总体检出率为40.9%(PI-RADS<3类中为6%,PI-RADS 3类中为14.8%,PI-RADS 4类中为55.3%,PI-RADS 5类中为88.9%)。在总体人群中,MRI-ERSPC模型相对于PSAD和Proclarix表现出净效益。在PI-RADS≤3时,Proclarix的表现优于PSAD和MRI-ERSPC RC。在PI-RADS>3时,PSAD的表现优于MRI-ESRPC RC和Proclarix,尽管在这种情况下它们对csPCa均未表现出100%的敏感性。因此,必须根据PI-RADS类别分析用于在MRI后正确选择前列腺活检候选者的工具。虽然MRI-ERSPC RC在总体人群中的表现优于PSAD和Proclarix,但Proclarix在PI-RADS≤3时表现更优,且没有工具能保证在PI-RADS 4类和5类中100%检测出csPCa。