scholarly journals Negative Predictive Value of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Era: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 78 (3) ◽  
pp. 402-414 ◽  
Author(s):  
Niranjan J. Sathianathen ◽  
Altan Omer ◽  
Eli Harriss ◽  
Lucy Davies ◽  
Veeru Kasivisvanathan ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurence Klotz ◽  
Giovanni Lughezzani ◽  
Davide Maffei ◽  
Andrea Sanchez ◽  
Jose Gregorio Pereira ◽  
...  

Introduction: High-resolution micro-ultrasound has the capability of imaging prostate cancer based on detecting alterations in ductal anatomy, analogous to multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI). This technology has the potential advantages of relatively low cost, simplicity, and accessibility compared to mpMRI. This multicenter, prospective registry aims to compare the sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value (PPV) of mpMRI with high-resolution micro-ultrasound imaging for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. Methods: We included 1040 subjects at 11 sites in seven countries who had prior mpMRI and underwent ExactVu micro-ultrasound-guided biopsy. Biopsies were taken from both mpMRI targets (PI-RADS >3 and micro-ultrasound targets (PRIMUS >3). Systematic biopsies (up to 14 cores) were also performed. Various strategies were used for mpMRI target sampling, including cognitive fusion with micro-ultrasound, separate software-fusion systems, and software-fusion using the micro-ultrasound FusionVu system. Clinically significant cancer was those with Gleason grade group ≥2. Results: Overall, 39.5% were positive for clinically significant prostate cancer. Micro-ultrasound and mpMRI sensitivity was 94% vs. 90%, respectively (p=0.03), and NPV was 85% vs. 77%, respectively. Specificities of micro-ultrasound and MRI were both 22%, with similar PPV (44% vs. 43%). This represents the initial experience with the technology at most of the participating sites and, therefore, incorporates a learning curve. Number of cores, diagnostic strategy, blinding to MRI results, and experience varied between sites. Conclusions: In this initial multicenter registry, micro-ultrasound had comparable or higher sensitivity for clinically significant prostate cancer compared to mpMRI, with similar specificity. Micro-ultrasound is a low-cost, single-session option for prostate screening and targeted biopsy. Further larger-scale studies are required for validation of these findings.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suguru Ito ◽  
SEI NAITO ◽  
Takafumi Narisawa ◽  
Mayu Yagi ◽  
Yuta Kurota ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The detection of prostate cancer (CaP) has increasingly being carried out by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI). Despite many previous studies, the sensitivity for clinically significant CaP (csCaP) was high, information on mpMRI false-negative lesions is limited. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the use and limitations of mpMRI in CaP. Methods A total of 228 CaP foci in 100 patients who underwent 1.5 T mpMRI and radical prostatectomy between December 2015 and June 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. The sensitivities of CaP foci, csCaP, and index tumors (ITs) were measured. Clinically significant CaP was defined into two categories based on the Gleason score (GS): csCaP/GS ≥ 3 + 4 (GS ≥ 3 + 4 or diameter > 10 mm) and csCaP/GS ≥ 4 + 3 (GS ≥ 4 + 3 or diameter > 10 mm). In addition, the characteristics of false-negative lesions were identified. The Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 was used to determine an mpMRI positive lesion, defined as a lesion having a score of ≥ 3. Results The sensitivity of all legions, csCaP/GS ≥ 3 + 4, csCaP/GS ≥ 4 + 3, and ITs were 61.4%, 75.8%, 83.0%, and 91%, respectively. There were 91 lesions that were mpMRI false, 40% of which were csCaP/GS ≥ 3 + 4. There were three lesions with a GS of ≥ 8 and ≥ 10 mm in the false-negative results. Conclusions mpMRI can highly detect ITs and csCaP/GS ≥ 4 + 3; however, a few large and high-GS CaPs constitute undetectable lesions in 1.5 T mpMRI.


BMJ Open ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. e050376
Author(s):  
Pranav Satish ◽  
Alex Freeman ◽  
Daniel Kelly ◽  
Alex Kirkham ◽  
Clement Orczyk ◽  
...  

IntroductionMultiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has improved the triage of men with suspected prostate cancer, through precision prebiopsy identification of clinically significant disease. While multiple important characteristics, including tumour grade and size have been shown to affect conspicuity on mpMRI, tumour location and association with mpMRI visibility is an underexplored facet of this field. Therefore, the objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to collate the extant evidence comparing MRI performance between different locations within the prostate in men with existing or suspected prostate cancer. This review will help clarify mechanisms that underpin whether a tumour is visible, and the prognostic implications of our findings.Methods and analysisThe databases MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase and Cochrane will be systematically searched for relevant studies. Eligible studies will be full-text English-language articles that examine the effect of zonal location on mpMRI conspicuity. Two reviewers will perform study selection, data extraction and quality assessment. A third reviewer will be involved if consensus is not achieved. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines will inform the methodology and reporting of the review. Study bias will be assessed using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale. A thematic approach will be used to synthesise key location-based factors associated with mpMRI conspicuity. A meta-analysis will be conducted to form a pooled value of the sensitivity and specificity of mpMRI at different tumour locations.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required as it is a protocol for a systematic review. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021228087.


2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (7) ◽  
pp. 925-930 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco Cantiello ◽  
Stefano Manno ◽  
Giorgio I. Russo ◽  
Sebastiano Cimino ◽  
Salvatore Privitera ◽  
...  

Objective: Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (mpMRI) has become a very useful tool in the management of PCa. Particularly, there is a great interest in using mpMRI for men on Active Surveillance (AS) for low risk PCa. The aim of this systematic review was to critically review the latest literature concerning the role of mpMRI in this clinical setting, underlying current strengths and weakness. Evidence Acquisition: A comprehensive literature research for English-language original and review articles was carried out using the National Center for Biotechnology Information PubMed database with the aim to identify studies pertaining to mpMRI for AS in low risk PCa patients. The following search terms were used: active surveillance, prostate cancer and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. Evidence Synthesis: Data from 28 recent original studies and reviews were reviewed. We only considered studies on the use of mpMRI in selecting AS patients and during AS follow-up, in order to solve two important questions: -Can mpMRI have a role in improving the detection of clinically significant disease, better selecting AS patients? -Can mpMRI identify the progression of disease and, consequently, be used during AS follow-up? Conclusions: mpMRI is useful to better select the ideal candidates to AS and to monitor them during follow-up. However, despite many advantages, there are yet important limitations to detect all clinically significant PCa and to better define mpMRI-radiological progression during AS. Further larger prospective studies are needed to definitively solve these important problems.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document