scholarly journals The Effect of Different Levels of Prostate-Specific Antigen and Prostate Imaging Report and Data System Scores on Logistic Regression Model to Predict Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer—A Single Center Retrospective Study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Loudong Zhang ◽  
Hua Zhu ◽  
Donghua Gu ◽  
Xiaodong Pan ◽  
bing zheng

Abstract Background: At present, there are various clinical regression models for predicting prostate cancer. But what about the diagnostic effectiveness of these models in different parameter ranges, and are the models applicable to everyone? This study aimed to study the influence of different levels of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and Prostate Imaging Report and Data System version 2 (PI-RADS v2) scores on the regression model to predict clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa).Methods: This retrospective study screened 251 patients from our hospital, who were divided into different groups. The regression model was established for each group to predict csPCa, and the effects of PSA and PI-RADS scores on each model were analyzed through the diagnostic effects of the model.Results: In patients with lower PSA scores, although the model was less sensitive than PSA, the AUC of the model was much greater. With the rise of PSA, the sensitivity of the model surpassed that of PSA, while the specificity became the opposite, and the AUC gap also gradually decreased. In the group with low PI-RADS score, the sensitivity and specificity of PI-RADS were lower than the model, and the gap was larger. Although the gap between the two gradually decreased with the increase of PI-RADS, the diagnostic efficiency of the model was still slightly larger than that of pure PI-RADS.Conclusion: As the PSA and PI-RADS v2 scores increase, the diagnostic advantages of the regression model will gradually decrease. However, for patients with low levels of PSA and PI-RADS scores,the regression model is less affected by PSA and PI-RADS, and can better utilize its clinical diagnostic advantages.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Loudong Zhang ◽  
Hua Zhu ◽  
Donghua Gu ◽  
Xiaodong Pan ◽  
bing zheng

Abstract Background At present, there are various clinical regression models for predicting prostate cancer. But what about the diagnostic effectiveness of these models in different parameter ranges, and are the models applicable to everyone? This study aimed to study the influence of different levels of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and Prostate Imaging Report and Data System version 2 (PI-RADS v2) scores on the regression model to predict clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). Methods This retrospective study screened 251 patients from our hospital, who were divided into different groups. The regression model was established for each group to predict csPCa, and the effects of PSA and PI-RADS scores on each model were analyzed through the diagnostic effects of the model. Results In patients with lower PSA scores, although the model was less sensitive than PSA, the AUC of the model was much greater. With the rise of PSA, the sensitivity of the model surpassed that of PSA, while the specificity became the opposite, and the AUC gap also gradually decreased. In the group with low PI-RADS score, the sensitivity and specificity of PI-RADS were lower than the model, and the gap was larger. Although the gap between the two gradually decreased with the increase of PI-RADS, the diagnostic efficiency of the model was still slightly larger than that of pure PI-RADS. Conclusion As the PSA and PI-RADS v2 scores increase, the diagnostic advantages of the regression model will gradually decrease. However, for patients with low levels of PSA and PI-RADS scores,the regression model is less affected by PSA and PI-RADS, and can better utilize its clinical diagnostic advantages.


2021 ◽  
pp. 20201434
Author(s):  
Yasuyo Urase ◽  
Yoshiko Ueno ◽  
Tsutomu Tamada ◽  
Keitaro Sofue ◽  
Satoru Takahashi ◽  
...  

Objectives: To evaluate the interreader agreement and diagnostic performance of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) v2.1, in comparison with v2. Methods: Institutional review board approval was obtained for this retrospective study. Seventy-seven consecutive patients who underwent a prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging at 3.0 T before radical prostatectomy were included. Four radiologists (two experienced uroradiologists and two inexperienced radiologists) independently scored eight regions [six peripheral zones (PZ) and two transition zones (TZ)] using v2.1 and v2. Interreader agreement was assessed using κ statistics. To evaluate diagnostic performance for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPC), area under the curve (AUC) was estimated. Results 228 regions were pathologically diagnosed as positive for csPC. With a cutoff ≥3, the agreement among all readers was better with v2.1 than v2 in TZ, PZ, or both zones combined (κ-value: TZ, 0.509 vs 0.414; PZ, 0.686 vs 0.568; both zones combined, 0.644 vs 0.531). With a cutoff ≥4, the agreement among all readers was also better with v2.1 than v2 in the PZ or both zones combined (κ-value: PZ, 0.761 vs 0.701; both zones combined, 0.756 vs 0.709). For all readers, AUC with v2.1 was higher than with v2 (TZ, 0.826–0.907 vs 0.788–0.856; PZ, 0.857–0.919 vs 0.853–0.902). Conclusions: Our study suggests that the PI-RADS v2.1 could improve the interreader agreement and might contribute to improved diagnostic performance compared with v2. Advances in knowledge: PI-RADS v2.1 has a potential to improve interreader variability and diagnostic performance among radiologists with different levels of expertise.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document