Prospective Evaluation of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 for Prostate Cancer Detection

Abstract

A PI-RADS score of 5 had the highest prospective cancer detection rate (78%). A PI-RADS score of 4 had only a 30% cancer detection rate, which is lower than expected. Surprisingly, no or few significant cancers were detected at a PI-RADS score of 3 (16%). These early prospective data suggest that current criteria result in a high false-positive rate that lowers the cancer detection rate. Therefore, stricter criteria may be needed in the future to decrease false-positives and increase the cancer detection rate for PI-RADS scores of 3, 4 and 5.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Robot-Guided, Software Based Transperineal MRI/TRUS Fusion Biopsy of the Prostate in a High Risk Population of Previously Biopsy Negative Men

“…The latest (153 patients and 287 lesions) series published by Kesch et al 2016 [20] using the same technique as we did shows similar detection rate of 34.8% and 29.9% for any and significant cancer, respectively. Another series (62 patients and 116 lesions) by Mertan et al 2016 [21] and Cash et al 2016 [22] (408 patients) reported similar results as well. The latest data including ours underline the poor performance of the PI-RADS scoring systems on a lesion based analysis.…”

In-Bore 3-T MR-guided Transrectal Targeted Prostate Biopsy: Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2–based Diagnostic Performance for Detection of Prostate Cancer

“…Quentin et al showed a 9.4% increase in clinically significant cancer from transrectal US-guided biopsy to combined transrectal US-guided and in-bore MR-guided biopsy. In our population, 18 of 49 patients (36.7%) with prior (22,23). A diagnostic yield of 16%-26% for category 3 underscores the need consider category 3 and higher as the threshold for proceeding to biopsy, rather than using category 4 as the threshold.…”

Advances in medical imaging for the diagnosis and management of common genitourinary cancers

“…To address this, in early 2015, Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (v.2) guidelines were established by the American College of Radiology and the European Society of Urogenital Radiology [109] that aim to standardize all aspects of mpMRI. Initial prospective studies have revealed promising findings on its use in improving prostate adenocarcinoma care [110] and its impact on inter-observer agreement and related cancer detection [111, 112]. A multi-reader study with 34 patients revealed average sensitivity values of 91% and 63% for detecting index and all lesions across all readers, respectively.…”