Utility of dynamic contrast enhancement for clinically significant prostate cancer detection

Fuente: Wiley Open Access
Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Hauptverfasser: Eric V. Li, Sai K. Kumar, Jonathan A. Aguiar, Mohammad R. Siddiqui, Clayton Neill, Zequn Sun, Edward M. Schaeffer, Anugayathri Jawahar, Ashley E. Ross, Hiten D. Patel
Format: Artículo Open Access
Veröffentlicht: Wiley 2024
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
_version_ 1867009118028431360
author Eric V. Li
Sai K. Kumar
Jonathan A. Aguiar
Mohammad R. Siddiqui
Clayton Neill
Zequn Sun
Edward M. Schaeffer
Anugayathri Jawahar
Ashley E. Ross
Hiten D. Patel
author_facet Eric V. Li
Sai K. Kumar
Jonathan A. Aguiar
Mohammad R. Siddiqui
Clayton Neill
Zequn Sun
Edward M. Schaeffer
Anugayathri Jawahar
Ashley E. Ross
Hiten D. Patel
Eric V. Li
Sai K. Kumar
Jonathan A. Aguiar
Mohammad R. Siddiqui
Clayton Neill
Zequn Sun
Edward M. Schaeffer
Anugayathri Jawahar
Ashley E. Ross
Hiten D. Patel
collection Wiley Open Access
contents Utility of dynamic contrast enhancement for clinically significant prostate cancer detection Eric V. Li Sai K. Kumar Jonathan A. Aguiar Mohammad R. Siddiqui Clayton Neill Zequn Sun Edward M. Schaeffer Anugayathri Jawahar Ashley E. Ross Hiten D. Patel BJUI Compass AbstractObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the association of dynamic contrast enhancement (DCE) with clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa, Gleason Grade Group ≥2) and compare biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) and multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) nomograms.Subjects/patients and methodsWe identified a retrospective cohort of biopsy naïve patients who underwent pre‐biopsy MRI separated by individual MRI series from 2018 to 2022. csPCa detection rates were calculated for patients with peripheral zone (PZ) lesions scored 3–5 on diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) with available DCE (annotated as − or +). bpMRI Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) (3 = 3−, 3+; 4 = 4−, 4+; 5 = 5−, 5+) and mpMRI PIRADS (3 = 3−; 4 = 3+, 4−, 4+; 5 = 5−, 5+) approaches were compared in multivariable logistic regression models. Nomograms for detection of csPCa and ≥GG3 PCa incorporating all biopsy naïve patients who underwent prostate MRI were generated based on available serum biomarkers [PHI, % free prostate‐specific antigen (PSA), or total PSA] and validated with an independent cohort.ResultsPatients (n = 1010) with highest PIRADS lesion in PZ were included in initial analysis with 127 (12.6%) classified as PIRADS 3+ (PIRADS 3 on bpMRI but PIRADS 4 on mpMRI). On multivariable analysis, PIRADS 3+ lesions were associated with higher csPCa rates compared to PIRADS 3− (3+ vs. 3−: OR 1.86, p = 0.024), but lower csPCa rates compared to PIRADS DWI 4 lesions (4 vs. 3+: OR 2.39, p < 0.001). csPCa rates were 19% (3−), 31% (3+), 41.5% (4−), 65.9% (4+), 62.5% (5−), and 92.3% (5+). bpMRI nomograms were non‐inferior to mpMRI nomograms in the development (n = 1410) and independent validation (n = 353) cohorts. Risk calculators available at: https://rossnm1.shinyapps.io/MynMRIskCalculator/.ConclusionWhile DCE positivity by itself was associated with csPCa among patients with highest PIRADS lesions in the PZ, nomogram comparisons suggest that there is no significant difference in performance of bpMRI and mpMRI. bpMRI may be considered as an alternative to mpMRI for prostate cancer evaluation in many situations. 10.1002/bco2.415 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
doi_str_mv 10.1002/bco2.415
format Artículo Open Access
id wiley_oa_10_1002_bco2_415
institution Wiley Open Access
license_str_mv http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
publishDate 2024
publisher Wiley
record_format wiley_oa
spellingShingle Utility of dynamic contrast enhancement for clinically significant prostate cancer detection
Eric V. Li
Sai K. Kumar
Jonathan A. Aguiar
Mohammad R. Siddiqui
Clayton Neill
Zequn Sun
Edward M. Schaeffer
Anugayathri Jawahar
Ashley E. Ross
Hiten D. Patel
BJUI Compass
Utility of dynamic contrast enhancement for clinically significant prostate cancer detection Eric V. Li Sai K. Kumar Jonathan A. Aguiar Mohammad R. Siddiqui Clayton Neill Zequn Sun Edward M. Schaeffer Anugayathri Jawahar Ashley E. Ross Hiten D. Patel BJUI Compass AbstractObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the association of dynamic contrast enhancement (DCE) with clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa, Gleason Grade Group ≥2) and compare biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) and multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) nomograms.Subjects/patients and methodsWe identified a retrospective cohort of biopsy naïve patients who underwent pre‐biopsy MRI separated by individual MRI series from 2018 to 2022. csPCa detection rates were calculated for patients with peripheral zone (PZ) lesions scored 3–5 on diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) with available DCE (annotated as − or +). bpMRI Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) (3 = 3−, 3+; 4 = 4−, 4+; 5 = 5−, 5+) and mpMRI PIRADS (3 = 3−; 4 = 3+, 4−, 4+; 5 = 5−, 5+) approaches were compared in multivariable logistic regression models. Nomograms for detection of csPCa and ≥GG3 PCa incorporating all biopsy naïve patients who underwent prostate MRI were generated based on available serum biomarkers [PHI, % free prostate‐specific antigen (PSA), or total PSA] and validated with an independent cohort.ResultsPatients (n = 1010) with highest PIRADS lesion in PZ were included in initial analysis with 127 (12.6%) classified as PIRADS 3+ (PIRADS 3 on bpMRI but PIRADS 4 on mpMRI). On multivariable analysis, PIRADS 3+ lesions were associated with higher csPCa rates compared to PIRADS 3− (3+ vs. 3−: OR 1.86, p = 0.024), but lower csPCa rates compared to PIRADS DWI 4 lesions (4 vs. 3+: OR 2.39, p < 0.001). csPCa rates were 19% (3−), 31% (3+), 41.5% (4−), 65.9% (4+), 62.5% (5−), and 92.3% (5+). bpMRI nomograms were non‐inferior to mpMRI nomograms in the development (n = 1410) and independent validation (n = 353) cohorts. Risk calculators available at: https://rossnm1.shinyapps.io/MynMRIskCalculator/.ConclusionWhile DCE positivity by itself was associated with csPCa among patients with highest PIRADS lesions in the PZ, nomogram comparisons suggest that there is no significant difference in performance of bpMRI and mpMRI. bpMRI may be considered as an alternative to mpMRI for prostate cancer evaluation in many situations. 10.1002/bco2.415 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
title Utility of dynamic contrast enhancement for clinically significant prostate cancer detection
topic BJUI Compass
url https://bjui-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bco2.415