Rofo
DOI: 10.1055/a-2374-2531
Urogenital Tract

Enhancing Prostate Cancer Detection in PI-RADS 3 Cases: An In-depth Analysis of Radiological Indicators from Multiparametric MRI

Verbesserung der Prostata karzinom detektion bei PI-RADS 3-Läsionen: eine eingehende Analyse radiologischer Indikatoren der multiparametrischen MRT
İlker Mersinlioğlu
1   Department of Radiology, Akdeniz University Faculty of Medicine, Antalya, Turkey (Ringgold ID: RIN64032)
,
1   Department of Radiology, Akdeniz University Faculty of Medicine, Antalya, Turkey (Ringgold ID: RIN64032)
,
Zülbiye Eda Tezel
1   Department of Radiology, Akdeniz University Faculty of Medicine, Antalya, Turkey (Ringgold ID: RIN64032)
,
Ahmet Faruk Gürbüz
1   Department of Radiology, Akdeniz University Faculty of Medicine, Antalya, Turkey (Ringgold ID: RIN64032)
,
Metin Çubuk
1   Department of Radiology, Akdeniz University Faculty of Medicine, Antalya, Turkey (Ringgold ID: RIN64032)
› Institutsangaben

Abstract

Purpose

Prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis using multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) remains challenging, especially in Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System 3 (PI-RADS 3) lesions, which present an intermediate risk of malignancy. This study aims to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of various radiological parameters in PI-RADS 3 lesions to improve the decision-making process for prostate biopsies.

Materials and Methods

This retrospective study included 76 patients with PI-RADS 3 lesions who underwent mpMRI and transrectal prostate biopsy at a tertiary university hospital between 2015 and 2022. Radiological parameters such as signal intensity, lesion size, border definition, morphological features, lesion location, and prostate volume were analyzed. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values and the patients’ clinical data including age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and histopathological findings were also evaluated. Results: Among the 76 patients meeting the inclusion criteria, prostate cancer was detected in 17, with only one case being clinically significant (csPCa). Factors increasing malignancy risk in PI-RADS 3 lesions included poorly defined lesion borders, ADC values below 1180 μm²/sec, and prostate volume below 50.5 cc. The study highlighted the need for additional radiological and clinical parameters in the risk classification of PI-RADS 3 cases.

This retrospective study included 76 patients with PI-RADS 3 lesions who underwent mpMRI and transrectal prostate biopsy at a tertiary university hospital between 2015 and 2022. Radiological parameters such as signal intensity, lesion size, border definition, morphological features, lesion location, and prostate volume were analyzed. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values and the patients’ clinical data including age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and histopathological findings were also evaluated.

Results

Among the 76 patients meeting the inclusion criteria, prostate cancer was detected in 17, with only one case being clinically significant (csPCa). Factors increasing malignancy risk in PI-RADS 3 lesions included poorly defined lesion borders, ADC values below 1180 μm²/sec, and prostate volume below 50.5 cc. The study highlighted the need for additional radiological and clinical parameters in the risk classification of PI-RADS 3 cases.

Conclusion

The findings suggest that incorporating additional radiological parameters into the evaluation of PI-RADS 3 lesions can enhance the accuracy of prostate cancer diagnosis. This approach could minimize unnecessary biopsies and ensure that significant malignancies are not overlooked. Future multicenter, large-scale studies are recommended to establish more definitive risk stratification criteria.

Key Points

  • The study emphasizes the complexity of diagnosing prostate cancer in PI-RADS 3 lesions and the importance of detailed radiological assessment.

  • It highlights the significance of specific radiological parameters, including lesion border definition and ADC values, in predicting malignancy.

  • The research provides valuable insight for clinicians in order to make informed decisions regarding prostate biopsies, particularly in ambiguous PI-RADS 3 cases.

Citation Format

  • Mersinlioğlu İ, Keven A, Tezel ZE et al. Enhancing Prostate Cancer Detection in PI-RADS 3 Cases: An In-depth Analysis of Radiological Indicators from Multiparametric MRI. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2024; DOI 10.1055/a-2374-2531

Zusammenfassung

Ziel

Die Diagnose des Prostatakarzinoms (PCa) mittels multiparametrischer Magnetresonanztomografie (mpMRT) bleibt eine Herausforderung, insbesondere bei Läsionen im PI-RADS 3 (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System 3), die ein mittleres Malignitätsrisiko aufweisen. Diese Studie zielt darauf ab, die diagnostische Wirksamkeit verschiedener radiologischer Parameter bei PI-RADS-3-Läsionen zu bewerten, um die Entscheidungsfindung für Prostatabiopsien zu verbessern.

Materialien und Methoden

Diese retrospektive Studie umfasste 76 Patienten mit PI-RADS-3-Läsionen, die sich zwischen 2015 und 2022 in einem tertiären Universitätsklinikum einer mpMRT und transrektalen Prostatabiopsie unterzogen. Radiologische Parameter wie Signalintensität, Läsionsgröße, Randschärfe, morphologische Merkmale, Lokalisation der Läsion und Prostatavolumen wurden analysiert. Zusätzlich wurden der apparente Diffusionskoeffizient (ADC) und klinische Daten der Patienten, einschließlich Alter, prostataspezifisches Antigen (PSA) und histopathologische Befunde, ausgewertet.

Ergebnisse

Bei 76 Patienten, die die Einschlusskriterien erfüllten, wurde bei 17 Patienten ein Prostatakarzinom nachgewiesen, wobei nur ein Fall klinisch signifikant (csPCa) war. Faktoren, die das Malignitätsrisiko bei PI-RADS-3-Läsionen erhöhen, waren unscharf begrenzte Läsionsränder, ADC-Werte unter 1180μm²/s und ein Prostatavolumen unter 50,5ccm. Die Studie unterstreicht die Notwendigkeit zusätzlicher radiologischer und klinischer Parameter in der Risikostratifizierung von PI-RADS-3-Fällen.

Schlussfolgerung

Die Ergebnisse deuten darauf hin, dass die Einbeziehung zusätzlicher radiologischer Parameter in die Bewertung von PI-RADS-3-Läsionen die Genauigkeit der Prostatakrebsdiagnose verbessern kann. Dieser Ansatz könnte unnötige Biopsien minimieren und sicherstellen, dass signifikante Malignome nicht übersehen werden. Um definitivere Kriterien für die Risikostratifizierung zu etablieren, werden zukünftige multizentrische Großstudien empfohlen.

Kernaussagen

  • Die Studie unterstreicht die Komplexität der Diagnose des Prostatakarzinoms bei PI-RADS-3-Läsionen und die Bedeutung einer detaillierten radiologischen Beurteilung.

  • Sie hebt die Bedeutung spezifischer radiologischer Parameter wie die Randschärfe der Läsion und die ADC-Werte für die Vorhersage von Malignität hervor.

  • Die Forschung liefert wertvolle Erkenntnisse für Kliniker, um fundierte Entscheidungen über Prostatabiopsien zu treffen, insbesondere in unklaren PI-RADS-3-Fällen.



Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 18. Juni 2024

Angenommen nach Revision: 19. Juli 2024

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
05. September 2024

© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 
  • References

  • 1 Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL. et al. PI-RADS Prostate Imaging – Reporting and Data System: 2015, Version 2. Eur Urol 2016; 69: 16-40 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.08.052. (PMID: 26427566)
  • 2 Purysko AS, Baroni RH, Giganti F. et al. PI-RADS Version 2.1: A Critical Review, From the AJR Special Series on Radiology Reporting and Data Systems. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2021; 216 (01) 20-32 DOI: 10.2214/AJR.20.24495.. (PMID: 32997518)
  • 3 Radtke JP, Wiesenfarth M, Kesch C. et al. Combined Clinical Parameters and Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Advanced Risk Modeling of Prostate Cancer – Patient-tailored Risk Stratification Can Reduce Unnecessary Biopsies. Eur Urol 2017; 72 (06) 888-896 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.03.039. (PMID: 28400169)
  • 4 Turkbey B, Rosenkrantz AB, Haider MA. et al. Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2.1: 2019 Update of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2. Eur Urol 2019; 76 (03) 340-351 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.02.033. (PMID: 30898406)
  • 5 Venderink W, van Luijtelaar A, Bomers JGR. et al. Results of Targeted Biopsy in Men with Magnetic Resonance Imaging Lesions Classified Equivocal, Likely or Highly Likely to Be Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol 2018; 73 (03) 353-360 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.02.021. (PMID: 28258784)
  • 6 Felker ER, Raman SS, Margolis DJ. et al. Risk stratification among men with prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 category 3 transition zone lesions: Is biopsy always necessary?. Am J Roentgenol 2017; 209 (06) 1272-1277
  • 7 Hansen NL, Kesch C, Barrett T. et al. Multicentre evaluation of targeted and systematic biopsies using magnetic resonance and ultrasound image-fusion guided transperineal prostate biopsy in patients with a previous negative biopsy. BJU Int 2017; 120 (05) 631-638
  • 8 Sheridan AD, Nath SK, Syed JS. et al. Risk of clinically signifcant prostate cancer associated with prostate imaging reporting and data system category 3 (equivocal) lesions identifed on multiparametric prostate MRI. Am J Roentgenol 2018; 210 (02) 347-357
  • 9 Ullrich T, Quentin M, Arsov C. et al. Risk Stratification of Equivocal Lesions on Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Prostate. J Urol 2018; 199 (03) 691-698 DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2017.09.074. (PMID: 28941924)
  • 10 Boschheidgen M, Schimmöller L, Doerfler S. et al. Single center analysis of an advisable control interval for follow-up of patients with PI-RADS category 3 in multiparametric MRI of the prostate. Sci Rep 2022; 12 (01) 6746
  • 11 Ullrich T, Schimmöller L. Perspective: a critical assessment of PI-RADS 2.1. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2020; 45 (12) 3961-3968 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-020-02424-7. (PMID: 32009207)
  • 12 Liddell H, Jyoti R, Haxhimolla HZ. Mp-MRI prostate characterised pirads 3 lesions are associated with a low risk of clinically significant prostate cancer-a retrospective review of 92 biopsied pirads 3 lesions. C. 8, Current Urology. S. Karger AG 2014; 96-100
  • 13 Nicola R, Bittencourt LK. PI-RADS 3 lesions: a critical review and discussion of how to improve management. Abdom Radiol 2023; 48 (07) 2401-2405 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-023-03929-7. (PMID: 37160472)
  • 14 Yang S, Zhao W, Tan S. et al. Combining clinical and MRI data to manage PI-RADS 3 lesions and reduce excessive biopsy. Transl Androl Urol 2020; 9 (03) 1252-1261 DOI: 10.21037/tau-19-755.
  • 15 Hansen NL, Koo BC, Warren AY. et al. Sub-differentiating equivocal PI-RADS-3 lesions in multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate to improve cancer detection. Eur J Radiol 2017; 95: 307-313 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2017.08.017. (PMID: 28987685)
  • 16 Hermie I, Van Besien J, De Visschere P. et al. Which clinical and radiological characteristics can predict clinically significant prostate cancer in PI-RADS 3 lesions? A retrospective study in a high-volume academic center. Eur J Radiol 2019; 114: 92-98
  • 17 Klingebiel M, Arsov C, Ullrich T. et al. Reasons for missing clinically significant prostate cancer by targeted magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy. Eur J Radiol 2021; 137: 109587 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109587. (PMID: 33592552)
  • 18 de Rooij M, Allen C, Twilt JJ. et al. PI-QUAL version 2: an update of a standardised scoring system for the assessment of image quality of prostate MRI. Eur Radiol 2024; 24 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-024-10795-4.