When to biopsy Prostate Imaging and Data Reporting System version 2 (PI-RADSv2) assessment category 3 lesions? Use of clinical and imaging variables to predict cancer diagnosis at targeted biopsy

Authors

  • Christopher Lim Department of Medical Imaging, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto
  • Jorge Abreu-Gomez Department of Medical Imaging, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto
  • Michel-Alexandre Leblond Department of Medical Imaging, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto
  • Ivan Carrion Department of Medical Imaging, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto
  • Danny Vesprini Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto
  • Nicola Schieda Department of Radiology, The Ottawa Hospital, The University of Ottawa
  • Laurence Klotz Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.6781

Keywords:

Prostate, PI-RADS, Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer, Targeted biopsy

Abstract

Introduction: We aimed to determine if clinical and imaging features can stratify men at higher risk for clinically significant (CS, International Society of Urological Pathology [ISUP] grade group ≥2) prostate cancer (PCa) in equivocal Prostate Imaging and Data Reporting System (PI-RADS) category 3 lesions on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

Methods: Approved by the institutional review board, this retrospective study involved 184 men with 198 lesions who underwent 3T-MRI and MRI-directed transrectal ultrasound biopsy for PI-RADS 3 lesions. Men were evaluated including clinical stage, prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD), indication, and MRI lesion size. Diagnoses for all men and by indication (no cancer, any PCa, CSPCa) were compared using multivariate logistic regression, including stage, PSAD, and lesion size.

Results: We found an overall PCa rate of 31.8% (63/198) and 10.1% (20/198) CSPCa (13 grade group 2, five group 3, and two group 4). Higher stage (p=0.001), PSAD (p=0.007), and lesion size (p=0.015) were associated with CSPCa, with no association between CSPCa and age, PSA, or prostate volume (p>0.05). PSAD modestly predicted CSPCa area under the curve (AUC) 0.66 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.518–0.794) in all men and 0.64 (0.487–0.799) for those on active surveillance (AS). Model combining clinical stage, PSAD, and lesion size improved accuracy for all men and AS (AUC 0.82 [0.736–0.910], p<0.001 and 0.785 [0.666–0.904], p<0.001). In men with prior negative biopsy and persistent suspicion, PSAD (0.90 [0.767–1.000]) was not different from the model (p>0.05), with optimal cutpoint of ≥0.215 ng/mL/ cc achieving sensitivity/specificity of 85.7/84.4%.

Conclusions: PI-RADSv2 category 3 lesions are often not CSPCa. PSAD predicted CSPCa in men with a prior negative biopsy; however, PSAD alone had limited value, and accuracy improved when using a model incorporating PSAD with clinical stage and MRI lesion size.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Published

2020-09-28

How to Cite

Lim, C., Abreu-Gomez, J., Leblond, M.-A., Carrion, I., Vesprini, D., Schieda, N., & Klotz, L. (2020). When to biopsy Prostate Imaging and Data Reporting System version 2 (PI-RADSv2) assessment category 3 lesions? Use of clinical and imaging variables to predict cancer diagnosis at targeted biopsy. Canadian Urological Association Journal, 15(4), 115–21. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.6781

Issue

Section

Original Research