Cargando…

Comparing Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System Version 2 (PI-RADSv2) Category 1 and 2 Groups: Clinical Implication of Negative Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinicopathological differences between Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2 (v2) category 1 and 2 groups. Materials and Methods. We retrospectively reviewed our two institutional clinical databases: (1) transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)/magnetic res...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kim, Jung Kwon, Lee, Hak Jong, Hwang, Sung Il, Choe, Gheeyoung, Hong, Sung Kyu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7154969/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32337234
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/2819701
_version_ 1783521933972733952
author Kim, Jung Kwon
Lee, Hak Jong
Hwang, Sung Il
Choe, Gheeyoung
Hong, Sung Kyu
author_facet Kim, Jung Kwon
Lee, Hak Jong
Hwang, Sung Il
Choe, Gheeyoung
Hong, Sung Kyu
author_sort Kim, Jung Kwon
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinicopathological differences between Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2 (v2) category 1 and 2 groups. Materials and Methods. We retrospectively reviewed our two institutional clinical databases: (1) transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) fusion biopsy cohort (n = 706) and (2) radical prostatectomy (RP) cohort (n = 1403). Subsequently, we performed comparative analyses between PI-RADSv2 category 1 and 2 groups. Clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) was defined as the presence of Gleason score (GS) ≥ 3 + 4 in a single biopsy core, and adverse pathology (AP) was defined as high-grade (primary Gleason pattern 4 or any pattern 5) and/or non-organ-confined disease (pT3/N1). We also performed multivariate logistic regression analyses for AP. RESULTS: In the TRUS/MRI fusion biopsy cohort, no significant differences in detection rates of all cancer (18.2% vs. 29.0%, respectively, P = 0.730) or csPCa (9.1% vs. 9.9%, respectively, P = 0.692) were observed between PI-RADSv2 category 1 and 2 groups. There were no significant differences in pathologic outcomes including Gleason score (≥4 + 3, 21.2% vs. 29.9%, respectively, P = 0.420) or detection rate of AP (27.3% vs. 33.8%, respectively, P = 0.561) between the two groups in the RP cohort either. PI-RADSv2 category 1 or 2 had no significant association with AP, even in univariate analysis (P = 0.299). CONCLUSIONS: PI-RADSv2 categories 1 and 2 had similar performance to predict clinicopathological outcomes. Consequently, these two categories may be unified into a single category. Negative mpMRI does not guarantee the absence of AP, as with csPCa.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7154969
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Hindawi
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-71549692020-04-24 Comparing Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System Version 2 (PI-RADSv2) Category 1 and 2 Groups: Clinical Implication of Negative Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Kim, Jung Kwon Lee, Hak Jong Hwang, Sung Il Choe, Gheeyoung Hong, Sung Kyu Biomed Res Int Research Article OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinicopathological differences between Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2 (v2) category 1 and 2 groups. Materials and Methods. We retrospectively reviewed our two institutional clinical databases: (1) transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) fusion biopsy cohort (n = 706) and (2) radical prostatectomy (RP) cohort (n = 1403). Subsequently, we performed comparative analyses between PI-RADSv2 category 1 and 2 groups. Clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) was defined as the presence of Gleason score (GS) ≥ 3 + 4 in a single biopsy core, and adverse pathology (AP) was defined as high-grade (primary Gleason pattern 4 or any pattern 5) and/or non-organ-confined disease (pT3/N1). We also performed multivariate logistic regression analyses for AP. RESULTS: In the TRUS/MRI fusion biopsy cohort, no significant differences in detection rates of all cancer (18.2% vs. 29.0%, respectively, P = 0.730) or csPCa (9.1% vs. 9.9%, respectively, P = 0.692) were observed between PI-RADSv2 category 1 and 2 groups. There were no significant differences in pathologic outcomes including Gleason score (≥4 + 3, 21.2% vs. 29.9%, respectively, P = 0.420) or detection rate of AP (27.3% vs. 33.8%, respectively, P = 0.561) between the two groups in the RP cohort either. PI-RADSv2 category 1 or 2 had no significant association with AP, even in univariate analysis (P = 0.299). CONCLUSIONS: PI-RADSv2 categories 1 and 2 had similar performance to predict clinicopathological outcomes. Consequently, these two categories may be unified into a single category. Negative mpMRI does not guarantee the absence of AP, as with csPCa. Hindawi 2020-03-31 /pmc/articles/PMC7154969/ /pubmed/32337234 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/2819701 Text en Copyright © 2020 Jung Kwon Kim et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Kim, Jung Kwon
Lee, Hak Jong
Hwang, Sung Il
Choe, Gheeyoung
Hong, Sung Kyu
Comparing Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System Version 2 (PI-RADSv2) Category 1 and 2 Groups: Clinical Implication of Negative Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging
title Comparing Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System Version 2 (PI-RADSv2) Category 1 and 2 Groups: Clinical Implication of Negative Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging
title_full Comparing Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System Version 2 (PI-RADSv2) Category 1 and 2 Groups: Clinical Implication of Negative Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging
title_fullStr Comparing Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System Version 2 (PI-RADSv2) Category 1 and 2 Groups: Clinical Implication of Negative Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging
title_full_unstemmed Comparing Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System Version 2 (PI-RADSv2) Category 1 and 2 Groups: Clinical Implication of Negative Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging
title_short Comparing Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System Version 2 (PI-RADSv2) Category 1 and 2 Groups: Clinical Implication of Negative Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging
title_sort comparing prostate imaging-reporting and data system version 2 (pi-radsv2) category 1 and 2 groups: clinical implication of negative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7154969/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32337234
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/2819701
work_keys_str_mv AT kimjungkwon comparingprostateimagingreportinganddatasystemversion2piradsv2category1and2groupsclinicalimplicationofnegativemultiparametricmagneticresonanceimaging
AT leehakjong comparingprostateimagingreportinganddatasystemversion2piradsv2category1and2groupsclinicalimplicationofnegativemultiparametricmagneticresonanceimaging
AT hwangsungil comparingprostateimagingreportinganddatasystemversion2piradsv2category1and2groupsclinicalimplicationofnegativemultiparametricmagneticresonanceimaging
AT choegheeyoung comparingprostateimagingreportinganddatasystemversion2piradsv2category1and2groupsclinicalimplicationofnegativemultiparametricmagneticresonanceimaging
AT hongsungkyu comparingprostateimagingreportinganddatasystemversion2piradsv2category1and2groupsclinicalimplicationofnegativemultiparametricmagneticresonanceimaging