Cargando…

Accuracy of Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Reader Experience Matters

BACKGROUND: Prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly used in the detection, image-guided biopsy, and active surveillance of prostate cancer. The accuracy of prostate MRI may differ based on factors including imaging technique, patient population, and reader experience. OBJECTIVE: To...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kang, Hyunseon C., Jo, Nahyun, Bamashmos, Anas Saeed, Ahmed, Mona, Sun, Jia, Ward, John F., Choi, Haesun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8061889/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33899028
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.euros.2021.03.004
_version_ 1783681653883797504
author Kang, Hyunseon C.
Jo, Nahyun
Bamashmos, Anas Saeed
Ahmed, Mona
Sun, Jia
Ward, John F.
Choi, Haesun
author_facet Kang, Hyunseon C.
Jo, Nahyun
Bamashmos, Anas Saeed
Ahmed, Mona
Sun, Jia
Ward, John F.
Choi, Haesun
author_sort Kang, Hyunseon C.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly used in the detection, image-guided biopsy, and active surveillance of prostate cancer. The accuracy of prostate MRI may differ based on factors including imaging technique, patient population, and reader experience. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the accuracy of prostate MRI varies with reader experience. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We rescored regions of interest from 194 consecutive patients who had undergone MRI/ultrasonography fusion biopsy. Original prostate MRI scans had been interpreted by one of 33 abdominal radiologists (AR group). More than 14 mo later, rescoring was performed by two blinded, prostate MRI radiologists (PR group). Likert scoring was used for both original MRI reports and rescoring. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Test performance (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value [PPV], and negative predictive value [NPV]) of prostate MRI was defined for the AR and PR groups. A Likert score of 4–5 was considered test positive and clinically significant prostate carcinoma (csPCa; Gleason grade group [GGG] ≥2) was considered outcome positive. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: MRI-positive lesions (Likert 4–5) scored by the PR group resulted in csPCa more frequently than those scored by the AR group (64.9% vs 39.3%). MRI-negative lesions (Likert 2–3) were more likely to result in a clinically insignificant biopsy (benign pathology or GGG 1) when scored by the PR versus the AR group (91.8% vs 76.6%). Sensitivity and specificity of MRI to detect csPCa were higher for the PR group than for the AR group (sensitivity 85.9% vs 70.7%; specificity 77.3% vs 46.8%). Overall diagnostic accuracy was higher for the PR group than for the AR group (80.1% vs 54.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of prostate MRI were higher for the PR group than for the AR group. PATIENT SUMMARY: We examined the accuracy of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in two groups of radiologists. Experienced radiologists were more likely to detect clinically significant prostate cancer on MRI.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8061889
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80618892021-07-29 Accuracy of Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Reader Experience Matters Kang, Hyunseon C. Jo, Nahyun Bamashmos, Anas Saeed Ahmed, Mona Sun, Jia Ward, John F. Choi, Haesun Eur Urol Open Sci Prostate Cancer BACKGROUND: Prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly used in the detection, image-guided biopsy, and active surveillance of prostate cancer. The accuracy of prostate MRI may differ based on factors including imaging technique, patient population, and reader experience. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the accuracy of prostate MRI varies with reader experience. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We rescored regions of interest from 194 consecutive patients who had undergone MRI/ultrasonography fusion biopsy. Original prostate MRI scans had been interpreted by one of 33 abdominal radiologists (AR group). More than 14 mo later, rescoring was performed by two blinded, prostate MRI radiologists (PR group). Likert scoring was used for both original MRI reports and rescoring. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Test performance (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value [PPV], and negative predictive value [NPV]) of prostate MRI was defined for the AR and PR groups. A Likert score of 4–5 was considered test positive and clinically significant prostate carcinoma (csPCa; Gleason grade group [GGG] ≥2) was considered outcome positive. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: MRI-positive lesions (Likert 4–5) scored by the PR group resulted in csPCa more frequently than those scored by the AR group (64.9% vs 39.3%). MRI-negative lesions (Likert 2–3) were more likely to result in a clinically insignificant biopsy (benign pathology or GGG 1) when scored by the PR versus the AR group (91.8% vs 76.6%). Sensitivity and specificity of MRI to detect csPCa were higher for the PR group than for the AR group (sensitivity 85.9% vs 70.7%; specificity 77.3% vs 46.8%). Overall diagnostic accuracy was higher for the PR group than for the AR group (80.1% vs 54.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of prostate MRI were higher for the PR group than for the AR group. PATIENT SUMMARY: We examined the accuracy of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in two groups of radiologists. Experienced radiologists were more likely to detect clinically significant prostate cancer on MRI. Elsevier 2021-03-23 /pmc/articles/PMC8061889/ /pubmed/33899028 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.euros.2021.03.004 Text en © 2021 The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Prostate Cancer
Kang, Hyunseon C.
Jo, Nahyun
Bamashmos, Anas Saeed
Ahmed, Mona
Sun, Jia
Ward, John F.
Choi, Haesun
Accuracy of Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Reader Experience Matters
title Accuracy of Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Reader Experience Matters
title_full Accuracy of Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Reader Experience Matters
title_fullStr Accuracy of Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Reader Experience Matters
title_full_unstemmed Accuracy of Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Reader Experience Matters
title_short Accuracy of Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Reader Experience Matters
title_sort accuracy of prostate magnetic resonance imaging: reader experience matters
topic Prostate Cancer
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8061889/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33899028
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.euros.2021.03.004
work_keys_str_mv AT kanghyunseonc accuracyofprostatemagneticresonanceimagingreaderexperiencematters
AT jonahyun accuracyofprostatemagneticresonanceimagingreaderexperiencematters
AT bamashmosanassaeed accuracyofprostatemagneticresonanceimagingreaderexperiencematters
AT ahmedmona accuracyofprostatemagneticresonanceimagingreaderexperiencematters
AT sunjia accuracyofprostatemagneticresonanceimagingreaderexperiencematters
AT wardjohnf accuracyofprostatemagneticresonanceimagingreaderexperiencematters
AT choihaesun accuracyofprostatemagneticresonanceimagingreaderexperiencematters