Cargando…

Reducing prostate biopsies and magnetic resonance imaging with prostate cancer risk stratification

OBJECTIVES: To recalibrate and validate the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer risk calculators (ERSPC RCs) 3/4 and the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)‐ERSPC‐RCs to a contemporary Norwegian setting to reduce upfront prostate multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) and prostate biopsies....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Davik, Petter, Remmers, Sebastiaan, Elschot, Mattijs, Roobol, Monique J., Bathen, Tone Frost, Bertilsson, Helena
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9349589/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35950035
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bco2.146
_version_ 1784762134704422912
author Davik, Petter
Remmers, Sebastiaan
Elschot, Mattijs
Roobol, Monique J.
Bathen, Tone Frost
Bertilsson, Helena
author_facet Davik, Petter
Remmers, Sebastiaan
Elschot, Mattijs
Roobol, Monique J.
Bathen, Tone Frost
Bertilsson, Helena
author_sort Davik, Petter
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To recalibrate and validate the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer risk calculators (ERSPC RCs) 3/4 and the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)‐ERSPC‐RCs to a contemporary Norwegian setting to reduce upfront prostate multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) and prostate biopsies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively identified and entered all men who underwent prostate mpMRI and subsequent prostate biopsy between January 2016 and March 2017 in a Norwegian centre into a database. mpMRI was reported using PI‐RADS v2.0 and clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) defined as Gleason ≥ 3 + 4. Probabilities of csPCa and any prostate cancer (PCa) on biopsy were calculated by the ERSPC RCs 3/4 and the MRI‐ERSPC‐RC and compared with biopsy results. RCs were then recalibrated to account for differences in prevalence between the development and current cohorts (if indicated), and calibration, discrimination and clinical usefulness assessed. RESULTS: Three hundred and three patients were included. The MRI‐ERSPC‐RCs were perfectly calibrated to our cohort, although the ERSPC RCs 3/4 needed recalibration. Area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) for the ERSPC RCs 3/4 was 0.82 for the discrimination of csPCa and 0.77 for any PCa. The AUC for the MRI‐ERSPC‐RCs was 0.89 for csPCa and 0.85 for any PCa. Decision curve analysis showed clear net benefit for both the ERSPC RCs 3/4 (>2% risk of csPCa threshold to biopsy) and for the MRI‐ERSPC‐RCs (>1% risk of csPCa threshold), with a greater net benefit for the MRI‐RCs. Using a >10% risk of csPCa or 20% risk of any PCa threshold for the ERSPC RCs 3/4, 15.5% of mpMRIs could be omitted, missing 0.8% of csPCa. Using the MRI‐ERSPC‐RCs, 23.4% of biopsies could be omitted with the same threshold, missing 0.8% of csPCa. CONCLUSION: The ERSPC RCs 3/4 and MRI‐ERSPC‐RCs can considerably reduce both upfront mpMRI and prostate biopsies with little risk of missing csPCa.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9349589
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93495892022-08-09 Reducing prostate biopsies and magnetic resonance imaging with prostate cancer risk stratification Davik, Petter Remmers, Sebastiaan Elschot, Mattijs Roobol, Monique J. Bathen, Tone Frost Bertilsson, Helena BJUI Compass To the Clinic OBJECTIVES: To recalibrate and validate the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer risk calculators (ERSPC RCs) 3/4 and the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)‐ERSPC‐RCs to a contemporary Norwegian setting to reduce upfront prostate multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) and prostate biopsies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively identified and entered all men who underwent prostate mpMRI and subsequent prostate biopsy between January 2016 and March 2017 in a Norwegian centre into a database. mpMRI was reported using PI‐RADS v2.0 and clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) defined as Gleason ≥ 3 + 4. Probabilities of csPCa and any prostate cancer (PCa) on biopsy were calculated by the ERSPC RCs 3/4 and the MRI‐ERSPC‐RC and compared with biopsy results. RCs were then recalibrated to account for differences in prevalence between the development and current cohorts (if indicated), and calibration, discrimination and clinical usefulness assessed. RESULTS: Three hundred and three patients were included. The MRI‐ERSPC‐RCs were perfectly calibrated to our cohort, although the ERSPC RCs 3/4 needed recalibration. Area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) for the ERSPC RCs 3/4 was 0.82 for the discrimination of csPCa and 0.77 for any PCa. The AUC for the MRI‐ERSPC‐RCs was 0.89 for csPCa and 0.85 for any PCa. Decision curve analysis showed clear net benefit for both the ERSPC RCs 3/4 (>2% risk of csPCa threshold to biopsy) and for the MRI‐ERSPC‐RCs (>1% risk of csPCa threshold), with a greater net benefit for the MRI‐RCs. Using a >10% risk of csPCa or 20% risk of any PCa threshold for the ERSPC RCs 3/4, 15.5% of mpMRIs could be omitted, missing 0.8% of csPCa. Using the MRI‐ERSPC‐RCs, 23.4% of biopsies could be omitted with the same threshold, missing 0.8% of csPCa. CONCLUSION: The ERSPC RCs 3/4 and MRI‐ERSPC‐RCs can considerably reduce both upfront mpMRI and prostate biopsies with little risk of missing csPCa. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-04-22 /pmc/articles/PMC9349589/ /pubmed/35950035 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bco2.146 Text en © 2022 The Authors. BJUI Compass published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of BJU International Company. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle To the Clinic
Davik, Petter
Remmers, Sebastiaan
Elschot, Mattijs
Roobol, Monique J.
Bathen, Tone Frost
Bertilsson, Helena
Reducing prostate biopsies and magnetic resonance imaging with prostate cancer risk stratification
title Reducing prostate biopsies and magnetic resonance imaging with prostate cancer risk stratification
title_full Reducing prostate biopsies and magnetic resonance imaging with prostate cancer risk stratification
title_fullStr Reducing prostate biopsies and magnetic resonance imaging with prostate cancer risk stratification
title_full_unstemmed Reducing prostate biopsies and magnetic resonance imaging with prostate cancer risk stratification
title_short Reducing prostate biopsies and magnetic resonance imaging with prostate cancer risk stratification
title_sort reducing prostate biopsies and magnetic resonance imaging with prostate cancer risk stratification
topic To the Clinic
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9349589/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35950035
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bco2.146
work_keys_str_mv AT davikpetter reducingprostatebiopsiesandmagneticresonanceimagingwithprostatecancerriskstratification
AT remmerssebastiaan reducingprostatebiopsiesandmagneticresonanceimagingwithprostatecancerriskstratification
AT elschotmattijs reducingprostatebiopsiesandmagneticresonanceimagingwithprostatecancerriskstratification
AT roobolmoniquej reducingprostatebiopsiesandmagneticresonanceimagingwithprostatecancerriskstratification
AT bathentonefrost reducingprostatebiopsiesandmagneticresonanceimagingwithprostatecancerriskstratification
AT bertilssonhelena reducingprostatebiopsiesandmagneticresonanceimagingwithprostatecancerriskstratification