Cargando…
Micro-ultrasound Versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance
Accurate assessment of tumor grade is critical for active surveillance (AS) in prostate cancer. We compared magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and micro-ultrasound scoring (Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System [PI-RADS] v2.1 vs Prostate Risk Identification using Micro-ultrasound [PRI-MUS]) in 12...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9618766/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36325366 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.euros.2022.09.019 |
_version_ | 1784821126380126208 |
---|---|
author | Albers, Patrick Wang, Betty Broomfield, Stacey Medina Martín, Anaïs Fung, Christopher Kinnaird, Adam |
author_facet | Albers, Patrick Wang, Betty Broomfield, Stacey Medina Martín, Anaïs Fung, Christopher Kinnaird, Adam |
author_sort | Albers, Patrick |
collection | PubMed |
description | Accurate assessment of tumor grade is critical for active surveillance (AS) in prostate cancer. We compared magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and micro-ultrasound scoring (Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System [PI-RADS] v2.1 vs Prostate Risk Identification using Micro-ultrasound [PRI-MUS]) in 128 men on AS. The primary outcome was upgrading to Gleason grade group (GG) ≥2. There was no difference in GG ≥2 detection between the imaging techniques (PRI-MUS score ≥3: 33/34, 98%; PI-RADS score ≥3: 29/34, 85%; p = 0.22). The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for GG ≥2 detection were 97%, 32%, 34%, and 97% with PRI-MUS ≥3, and 85%, 53%, 40%, and 91% with PI-RADS ≥3, respectively. Upgrading to GG ≥2 was more likely for PRI-MUS ≥3 than for PRI-MUS ≤2 scores (odds ratio 15.5, 95% confidence interval 2.0–118.5). A limitation is the lack of blinding to the MRI results. In conclusion, detection of upgrading to GG ≥2 during AS appears similar when using micro-ultrasound or MRI to inform prostate biopsy. PATIENT SUMMARY: We looked at a novel imaging technology, micro-ultrasound, in patients undergoing biopsy during active surveillance for prostate cancer. We found that micro-ultrasound can detect prostate cancer that may require treatment at a similar rate to that with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9618766 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-96187662022-11-01 Micro-ultrasound Versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance Albers, Patrick Wang, Betty Broomfield, Stacey Medina Martín, Anaïs Fung, Christopher Kinnaird, Adam Eur Urol Open Sci Brief Correspondence Accurate assessment of tumor grade is critical for active surveillance (AS) in prostate cancer. We compared magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and micro-ultrasound scoring (Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System [PI-RADS] v2.1 vs Prostate Risk Identification using Micro-ultrasound [PRI-MUS]) in 128 men on AS. The primary outcome was upgrading to Gleason grade group (GG) ≥2. There was no difference in GG ≥2 detection between the imaging techniques (PRI-MUS score ≥3: 33/34, 98%; PI-RADS score ≥3: 29/34, 85%; p = 0.22). The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for GG ≥2 detection were 97%, 32%, 34%, and 97% with PRI-MUS ≥3, and 85%, 53%, 40%, and 91% with PI-RADS ≥3, respectively. Upgrading to GG ≥2 was more likely for PRI-MUS ≥3 than for PRI-MUS ≤2 scores (odds ratio 15.5, 95% confidence interval 2.0–118.5). A limitation is the lack of blinding to the MRI results. In conclusion, detection of upgrading to GG ≥2 during AS appears similar when using micro-ultrasound or MRI to inform prostate biopsy. PATIENT SUMMARY: We looked at a novel imaging technology, micro-ultrasound, in patients undergoing biopsy during active surveillance for prostate cancer. We found that micro-ultrasound can detect prostate cancer that may require treatment at a similar rate to that with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans. Elsevier 2022-10-25 /pmc/articles/PMC9618766/ /pubmed/36325366 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.euros.2022.09.019 Text en © 2022 The Author(s) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Brief Correspondence Albers, Patrick Wang, Betty Broomfield, Stacey Medina Martín, Anaïs Fung, Christopher Kinnaird, Adam Micro-ultrasound Versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance |
title | Micro-ultrasound Versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance |
title_full | Micro-ultrasound Versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance |
title_fullStr | Micro-ultrasound Versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance |
title_full_unstemmed | Micro-ultrasound Versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance |
title_short | Micro-ultrasound Versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance |
title_sort | micro-ultrasound versus magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer active surveillance |
topic | Brief Correspondence |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9618766/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36325366 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.euros.2022.09.019 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT alberspatrick microultrasoundversusmagneticresonanceimaginginprostatecanceractivesurveillance AT wangbetty microultrasoundversusmagneticresonanceimaginginprostatecanceractivesurveillance AT broomfieldstacey microultrasoundversusmagneticresonanceimaginginprostatecanceractivesurveillance AT medinamartinanais microultrasoundversusmagneticresonanceimaginginprostatecanceractivesurveillance AT fungchristopher microultrasoundversusmagneticresonanceimaginginprostatecanceractivesurveillance AT kinnairdadam microultrasoundversusmagneticresonanceimaginginprostatecanceractivesurveillance |