PI-RADS评分3分患者诊断有临床意义前列腺癌的预测因素分析

目的:探索前列腺影像报告和数据系统(PI-RADS)评分为3分的患者诊断有临床意义前列腺癌(CsPCa)的预测因素。方法:回顾性分析2019年1月至2020年12月南京医科大学第一附属医院133例PI-RADS评分3分行前列腺穿刺患者的临床资料。年龄66(60~72)岁,前列腺特异性抗原(PSA) 8.22(5.95~...     

PSA密度在PSA 2.5～10.0 ng/mL和10.1～20.0 ng/mL患者前列腺癌诊断价值的多中心研究

目的探讨前列腺特异性抗原密度(PSAD)在前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)值位于2.5~10 ng/m L和10.1~20.0 ng/m L患者前列腺癌诊断的效能。方法回顾性分析广州地区两家医院中PSA在2.5~20.0 ng/m L之间,行经直肠前列腺体积测量并行前列腺穿刺的461名患者临床资料,入选者分为PSA 2.5~10.0 ng/m L和PSA10.1~20.0 ng/m L两组,通过受试者工作特征曲线(ROC)分析法评价PSAD与PSA在预测前列腺癌的诊断效力。结果 PSA 2.5~10.0 ng/m L和PSA 10.1~20.0 ng/ml两组的曲线下面积比较,PSAD均高于PSA。在PSA 2.5~10.0 ng/m L组,PSAD预测前列腺癌的最佳临界点为0.15 ng·m L~(-1)·m L~(-1),敏感性和特异性分别为64.4%和64.6%;在PSA10.1~20.0 ng/m L组,PSAD预测前列腺癌的最佳临界点为0.33 ng·m L~(-1)·m L~(-1),敏感性和特异性分别为60.3%和82.7%。结论对于PSA2.5~10.0 ng/m L和10.1~20.0 ng/m L的中国男性,PSAD是一种更优的前列腺癌预测指标。     

PSA、PSAD和PSAT在前列腺穿刺活检中的价值

目的 研究血清前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)及其密度(PSAD)和移行带密度(PSAT)在前列腺穿刺活检中的价值.方法 选取本院2014年5月至2015年5月收治的150例患者进行前列腺穿刺活检,分析并比较PSA、PSAD、PSAT在前列腺穿刺活检中的差异及其在确诊疾病方面的价值.结果 在前列腺穿刺活检的150例中发现PSA＜4 ng/mL有8例,4 ng/mL≤PSA≤20 ng/mL有66例,PSA ＞20 ng/mL有76例.其中在PSA＜4 ng/mL的8例中,活检结果良性前列腺增生6例,前列腺小细胞癌1例,前列腺横纹肌肉瘤1例.在4 ng/mL≤PSA≤20 ng/mL的66例中,活检结果诊断为前列腺癌增生患者54例,活检阳性率为81.8％,PSA平均值为(13.98±1.51) ng/mL,PSAD平均值为(0.32±0.18);PSAT平均值为(0.35±0.18);活检前列腺癌12例,活检阳性率为19.2％,PSA平均值为(14.29±1.48) ng/mL,PSAD平均值为(0.42±0.15),PSAT平均值为(0.82±0.15);将其分为良性前列腺增生组和前列腺癌组,两组差异具有统计学意义(P＜0.05).当PSAD ＞0.13或PSAT＞ 0.15时,前列腺癌的敏感性分别为92.86％和96.94％.在PSA＞ 20 ng/mL的76例中,前列腺癌有68例,活检阳性率89.47％.结论 在4 ng/mL≤PSA≤20 ng/mL时,PSAD和PSAT对前列腺增生和前列腺癌的鉴别诊断具有重要意义,其中又以PSAT更为准确;PSA＞ 20ng/mL时,应高度怀疑前列腺癌,及时确诊治疗.     

FPSA/TPSA、PSAD联合多参数磁共振成像PI-RADS评分在诊断PSA灰区前列腺癌中的作用

目的探讨游离前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)与总PSA的比值(FPSA/TPSA)、PSA密度(PSAD)联合多参数磁共振成像(mp-MRI)PI-RADS(前列腺影像数据与报告系统)评分在PSA灰区前列腺癌(PCa)中的诊断价值。方法选取2016年5月至2018年8月在本院就诊的PSA灰区、经前列腺穿刺活检确诊为前列腺癌或良性前列腺增生(BPH)的患者117例,统计上述患者FPSA、TPSA、多参数磁共振PI-RADS评分数据,计算FPSA/TPSA、PSAD,比较两组患者各项指标的差异,并使用受试者工作曲线(ROC)分析FPSA/TPSA、PSAD及多参数磁共振PI-RADS评分对PSA灰区前列腺癌的诊断价值。结果两组患者的年龄、FPSA、TPSA、FPSA/TPSA差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);但两组患者PSAD、多参数磁共振PI-RADS评分差异有统计学意义(P<0.01);受试者工作曲线(ROC)分析结果显示FPSA/TPSA、PSAD联合PI-RADS评分检测对PCa及BPH患者曲线下面积AUC=0.771(P<0.01)。结论对于PSA在灰区的患者,PSAD、PI-RADS评分对诊断前列腺癌有显著价值。FPSA/TPSA、PSAD联合多参数磁共振成像PI-RADS评分在诊断PSA灰区前列腺癌方面有重要应用价值。     

以前列腺特异抗原水平分组筛查与前列腺穿刺阳性率的关系

目的探讨不同血清前列腺特异抗原(PSA)水平前列腺癌检出情况以及直肠指诊(DRE)、经直肠超声检查(TRUS)、PSA密度(PSAD)等指标对筛查前列腺穿刺活检病例的意义。方法回顾性分析在1996年4月至2002年12月间行TRUS引导前列腺6点系统穿刺活检的634例患者的诊断资料,对各PSA组(≤4.0,4.1~,10.1~和>20.0μg/L组)中前列腺癌的检出率,以及PSA、DRE、TRUS、PSAD等对前列腺癌的预测作用进行t检验、χ2检验和多因素Logistic回归分析。结果PSA≤4.0,4.1~,10.1~和>20.0μg/L各组的前列腺癌检出率分别为11.6%(17/146),26.8%(38/142),39.8%(68/171)和68.6%(120/175)。PSA的敏感性最高(93.0%),特异性低(33.0%);DRE、TRUS等诊断效率较低。随血清PSA水平升高,前列腺癌检出率以及DRE、TRUS的阳性预测值逐渐升高;在PSA4.1~20.0μg/L者中,PSAD对前列腺癌有较大的预测价值(OR=687.09±646.96,P=0.000)。以PSAD≥0.13μg.L-1.cm-3为截点筛查前列腺穿刺病例,可在不明显降低敏感性的基础上,减少阴性穿刺。结论各PSA组国人与欧美等国前列腺癌检出率有较大差别;DRE、TRUS的筛查作用与血清PSA水平有关;按PSA水平分组筛查穿刺病例,可提高前列腺穿刺的阳性率。     

靶向穿刺与靶向联合系统穿刺对前列腺PI-RADS评分4~5分患者的诊断效能比较

目的比较靶向穿刺与靶向联合系统穿刺对多参数磁共振(mpMRI)前列腺影像报告与数据系统(PI-RADS)评分4~5分患者的诊断效能。方法回顾性分析2018年1月至2020年2月南京大学医学院附属鼓楼医院378例前列腺PI-RADS评分为4~5分且接受前列腺靶向穿刺联合系统穿刺患者的临床资料。中位年龄69(64,75)岁,中位前列腺特异性抗原9.5(6.7,16.3)ng/ml,中位前列腺体积34.1(23.5,48.4)ml。PI-RADS评分4分240例,5分138例。所有患者均行经会阴前列腺穿刺,在mpMRI/经直肠超声融合图像引导下,先行2针靶向穿刺,再行12针系统穿刺。评估穿刺病理及穿刺阳性的Gleason评分,通过χ²检验或Fisher精确检验比较不同穿刺方式前列腺癌和有临床意义前列腺癌(CsPCa)的检出情况。结果378例中290例阳性,88例阴性。靶向穿刺平均2.4针/例,系统穿刺平均12.0针/例,靶向穿刺与系统穿刺对前列腺癌的检出率差异无统计学意义[73.3%(277/378)与68.3%(258/378),P=0.129],对CsPCa的检出率差异无统计学意义[55.8%(211/378)与49.7%(188/378),P=0.094],准确率差异无统计学意义[79.1%(299/378)与77.8%(294/378),P=0.658],穿刺针数阳性率差异有统计学意义[64.2%(580/904)与23.1%(1049/4536),P<0.001]。靶向穿刺与靶向穿刺联合系统穿刺的病理符合率为92.3%(349/378),对前列腺癌的检出率差异无统计学意义[73.3%(277/378)与76.7%(290/378),P=0.275],对CsPCa的检出率差异无统计学意义[55.8%(211/378)与62.2%(235/378),P=0.076]。靶向穿刺对前列腺癌的漏诊率为4.5%(13/290),对CsPCa的漏诊率为10.2%(24/235)。在PI-RADS评分4分的患者中,靶向穿刺与靶向穿刺联合系统穿刺对前列腺癌的检出率差异无统计学意义[65.4%(157/240)与69.2%(166/240),P=0.381],对CsPCa的检出率差异无统计学意义[46.7%(112/240)与52.9%(127/240),P=0.171];靶向穿刺的准确率为82.1%(197/240),对前列腺癌的漏诊率为5.4%(9/166),对CsPCa的漏诊率为11.8%(15/127)。在PI-RADS评分5分的患者中,靶向穿刺与靶向穿刺联合系统穿刺对前列腺癌的检出率差异无统计学意义[87.0%(120/138)与89.9%(124/138),P=0.452],对CsPCa的检出率差异无统计学意义[71.7%(99/138)与78.3%(108/138),P=0.211];靶向穿刺的准确率为73.9%(102/138),对前列腺癌的漏诊率为3.2%(4/124),对CsPCa的漏诊率为8.3%(9/108)。结论对于PI-RADS评分为4~5分的高危前列腺癌患者,靶向穿刺以更少的穿刺针数可获得与靶向穿刺联合系统穿刺相近的检出效果,但仍存在诊断不准确及漏诊的可能。     

前列腺体积与前列腺癌穿刺阳性率的相关性研究

【摘要】 目的 探讨前列腺体积与前列腺癌穿刺阳性率的相关性研究。方法 选取2014年1月至2017年7月经直肠超声引导下行前列腺穿刺活检术的患者，共145例患者。入选标准：前列腺特异性抗原（prostatic specific antigen,PSA）≥10 ng/mL，4 ng/mL≤总的前列腺特异性抗原（total prostatic specific antigen,tPSA）＜10 ng/mL且f/t≤0.16，直肠指检发现前列腺结节，或超声、MRI发现异常影像的患者；排除标准：tPSA＞100 ng/mL，或穿刺病理为非前列腺腺癌的患者。其临床资料包括年龄、tPSA、前列腺体积（prostate volume，PV）、PSA密度等。结果 前列腺体积＜25 mL（Ⅰ度）、25～55 mL（Ⅱ度）和≥55 mL（Ⅲ度）的前列腺穿刺阳性率分别为53%、33%和17%，差异比较有统计学意义（χ²=9.1653，P=0.010）。行Cochran-Armitage趋势检验方法,提示：穿刺阳性率随着前列腺体积的增大而降低，差异比较有统计学意义（Z=2.9948，P=0.003）。多因素logistic回归分析，发现PV是前列腺癌穿刺阳性率的独立危险因素，PV为Ⅰ度相对Ⅲ度的优势比为6.268（95%CI：1.802～21.805，P=0.004）；PV为Ⅱ度相比Ⅲ度的优势比为2.444（95%CI：0.962～6.205，P=0.060）。结论 对tPSA＜100 ng/ mL的患者行前列腺穿刺，前列腺体积越小则是前列腺癌相对高发的危险因素，前列腺癌的穿刺阳性率也越高。     

血清PSA、PSAD和PSAT在前列腺穿刺活检中的意义

目的探讨血清前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)、前列腺特异性抗原密度(PSAD)和前列腺移行带特异性抗原密度(PSAT)在前列腺穿刺活检中的意义。方法对192例患者行前列腺穿刺活检,其中PSA≥4ng/ml者184例,PSA<4ng/ml且直肠指诊及经直肠B超有阳性发现者8例。对PSA、PSAD和PSAT与前列腺穿刺活检的关系进行分析。结果192例患者中经前列腺穿刺诊断为前列腺癌(PCa)100例,活检阳性率52.1%,其中8例PSA<4ng/ml者中,活检结果为前列腺横纹肌肉瘤1例,良性前列腺增生7例;93例PSA>20ng/ml者中80例为PCa,活检阳性率86.0%;91例PSA4~20ng/ml者中19例为PCa,活检阳性率20.9%。血清PSA4~20ng/ml患者,PSAD>0.10或PSAT>0.10时,敏感性均为100%,特异性为11.1%或4.2%,阳性预测值为22.9%或21.6%,可避免8.8%(8/91)或3.3%(3/91)阴性穿刺结果。血清PSA4~20ng/ml时,前列腺穿刺阳性组和阴性组PSA分别为(13.2±4.7)和(11.4±4.6)ng/ml(P>0.05);PSAD分别为0.36±0.18和0.19±0.09(P=0.001);PSAT分别为0.67±0.36和0.32±0.18(P=0.000)。血清PSA、PSAD和PSAT的ROC曲线下面积分别为0.613、0.810和0.833,PSAD和PSAT的ROC曲线下面积与PSA比较,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论PSA>20ng/ml时应做前列腺穿刺活检;PSA4~20ng/ml时,PSAD和PSAT对预测患者是否行前列腺穿刺活检有较大帮助。     

基于PI-RADS v2评分在PSA 4～10ng/mL患者前列腺癌预测模型的构建及验证

目的:联合核磁共振第2版前列腺影像报告和数据系统(prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2,PI-RADS v2)与其他临床指标,建立前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)"灰区"(4～10 ng/mL)患者的前列腺癌(prostate cancer, PCa)预测模型,并验证模型的准确性。方法:回顾性分析2016年1月—2020年12月在我院行前列腺穿刺活检的PSA"灰区"患者的临床资料,包括年龄、血清PSA、游离/总PSA比值(f/tPSA)、前列腺体积(prostate volume, PV)、PSA密度(PAS density, PASD)、经直肠前列腺超声(transrectal ultrasonography, TRUS)结果、PI-RADS v2评分等临床指标。其中2016年1月—2019年12月纳入病例作为模型构建组,2020年1月—2020年12月为模型验证组。采用二元logistic单因素及多因素分析计算PCa的独立预测因素,依据回归系数建立预测模型,通过ROC曲线下面积(area under curve, AUC...     

血清PSA水平下降速率联合改良PI-RADS评分在鉴别前列腺良性疾病与前列腺癌中的价值

目的探讨血清前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)水平下降速率联合改良前列腺影像报告和数据系统(PI-RADS)评分在鉴别前列腺良性疾病和前列腺癌中的价值。方法回顾分析80例行前列腺穿刺活检患者的临床资料,根据病理结果分为前列腺良性疾病组和前列腺癌组,绘制受试者工作特征曲线(ROC)确定阈值,比较两组PSA水平下降速率、PI-RADS评分、血常规和尿液白细胞等相关参数,采用t检验或Z检验等统计方法探讨这些参数在鉴别前列腺良性疾病和前列腺癌中的价值。结果两组相比,PSA水平下降速率、改良PI-RADS评分、淋巴细胞百分比和尿液白细胞差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。两组血常规中白细胞计数、中性粒细胞计数、中性粒细胞百分比、单核细胞百分比差异无统计学意义(P>0.01)。通过ROC确定,PSA下降速率阈值为3.175 ng/mL时,对前列腺疾病鉴别诊断符合率最高。再结合改良PI-RADS评分,使得前列腺疾病诊断符合率大幅提升。结论使用血清PSA水平下降速率联合改良PI-RADS评分鉴别前列腺良性疾病和前列腺癌,可提高前列腺穿刺阳性率。     

基于bpMRI的前列腺活检对PSA≤20 ng/ml前列腺癌诊断价值的研究

目的:探讨基于双参数磁共振(bpMRI)的前列腺活检对PSA≤20ng/ml前列腺癌的诊断价值。方法:回顾性分析2017年11至2019年10月南京医科大学第一附属医院行前列腺活检的394例患者的临床资料。其中177例行经直肠超声(TRUS)引导改良系统活检,为TRUS组;217例活检前行bpMRI检查,为MRI组,其...     

The clinical impact of Prostate Imaging–Reporting and Data System classification in patients with haemospermia undergoing multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate

In this study, we evaluated the role of the Prostate Imaging–Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) classification of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) to determine the likelihood of prostate cancer (PCa) in patients with haemospermia. Fifty-one patients presenting with haemospermia between 2018 and 2020 were included in this retrospective study. Forty-two of the patients (82.4%) were over 40 years, and the median prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level was 1.4 ng/ml. Fourteen of the patients (27.5%) had recurrent haemospermia. All patients underwent mpMRI, and assessments were classified according to PI-RADS v2. The mpMRI revealed PI-RADS one to four lesions in 10 (19.6%), 30 (58.8%), 6 (11.8%) and 5 (9.8%) patients respectively. One patient with PI-RADS 3 and five with PI-RADS 4 lesions underwent cognitive fusion prostate biopsy depending on MRI findings, and two patients with PI-RADS 4 lesions were diagnosed with PCa. Patients with haemospermia and risk factors, that is aged over 40 years, a high PSA level or familial history of PCa, need a more thorough evaluation with mpMRI.     

A magnetic resonance imaging-based nomogram for predicting clinically significant prostate cancer at radical prostatectomy

PurposeTo develop a nomogram incorporating clinical and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) parameters for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csCaP) at radical prostatectomy (RP).Materials and MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed all consecutive patients who underwent robotic RP between 2016 and 2020. All patients underwent a 1.5-T mp-MRI according to the PI-RADS-v2 scoring system. RP specimens were examined with the whole-mount technique. csCaP definition: any tumor with a volume larger than 0.5 cm³ or with a Gleason score ≥7. Univariable logistic regression models explored the association between clinical and imaging data and the risk of csCaP. Significant variables (P < 0.05) were selected into multivariable regression models to identify independent predictors. A nomogram was designed to select the significant relevant predictors. The nomogram was internally validated in terms of discrimination and calibration. Receiver operating characteristics of the area under the curve was used to assess the discrimination ability of the nomogram. To assess the predictive performance of mpMRI, the accuracy of the mpMRI-based nomogram was compared with that excluding either PI-RADS score or mpMRI IL size.ResultsThe analysis involved 393 patients. The median age was 65(9) years. The median prostate specific antigen was 5.81(3.76) ng/ml. 363 had csCaP. PI-RADS v2 score of 4-5, prostate specific antigen density of 0.15 or more, and mpMRI index lesion (IL) size were significantly associated with csCaP in the multivariable regression analyses. Based on these variables, a diagnostic model was developed. The full model yielded an area under the curve of 0.77 (95%CI:0.75–0.80) which was significantly better than those excluding mpMRI findings (P = 0.02) Decision curve analysis showed a slight but significant net benefit associated with the use of the mp-MRI based nomograms compared with those excluding either PI-RADS score (Delta net benefit 0.0278) or mpMRI maximum IL size (Delta net benefit 0.0111).ConclusionsThe nomogram constructed in this study can assist urologists in assessing an individual's risk of csCaP at RP.     

Clinical utility of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy in patients with lower suspicion lesions on active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer

BackgroundThe utility of Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) guided prostate biopsy among patients with prostate cancer (CaP) managed with active surveillance (AS) with low-suspicion lesions remains unsettled.MethodsWe performed a retrospective analysis of 415 men with low-risk CaP managed with active surveillance. We selected men with mpMRI visible index lesions scored as 2 or 3 according to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2. The primary outcome was detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csCaP) was defined as Gleason grade group ≥ 2. We assessed the diagnostic accuracy of biopsy approaches using area under the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve and evaluated factors associated with csCaP in these patients using multivariate logistic regression.ResultsCsCaP was identified in 22 of 125 patients (17.6%) with PI-RADS 2 or 3 index lesions during surveillance prostate biopsies. These included 10 (45.5%) diagnosed by systematic biopsy alone, 9 (40.9%) by targeted alone, and 3 (13.6%) by both approaches. On multivariable analysis, the only significant variable predicting the detection of csCaP in men with low-risk imaging mpMRI characteristics was higher PSAD (OR per 0.1 unit=2.26, 95% CI 1.25–4.06, P = 0.007. A PSAD cutoff of 0.1, 0.12 and 0.15 resulted in a negative predictive value (NPV) of 90.9%, 87.1% and 86.2%, respectively. When stratified by PI-RADS score, a PSAD cutoff of 0.1, 0.12 and 0.15 resulted in NPV of 96.2%, 90.6% and 89.7% and 86.2%, 84.2% and 83.3% for detection of csCaP in PI-RADS 2 and 3 lesions, respectively. In patients with PIRDAS 2 lesions, using a PSAD of 0.1 would potentially allow 51% of patients to avoid biopsy with only a 3.8% chance of missing csCaP.ConclusionIn men with clinical low-risk prostate cancer on active surveillance with PI-RADS 2 and 3 lesions, there is an almost 18% risk of upgrade to csCaP. Integration of PSAD may be a useful adjunctive tool in identifying patients at highest risk for upgrade despite favorable imaging findings. In men with PIRADS 2 lesions with PSAD ≤0.12 biopsy can be avoided. For men with PIRADS 2 lesions with PSAD ≤0.15 informed decision making regarding the AS intensity should include that these patients have a low risk (>10%) of developing csCaP. In men with PIRADS 3 lesions with PSAD >0.1, shared decision making should include discussion of a >10% miss rate of csCaP.     

Which men with non-malignant pathology at magnetic resonance imaging-targeted prostate biopsy and persistent PI-RADS 3-5 lesions should repeat biopsy?

PurposeTo assess predictors of clinically significant (cs) prostate cancer (PCa) in men who had a non-malignant Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-targeted biopsy and persistent Prostate Imaging-Reporting Data System (PI-RADS) 3 to 5 lesions in subsequent mpMRI.Materials and MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed MRI-targeted biopsy database in three centers. Inclusion criteria: persistence of at least one PI-RADS ≥3 lesion found negative for cancer in a previous MRI-targeted plus systemic biopsy (baseline biopsy). Exclusion criteria: downgrading to PI-RADS 1-2. A logistic regression analysis was performed to estimate the predictors of csPCa.ResultsFifty-seven patients were included. Median interval between biopsies was 12.9(2.43) months. Median age was 68.0(12) years. Median PSA was 7.0(5.45) ng/ml. At follow-up, 24.6%, 54.4%, and 21% of patients had a PI-RADS score 3, 4, and 5 index lesion (IL), respectively. At re-biopsy, 28/57(49.1%) men were found to harbor PCa. Among these, 22(78.6%) had csPCa. csPCa was found outside the IL in only 2 patients. Eleven, 13, and 5 patients with PI-RADS 3, 4, and 5, respectively, had no cancer. Three patients with a PI-RADS 3 lesion had cancer (2 with Gleason score 3+3, 1 with Gleason score 3+4). 14/43 men with a PI-RADS 4/5 lesion harbored Gleason score ≥3+4 PCa. Logistic regression analysis found that PSA (HR 1.281, 95% CI: 1.013–1.619, P = 0.039) and IL size (HR 1.146, 95% CI: 1.018–1.268, P = 0.041) were the predictors of csPCa at re-biopsy.ConclusionsPatients with non-malignant pathology from PI-RADS ≥3 lesions targeted biopsy should be follow-up with mpMRI, and those with persistent PI-RADS 4 to 5 lesions should repeat MRI-targeted and systematic biopsy.     

Effects of “real life” prostate MRI inter-observer variability on total needle samples and indication for biopsy

PurposeProstate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) improves diagnosis of clinically significant cancer and reduces over-detection of nonsignificant cancer. Disagreement in the interpretation of mpMRI readings is well-known, with a reported discrepancy rate of 10% to 42%. We report the clinical repercussions of this variability on prostate biopsy candidates.Materials and MethodsMedical records of patients referred from 11 medical centers for MR-guided prostate biopsy (MRGpB) between October, 2017 and January, 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with at least one prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) 3 or greater prostate lesion were selected, and the mpMRI studies (all read by others) were reviewed by our prostate mpMRI reader. Outcomes included changes in PI-RADS score and the subsequent effect on total needle samples and indication for biopsy.ResultsEighty-two patients with 128 lesions were suitable for analysis (mean age 66.5 ± 7.1 years, mean PSA 6.8 ± 8.5 ng/ml). Nine (11%) patients had suspicious rectal exams (T2a). Following our prostate mpMRI reader's imaging revisions, the PI-RADS score was downgraded in 66 (52%) lesions, upgraded in 15 (12%), and unchanged in 47 (37%), leaving a total of 84 suspected lesions (kappa = 0.17). Biopsy was deferred in 22 (27%) patients, and an estimated 136.4 (34.4%) samples were avoided (P = 0.0001 for both). There was a trend toward prostate size to correlate with imaging revision and abortion of biopsy (P = 0.06) while enrollment in active surveillance correlated with proof from such outcome (P = 0.007).ConclusionThese data suggest that high interobserver disagreement in prostate mpMRIs from diverse institutes significantly affects prostate biopsy practice. The clinical consequences of this discord are significant.     

Determining the diagnostic value of PSMA-PET/CT imaging in patients with persistent high prostate specific antigen levels and negative prostate biopsies

PurposeTo assess the diagnostic performance of prostate specific membranous antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) imaging to localize primary prostate cancer (PCa) in men with persistent elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels and previous prostate biopsies that were negative for PCa.MethodsIn this study, 34 men with persistently elevated PSA-levels, previous negative for PCa biopsies and who subsequently underwent diagnostic PSMA-PET/CT imaging were retrospectively evaluated. Men were divided into 3 groups: 1. 12 men with a previous negative mpMRI scan (PI-RADS 1-2) 2. 17 men with a positive mpMRI scan (PI-RADS 3-5), but negative MRI-targeted biopsies and 3. Four men in whom mpMRI was contraindicated. If PSMA-avid lesions were seen, patients underwent 2-4 cognitive targeted biopsies in combination with systematic biopsies. The detection rate of PSMA-PET/CT for PCa, and the accuracy of (possible) targeted biopsies were calculated.ResultsIncluded men had a median PSA-level of 22.8 ng/mL (Interquartile Range 15.6–30.0) at the time of PSMA-PET/CT. Elevated PSMA-ligand uptake in the prostate suspicious for PCa was observed in 22/34 patients (64.7%). In 18/22 patients (54.5%), PSMA-targeted prostate biopsies were performed. In 3/18 patients (16.6%), the targeted biopsies showed International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) score 1–2 PCa. The other men had inflammation or benign findings after histopathological examination of the biopsy cores.ConclusionIn this study, the clinical value of PSMA-PET/CT for patients with an elevated PSA-level, and negative for PCa biopsies was low. Only very few men were diagnosed with PCa, and no clinically significant PCa was found.     

Contribution of a single repeat PSA test to prostate cancer risk assessment: experience from the ProtecT study

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether a single repeat prostate-specific antigen (PSA) helps discriminate cancer from non-cancer-related PSA elevation. METHODS: Men aged 50-70 yr (n=54,087) in a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing treatments for localised prostate cancer were tested. A total of 4102 (7.6%) with an initial PSA in the range of 3-19.9 ng/ml had repeat measurement (median interval: 50 d) followed by prostate biopsy. The decision to biopsy was based on the first PSA level. The outcome was the presence of prostate cancer on biopsy. RESULTS: Men with a 20% drop in PSA had a lower risk of cancer (odds ratio [OR]=0.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35-0.52; p<0.001) and high-grade cancer (OR=0.29; 95%CI, 0.19-0.44; p<0.001) compared to the rest of the cohort. The effect of percentage reduction was greater in men aged < or =60 yr than in those >60 yr. (OR for any cancer=1.6; 95%CI, 1.0-2.4; p=0.05; OR for high-grade cancer=2.9; 95%CI, 1.2-6.7; p=0.014). This equated to a risk reduction of high-grade cancer from 4% to 0.5%, 6% to 2%, and 15% to 2% in men < or =60 yr with an initial PSA of 3.0-3.99, 4.0-5.99, and > or =6 ng/ml, respectively. No level of repeat PSA confidently predicted absence of cancer. CONCLUSION: Following an initial PSA of 3.0-19.99 ng/ml in men aged 50-70 yr, repeat PSA within 7 wk allows more accurate risk prediction that may assist in the decision-making as to whether or not to proceed with prostate biopsy.