21
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      MRI in early prostate cancer detection: how to manage indeterminate or equivocal PI-RADS 3 lesions?

      review-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This review focuses on indeterminate lesions on prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), assigned as PI-RADS category 3. The prevalence of PI-RADS 3 index lesion in the diagnostic work-up is significant, varying between one in three (32%) to one in five (22%) men, depending on patient cohort of first biopsies, previously negative biopsies, and active surveillance biopsies. A management strategy must be developed for this group of men with an indeterminate suspicion of having clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). Currently available data show that the actual prevalence of csPCa after targeted biopsy in PI-RADS 3 lesions vary between patients groups from one in five (21%) to one in six (16%), depending on previous biopsy status. Although this prevalence is lower in comparison to PI-RADS 4 and PI-RADS 5 lesions, still a considerable proportion of men harbor significant disease. Men with such a PI-RADS 3 lesion should therefore be adequately managed. In general, the clinical approach of using a threshold of PI-RADS ≥4 instead of PI-RADS ≥3 to select MRI for targeted biopsies is not supported by data from our explorative literature search using current definitions of csPCa. A possible adaptation to the threshold of PI-RADS ≥4 in combination with other clinical markers could be considered within an active surveillance protocol, where the balance between the individual risk of missing csPCa and the constant process of repeating prostate biopsies is crucial. In the future, improvements in MR imaging and interpretation, combined with molecular biomarkers and multivariate risk models will all be employed in prostate cancer detection and monitoring. These combinations will aid decision-making in challenging circumstances, such as unclear and diagnostic equivocal results for csPCa at early detection.

          Related collections

          Most cited references26

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Combined Clinical Parameters and Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Advanced Risk Modeling of Prostate Cancer-Patient-tailored Risk Stratification Can Reduce Unnecessary Biopsies.

          Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is gaining widespread acceptance in prostate cancer (PC) diagnosis and improves significant PC (sPC; Gleason score≥3+4) detection. Decision making based on European Randomised Study of Screening for PC (ERSPC) risk-calculator (RC) parameters may overcome prostate-specific antigen (PSA) limitations.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Multicentre evaluation of targeted and systematic biopsies using magnetic resonance and ultrasound image-fusion guided transperineal prostate biopsy in patients with a previous negative biopsy

            To evaluate the detection rates of targeted and systematic biopsies in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasound (US) image-fusion transperineal prostate biopsy for patients with previous benign transrectal biopsies in two high-volume centres.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Prostate tissue composition and MR measurements: investigating the relationships between ADC, T2, K(trans), v(e), and corresponding histologic features.

              To investigate relationships between magnetic resonance (MR) imaging measurements and the underlying composition of normal and malignant prostate tissue. Twenty-four patients (median age, 63 years; age range, 44-72 years) gave informed consent to be examined for this research ethics board-approved study. Before undergoing prostatectomy, patients were examined with T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted, T2 mapping, and dynamic contrast material-enhanced MR imaging at 1.5 T. Maps of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), T2, volume transfer constant (K(trans)), and extravascular extracellular space (v(e)) were calculated. Whole-mount hematoxylin-eosin-stained sections were generated and digitized at histologic resolution. Percentage areas of tissue components (nuclei, cytoplasm, stroma, luminal space) were measured by using image segmentation. Corresponding regions on MR images and histologic specimens were defined by using anatomically defined segments in peripheral zone (PZ) and central gland tissue. Cancer and normal PZ regions were identified at histopathologic analysis. Each MR parameter-histologic tissue component pair was assessed by using linear mixed-effects models, and cancer versus normal PZ values were compared by using nonparametric tests. ADC and T2 were inversely related to percentage area of nuclei and percentage area of cytoplasm and positively related to percentage area of luminal space (P .48) were significantly different between cancer and normal PZ tissue. MR imaging-derived parameters measured in the prostate were significantly related to the proportion of specific histologic components that differ between normal and malignant PZ tissue. These relationships may help define imaging-related histologic prognostic parameters for prostate cancer.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Transl Androl Urol
                Transl Androl Urol
                TAU
                Translational Andrology and Urology
                AME Publishing Company
                2223-4691
                February 2018
                February 2018
                : 7
                : 1
                : 70-82
                Affiliations
                [1]Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC University Medical Center , Rotterdam, The Netherlands
                Author notes
                Correspondence to: Ivo G. Schoots. Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, P.O. Box 2040, ’s-Gravendijkwal 230, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Email: i.schoots@ 123456erasmusmc.nl .
                Article
                tau-07-01-70
                10.21037/tau.2017.12.31
                5861283
                29594022
                7210a5ec-8185-4d74-9baa-8514260b06c5
                2018 Translational Andrology and Urology. All rights reserved.
                History
                : 11 December 2017
                : 22 December 2017
                Categories
                Review Article

                prostate cancer,biopsy,magnetic resonance imaging (mri),mri-guided targeted biopsy,psa density,pi-rads,pi-rads 3,risk stratification,indeterminate,equivocal

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content315

                Cited by61

                Most referenced authors639