Hirotsugu Nakai, Hiroaki Takahashi, Jordan D LeGout, Akira Kawashima, Adam T Froemming, Derek J Lomas, Mitchell R Humphreys, Chandler Dora, Naoki Takahashi
{"title":"在临床怀疑患有前列腺癌的情况下进行的前列腺磁共振成像的诊断性能估计。","authors":"Hirotsugu Nakai, Hiroaki Takahashi, Jordan D LeGout, Akira Kawashima, Adam T Froemming, Derek J Lomas, Mitchell R Humphreys, Chandler Dora, Naoki Takahashi","doi":"10.1186/s13244-024-01845-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To assess the diagnostic performance of prostate MRI by estimating the proportion of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in patients without prostate pathology.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This three-center retrospective study included prostate MRI examinations performed for clinical suspicion of csPCa (Grade group ≥ 2) between 2018 and 2022. Examinations were divided into two groups: pathological diagnosis within 1 year after the MRI (post-MRI pathology) is present and absent. Risk prediction models were developed using the extracted eleven common predictive variables from the patients with post-MRI pathology. Then, the csPCa proportion in the patients without post-MRI pathology was estimated by applying the model. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (PPV/NPV) of prostate MRI in diagnosing csPCa were subsequently calculated for patients with and without post-MRI prostate pathology (estimated statistics) with a positive threshold of PI-RADS ≥ 3.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 12,191 examinations enrolled (mean age, 65.7 years ± 8.4 [standard deviation]), PI-RADS 1-2 was most frequently assigned (55.4%) with the lowest pathological confirmation rate of 14.0-18.2%. Post-MRI prostate pathology was found in 5670 (46.5%) examinations. The estimated csPCa proportions across facilities were 12.6-15.3%, 18.4-31.4%, 45.7-69.9%, and 75.4-88.3% in PI-RADS scores of 1-2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively. The estimated (observed) performance statistics were as follows: AUC, 0.78-0.81 (0.76-0.79); sensitivity, 76.6-77.3%; specificity, 67.5-78.6%; PPV, 49.8-66.6% (52.0-67.7%); and NPV, 84.4-87.2% (82.4-86.6%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We proposed a method to estimate the probabilities harboring csPCa for patients who underwent prostate MRI examinations, which allows us to understand the PI-RADS diagnostic performance with several metrics.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance statement: </strong>The reported estimated performance metrics are expected to aid in understanding the true diagnostic value of PI-RADS in the entire prostate MRI population performed with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>Calculating performance metrics only from patients who underwent prostate biopsy may be biased due to biopsy selection criteria, especially in PI-RADS 1-2. The estimated area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of PI-RADS in the entire prostate MRI population ranged from 0.78 to 0.81 at three facilities. The estimated statistics are expected to help us understand the true PI-RADS performance and serve as a reference for future studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":13639,"journal":{"name":"Insights into Imaging","volume":"15 1","pages":"271"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11568117/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Estimated diagnostic performance of prostate MRI performed with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer.\",\"authors\":\"Hirotsugu Nakai, Hiroaki Takahashi, Jordan D LeGout, Akira Kawashima, Adam T Froemming, Derek J Lomas, Mitchell R Humphreys, Chandler Dora, Naoki Takahashi\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13244-024-01845-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To assess the diagnostic performance of prostate MRI by estimating the proportion of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in patients without prostate pathology.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This three-center retrospective study included prostate MRI examinations performed for clinical suspicion of csPCa (Grade group ≥ 2) between 2018 and 2022. Examinations were divided into two groups: pathological diagnosis within 1 year after the MRI (post-MRI pathology) is present and absent. Risk prediction models were developed using the extracted eleven common predictive variables from the patients with post-MRI pathology. Then, the csPCa proportion in the patients without post-MRI pathology was estimated by applying the model. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (PPV/NPV) of prostate MRI in diagnosing csPCa were subsequently calculated for patients with and without post-MRI prostate pathology (estimated statistics) with a positive threshold of PI-RADS ≥ 3.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 12,191 examinations enrolled (mean age, 65.7 years ± 8.4 [standard deviation]), PI-RADS 1-2 was most frequently assigned (55.4%) with the lowest pathological confirmation rate of 14.0-18.2%. Post-MRI prostate pathology was found in 5670 (46.5%) examinations. The estimated csPCa proportions across facilities were 12.6-15.3%, 18.4-31.4%, 45.7-69.9%, and 75.4-88.3% in PI-RADS scores of 1-2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively. The estimated (observed) performance statistics were as follows: AUC, 0.78-0.81 (0.76-0.79); sensitivity, 76.6-77.3%; specificity, 67.5-78.6%; PPV, 49.8-66.6% (52.0-67.7%); and NPV, 84.4-87.2% (82.4-86.6%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We proposed a method to estimate the probabilities harboring csPCa for patients who underwent prostate MRI examinations, which allows us to understand the PI-RADS diagnostic performance with several metrics.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance statement: </strong>The reported estimated performance metrics are expected to aid in understanding the true diagnostic value of PI-RADS in the entire prostate MRI population performed with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>Calculating performance metrics only from patients who underwent prostate biopsy may be biased due to biopsy selection criteria, especially in PI-RADS 1-2. The estimated area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of PI-RADS in the entire prostate MRI population ranged from 0.78 to 0.81 at three facilities. The estimated statistics are expected to help us understand the true PI-RADS performance and serve as a reference for future studies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13639,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Insights into Imaging\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"271\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11568117/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Insights into Imaging\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-024-01845-y\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Insights into Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-024-01845-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Estimated diagnostic performance of prostate MRI performed with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer.
Purpose: To assess the diagnostic performance of prostate MRI by estimating the proportion of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in patients without prostate pathology.
Materials and methods: This three-center retrospective study included prostate MRI examinations performed for clinical suspicion of csPCa (Grade group ≥ 2) between 2018 and 2022. Examinations were divided into two groups: pathological diagnosis within 1 year after the MRI (post-MRI pathology) is present and absent. Risk prediction models were developed using the extracted eleven common predictive variables from the patients with post-MRI pathology. Then, the csPCa proportion in the patients without post-MRI pathology was estimated by applying the model. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (PPV/NPV) of prostate MRI in diagnosing csPCa were subsequently calculated for patients with and without post-MRI prostate pathology (estimated statistics) with a positive threshold of PI-RADS ≥ 3.
Results: Of 12,191 examinations enrolled (mean age, 65.7 years ± 8.4 [standard deviation]), PI-RADS 1-2 was most frequently assigned (55.4%) with the lowest pathological confirmation rate of 14.0-18.2%. Post-MRI prostate pathology was found in 5670 (46.5%) examinations. The estimated csPCa proportions across facilities were 12.6-15.3%, 18.4-31.4%, 45.7-69.9%, and 75.4-88.3% in PI-RADS scores of 1-2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively. The estimated (observed) performance statistics were as follows: AUC, 0.78-0.81 (0.76-0.79); sensitivity, 76.6-77.3%; specificity, 67.5-78.6%; PPV, 49.8-66.6% (52.0-67.7%); and NPV, 84.4-87.2% (82.4-86.6%).
Conclusion: We proposed a method to estimate the probabilities harboring csPCa for patients who underwent prostate MRI examinations, which allows us to understand the PI-RADS diagnostic performance with several metrics.
Clinical relevance statement: The reported estimated performance metrics are expected to aid in understanding the true diagnostic value of PI-RADS in the entire prostate MRI population performed with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer.
Key points: Calculating performance metrics only from patients who underwent prostate biopsy may be biased due to biopsy selection criteria, especially in PI-RADS 1-2. The estimated area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of PI-RADS in the entire prostate MRI population ranged from 0.78 to 0.81 at three facilities. The estimated statistics are expected to help us understand the true PI-RADS performance and serve as a reference for future studies.
期刊介绍:
Insights into Imaging (I³) is a peer-reviewed open access journal published under the brand SpringerOpen. All content published in the journal is freely available online to anyone, anywhere!
I³ continuously updates scientific knowledge and progress in best-practice standards in radiology through the publication of original articles and state-of-the-art reviews and opinions, along with recommendations and statements from the leading radiological societies in Europe.
Founded by the European Society of Radiology (ESR), I³ creates a platform for educational material, guidelines and recommendations, and a forum for topics of controversy.
A balanced combination of review articles, original papers, short communications from European radiological congresses and information on society matters makes I³ an indispensable source for current information in this field.
I³ is owned by the ESR, however authors retain copyright to their article according to the Creative Commons Attribution License (see Copyright and License Agreement). All articles can be read, redistributed and reused for free, as long as the author of the original work is cited properly.
The open access fees (article-processing charges) for this journal are kindly sponsored by ESR for all Members.
The journal went open access in 2012, which means that all articles published since then are freely available online.