Correlation Engine 2.0
Clear Search sequence regions


  • antigen (3)
  • cancer (4)
  • ci 19 (1)
  • ci 4 (2)
  • data systems (3)
  • humans (1)
  • men (5)
  • patients (2)
  • prostate (9)
  • roc analysis (1)
  • Sizes of these terms reflect their relevance to your search.

    To compare biopsy recommendation rates and accuracy of the Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System, version 2 (PI-RADSv2) with the Likert scale for detection of clinically significant and insignificant prostate cancer in men screened within the Imperial Prostate 1 Prostate Cancer Screening Trial Using Imaging (IP1-PROSTAGRAM). Men aged 50-69 years were screened with Prostagram MRI. Scans were prospectively reported using both PI-RADSv2 (excluding dynamic contrast-enhanced sequence score) and 5-point Likert scores by expert uro-radiologists. Systematic and targeted transperineal biopsy was recommended if the scan was scored ≥ 3, based on either reporting system. The proportion of patients recommended for biopsy and detection rates for Grade Groups (GGs) 1 and ≥ 2 were compared. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed to compare performance. A total of 406 men underwent Prostagram MRI. The median (interquartile range) age and prostate-specific antigen level were 57 (53-61) years and 0.91 (0.56-1.74) ng/mL, respectively. At MRI score ≥ 3, more patients were recommended for biopsy based on Likert criteria (94/406; 23%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 19.2%-27.6%) compared to PI-RADSv2 (72/406; 18%, 95% CI 14.2%-21.9%; P = 0.03). For MRI scores ≥ 4, PI-RADSv2 and Likert scales led to 43/406 (11%, 95% CI 7.9%-14.1%) and 35/406 (9%, 95% CI 6.2%-11.9%) men recommended for biopsy (P = 0.40). For GG ≥ 2 detection, PIRADSv2 and Likert detected 22% (95% CI 11.4%-30.8%, 14/72) and 16% (95% CI 9.5%-25.3%, 15/94), respectively (P = 0.56). For GG1 cancers detection these were 11% (95% CI 4.3%-19.6%, seven of 72) vs 11% (95% CI 4.7%-17.8%, nine of 94; P = 1.00). The accuracy of PI-RADSv2 and Likert scale was similar (area under the ROC curve 0.64 vs 0.65, P = 0.95). In reporting non-contrast-enhanced Prostagram MRI in a screening population, the PI-RADSv2 and Likert scoring systems were equally accurate; however, Likert scale use led to more men undergoing biopsy without a subsequent increase in significant cancer detection rates. To improve reporting of Prostagram MRI, either the PI-RADSv2 or a modified Likert scale or a standalone scoring system should be developed. © 2023 The Authors. BJU International published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of BJU International.

    Citation

    Nikhil Mayor, David Eldred-Evans, Henry Tam, Heminder Sokhi, Anwar R Padhani, Martin J Connor, Derek Price, Martin Gammon, Natalia Klimowska-Nassar, Paula Burak, Emily Day, Mathias Winkler, Francesca Fiorentino, Taimur Shah, Hashim Uddin Ahmed. Prostagram magnetic resonance imaging in a screening population: Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System or Likert? BJU international. 2024 Jan;133(1):112-117

    Expand section icon Mesh Tags

    Expand section icon Substances


    PMID: 37591614

    View Full Text