Concordance Between the Expert Reading of Biparametric-MRI and the Nonexpert Multiparametric-MRI for the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: Clinical Implications
Nahuel Paesano , María José Gutiérrez Vallecillo , Violeta Catalá , Larisa Tcholakian , Xavier Alomar , Miguel Barranco , Abel González-Huete , Jonathan Hernández Mancera , Enric Trilla , Juan Morote
{"title":"Concordance Between the Expert Reading of Biparametric-MRI and the Nonexpert Multiparametric-MRI for the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: Clinical Implications","authors":"Nahuel Paesano , María José Gutiérrez Vallecillo , Violeta Catalá , Larisa Tcholakian , Xavier Alomar , Miguel Barranco , Abel González-Huete , Jonathan Hernández Mancera , Enric Trilla , Juan Morote","doi":"10.1016/j.clgc.2024.102233","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>Prostate-magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) interpretation is challenging, with expertise playing a crucial role. Biparametric MRI (bpMRI) is gaining popularity in experienced centers due to its time and cost advantages over multiparametric MRI (mpMRI). We aim to analyze concordance between nonexpert radiologist PI-RADS from mpMRI and expert radiologist PI-RADS from bpMRI, and its clinical implications.</div></div><div><h3>Material and Methods</h3><div>222 men suspected of having prostate cancer (PCa) and mpMRI reported by nonexpert radiologists were referred to a reference center for transperineal MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy where an expert radiologist reported bpMRI PI-RADS 2.1 and segmentation, blinded to external mpMRI. Mapping targeted suspected lesions and 12-core systematic biopsies were performed. Clinically significant PCa (csPCa) was diagnosed when ISUP-grade group was ≥2.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Concordance between both PI-RADS existed in 49.1% of cases (Kappa index 0.288). In 102 cases (45.9%), expert reclassification to lower PI-RADS existed, while an increase existed in 11 cases (5.0%), <em>P</em> < .001. Agreement existed in 30.8% of nonexpert PI-RADS 3, 43.6% of PI-RADS 4, and 83.7% of PI-RADS 5, <em>P</em> < .001. Potential clinical implications included 27% reduction in prostate biopsies when using expert bpMRI readings compared to nonexpert mpMRI readings (<em>P</em> < 0.001), while undetected csPCa were 4.2% and 3.4%, respectively, <em>P</em> = .669. Over-detection reduction of insignificant PCa was 29.4% and 0%, respectively, <em>P</em> = .034.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Concordance between nonexpert PI-RADS mpMRI and expert PI-RADS bpMRI was low, increasing with nonexpert PI-RADS. Expert reclassification would reduce prostate biopsies by more than one quarter and over-detection of iPCa, while csPCa detection remained similar.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1558767324002039","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose
Prostate-magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) interpretation is challenging, with expertise playing a crucial role. Biparametric MRI (bpMRI) is gaining popularity in experienced centers due to its time and cost advantages over multiparametric MRI (mpMRI). We aim to analyze concordance between nonexpert radiologist PI-RADS from mpMRI and expert radiologist PI-RADS from bpMRI, and its clinical implications.
Material and Methods
222 men suspected of having prostate cancer (PCa) and mpMRI reported by nonexpert radiologists were referred to a reference center for transperineal MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy where an expert radiologist reported bpMRI PI-RADS 2.1 and segmentation, blinded to external mpMRI. Mapping targeted suspected lesions and 12-core systematic biopsies were performed. Clinically significant PCa (csPCa) was diagnosed when ISUP-grade group was ≥2.
Results
Concordance between both PI-RADS existed in 49.1% of cases (Kappa index 0.288). In 102 cases (45.9%), expert reclassification to lower PI-RADS existed, while an increase existed in 11 cases (5.0%), P < .001. Agreement existed in 30.8% of nonexpert PI-RADS 3, 43.6% of PI-RADS 4, and 83.7% of PI-RADS 5, P < .001. Potential clinical implications included 27% reduction in prostate biopsies when using expert bpMRI readings compared to nonexpert mpMRI readings (P < 0.001), while undetected csPCa were 4.2% and 3.4%, respectively, P = .669. Over-detection reduction of insignificant PCa was 29.4% and 0%, respectively, P = .034.
Conclusions
Concordance between nonexpert PI-RADS mpMRI and expert PI-RADS bpMRI was low, increasing with nonexpert PI-RADS. Expert reclassification would reduce prostate biopsies by more than one quarter and over-detection of iPCa, while csPCa detection remained similar.