磁共振成像在前列腺癌筛查中的应用

IF 22.5 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY
Tamás Fazekas, Sung Ryul Shim, Giuseppe Basile, Michael Baboudjian, Tamás Kói, Mikolaj Przydacz, Mohammad Abufaraj, Guillaume Ploussard, Veeru Kasivisvanathan, Juan Gómez Rivas, Giorgio Gandaglia, Tibor Szarvas, Ivo G. Schoots, Roderick C. N. van den Bergh, Michael S. Leapman, Péter Nyirády, Shahrokh F. Shariat, Pawel Rajwa
{"title":"磁共振成像在前列腺癌筛查中的应用","authors":"Tamás Fazekas, Sung Ryul Shim, Giuseppe Basile, Michael Baboudjian, Tamás Kói, Mikolaj Przydacz, Mohammad Abufaraj, Guillaume Ploussard, Veeru Kasivisvanathan, Juan Gómez Rivas, Giorgio Gandaglia, Tibor Szarvas, Ivo G. Schoots, Roderick C. N. van den Bergh, Michael S. Leapman, Péter Nyirády, Shahrokh F. Shariat, Pawel Rajwa","doi":"10.1001/jamaoncol.2024.0734","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ImportanceProstate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly integrated within the prostate cancer (PCa) early detection pathway.ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the existing evidence regarding screening pathways incorporating MRI with targeted biopsy and assess their diagnostic value compared with prostate-specific antigen (PSA)–based screening with systematic biopsy strategies.Data SourcesPubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane/Central, Scopus, and Web of Science (through May 2023).Study SelectionRandomized clinical trials and prospective cohort studies were eligible if they reported data on the diagnostic utility of prostate MRI in the setting of PCa screening.Data ExtractionNumber of screened individuals, biopsy indications, biopsies performed, clinically significant PCa (csPCa) defined as International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade 2 or higher, and insignificant (ISUP1) PCas detected were extracted.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was csPCa detection rate. Secondary outcomes included clinical insignificant PCa detection rate, biopsy indication rates, and the positive predictive value for the detection of csPCa.Data SynthesisThe generalized mixed-effect approach with pooled odds ratios (ORs) and random-effect models was used to compare the MRI-based and PSA-only screening strategies. Separate analyses were performed based on the timing of MRI (primary/sequential after a PSA test) and cutoff (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System [PI-RADS] score ≥3 or ≥4) for biopsy indication.ResultsData were synthesized from 80 114 men from 12 studies. Compared with standard PSA-based screening, the MRI pathway (sequential screening, PI-RADS score ≥3 cutoff for biopsy) was associated with higher odds of csPCa when tests results were positive (OR, 4.15; 95% CI, 2.93-5.88; <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> ≤ .001), decreased odds of biopsies (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.22-0.36; <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> ≤ .001), and insignificant cancers detected (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.23-0.49; <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = .002) without significant differences in the detection of csPCa (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.75-1.37; <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = .86). Implementing a PI-RADS score of 4 or greater threshold for biopsy selection was associated with a further reduction in the odds of detecting insignificant PCa (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.05-0.97; <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = .048) and biopsies performed (OR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.09-0.38; <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = .01) without differences in csPCa detection (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.49-1.45; <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = .22).Conclusion and relevanceThe results of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that integrating MRI in PCa screening pathways is associated with a reduced number of unnecessary biopsies and overdiagnosis of insignificant PCa while maintaining csPCa detection as compared with PSA-only screening.","PeriodicalId":14850,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Oncology","volume":"127 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":22.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Prostate Cancer Screening\",\"authors\":\"Tamás Fazekas, Sung Ryul Shim, Giuseppe Basile, Michael Baboudjian, Tamás Kói, Mikolaj Przydacz, Mohammad Abufaraj, Guillaume Ploussard, Veeru Kasivisvanathan, Juan Gómez Rivas, Giorgio Gandaglia, Tibor Szarvas, Ivo G. Schoots, Roderick C. N. van den Bergh, Michael S. Leapman, Péter Nyirády, Shahrokh F. Shariat, Pawel Rajwa\",\"doi\":\"10.1001/jamaoncol.2024.0734\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ImportanceProstate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly integrated within the prostate cancer (PCa) early detection pathway.ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the existing evidence regarding screening pathways incorporating MRI with targeted biopsy and assess their diagnostic value compared with prostate-specific antigen (PSA)–based screening with systematic biopsy strategies.Data SourcesPubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane/Central, Scopus, and Web of Science (through May 2023).Study SelectionRandomized clinical trials and prospective cohort studies were eligible if they reported data on the diagnostic utility of prostate MRI in the setting of PCa screening.Data ExtractionNumber of screened individuals, biopsy indications, biopsies performed, clinically significant PCa (csPCa) defined as International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade 2 or higher, and insignificant (ISUP1) PCas detected were extracted.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was csPCa detection rate. Secondary outcomes included clinical insignificant PCa detection rate, biopsy indication rates, and the positive predictive value for the detection of csPCa.Data SynthesisThe generalized mixed-effect approach with pooled odds ratios (ORs) and random-effect models was used to compare the MRI-based and PSA-only screening strategies. Separate analyses were performed based on the timing of MRI (primary/sequential after a PSA test) and cutoff (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System [PI-RADS] score ≥3 or ≥4) for biopsy indication.ResultsData were synthesized from 80 114 men from 12 studies. Compared with standard PSA-based screening, the MRI pathway (sequential screening, PI-RADS score ≥3 cutoff for biopsy) was associated with higher odds of csPCa when tests results were positive (OR, 4.15; 95% CI, 2.93-5.88; <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> ≤ .001), decreased odds of biopsies (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.22-0.36; <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> ≤ .001), and insignificant cancers detected (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.23-0.49; <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = .002) without significant differences in the detection of csPCa (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.75-1.37; <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = .86). Implementing a PI-RADS score of 4 or greater threshold for biopsy selection was associated with a further reduction in the odds of detecting insignificant PCa (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.05-0.97; <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = .048) and biopsies performed (OR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.09-0.38; <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = .01) without differences in csPCa detection (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.49-1.45; <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = .22).Conclusion and relevanceThe results of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that integrating MRI in PCa screening pathways is associated with a reduced number of unnecessary biopsies and overdiagnosis of insignificant PCa while maintaining csPCa detection as compared with PSA-only screening.\",\"PeriodicalId\":14850,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JAMA Oncology\",\"volume\":\"127 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":22.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JAMA Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2024.0734\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2024.0734","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

重要性前列腺磁共振成像(MRI)越来越多地被纳入前列腺癌(PCa)早期检测途径中.目的系统评估有关结合磁共振成像和靶向活检的筛查途径的现有证据,并评估其与基于前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)的系统活检筛查策略相比的诊断价值.数据来源PubMed/MEDLINE、Embase、Cochrane/Central、Scopus和Web of Science(至2023年5月).研究选择随机临床试验和前瞻性队列研究,只要报告了前列腺MRI在PCa筛查中的诊断效用的数据,均符合条件。数据提取提取了筛查人数、活检适应症、所做活检、有临床意义的PCa(csPCa)(定义为国际泌尿病理学会(ISUP)2级或更高级别)以及检测出的无临床意义的PCa(ISUP1)。次要结果包括临床不显著 PCa 检出率、活检适应症率和 csPCa 检出的阳性预测值。数据合成采用集合赔率比 (OR) 和随机效应模型的广义混合效应方法来比较基于 MRI 和仅 PSA 的筛查策略。根据核磁共振成像的时间(主要/PSA检测后的后续)和活检指征的临界值(前列腺成像报告和数据系统[PI-RADS]评分≥3或≥4)分别进行了分析。与基于 PSA 的标准筛查相比,MRI 途径(顺序筛查,PI-RADS 评分≥3 时为活组织检查临界值)在检测结果呈阳性时与较高的 csPCa 发生几率相关(OR,4.15;95% CI,2.93-5.88;P ≤ .001)、活检几率降低(OR,0.28;95% CI,0.22-0.36;P ≤ .001)、检测出的癌症不明显(OR,0.34;95% CI,0.23-0.49;P = .002),但在检测出 csPCa 方面无显著差异(OR,1.02;95% CI,0.75-1.37;P = .86)。实施 PI-RADS 评分 4 分或更高的活检选择阈值可进一步降低检测到不明显 PCa 的几率(OR,0.23;95% CI,0.05-0.97;P = .048)和活检率(OR,0.19;95% CI,0.09-0.38;P = .01),但 csPCa 的检测率没有差异(OR,0.85;95% CI,0.结论和相关性本系统综述和荟萃分析的结果表明,与单纯 PSA 筛查相比,将 MRI 纳入 PCa 筛查途径可减少不必要的活检次数和不明显 PCa 的过度诊断,同时保持 csPCa 的检出率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Prostate Cancer Screening
ImportanceProstate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly integrated within the prostate cancer (PCa) early detection pathway.ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the existing evidence regarding screening pathways incorporating MRI with targeted biopsy and assess their diagnostic value compared with prostate-specific antigen (PSA)–based screening with systematic biopsy strategies.Data SourcesPubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane/Central, Scopus, and Web of Science (through May 2023).Study SelectionRandomized clinical trials and prospective cohort studies were eligible if they reported data on the diagnostic utility of prostate MRI in the setting of PCa screening.Data ExtractionNumber of screened individuals, biopsy indications, biopsies performed, clinically significant PCa (csPCa) defined as International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade 2 or higher, and insignificant (ISUP1) PCas detected were extracted.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was csPCa detection rate. Secondary outcomes included clinical insignificant PCa detection rate, biopsy indication rates, and the positive predictive value for the detection of csPCa.Data SynthesisThe generalized mixed-effect approach with pooled odds ratios (ORs) and random-effect models was used to compare the MRI-based and PSA-only screening strategies. Separate analyses were performed based on the timing of MRI (primary/sequential after a PSA test) and cutoff (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System [PI-RADS] score ≥3 or ≥4) for biopsy indication.ResultsData were synthesized from 80 114 men from 12 studies. Compared with standard PSA-based screening, the MRI pathway (sequential screening, PI-RADS score ≥3 cutoff for biopsy) was associated with higher odds of csPCa when tests results were positive (OR, 4.15; 95% CI, 2.93-5.88; P ≤ .001), decreased odds of biopsies (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.22-0.36; P ≤ .001), and insignificant cancers detected (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.23-0.49; P = .002) without significant differences in the detection of csPCa (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.75-1.37; P = .86). Implementing a PI-RADS score of 4 or greater threshold for biopsy selection was associated with a further reduction in the odds of detecting insignificant PCa (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.05-0.97; P = .048) and biopsies performed (OR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.09-0.38; P = .01) without differences in csPCa detection (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.49-1.45; P = .22).Conclusion and relevanceThe results of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that integrating MRI in PCa screening pathways is associated with a reduced number of unnecessary biopsies and overdiagnosis of insignificant PCa while maintaining csPCa detection as compared with PSA-only screening.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
JAMA Oncology
JAMA Oncology Medicine-Oncology
自引率
1.80%
发文量
423
期刊介绍: JAMA Oncology is an international peer-reviewed journal that serves as the leading publication for scientists, clinicians, and trainees working in the field of oncology. It is part of the JAMA Network, a collection of peer-reviewed medical and specialty publications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信