» Articles » PMID: 29908876

Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System Steering Committee: PI-RADS V2 Status Update and Future Directions

Overview
Journal Eur Urol
Specialty Urology
Date 2018 Jun 18
PMID 29908876
Citations 90
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Context: The Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) v2 analysis system for multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) detection of prostate cancer (PCa) is based on PI-RADS v1, accumulated scientific evidence, and expert consensus opinion.

Objective: To summarize the accuracy, strengths and weaknesses of PI-RADS v2, discuss pathway implications of its use and outline opportunities for improvements and future developments.

Evidence Acquisition: For this consensus expert opinion from the PI-RADS steering committee, clinical studies, systematic reviews, and professional guidelines for mpMRI PCa detection were evaluated. We focused on the performance characteristics of PI-RADS v2, comparing data to systems based on clinicoradiologic Likert scales and non-PI-RADS v2 imaging only. Evidence selections were based on high-quality, prospective, histologically verified data, with minimal patient selection and verifications biases.

Evidence Synthesis: It has been shown that the test performance of PI-RADS v2 in research and clinical practice retains higher accuracy over systematic transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) biopsies for PCa diagnosis. PI-RADS v2 fails to detect all cancers but does detect the majority of tumors capable of causing patient harm, which should not be missed. Test performance depends on the definition and prevalence of clinically significant disease. Good performance can be attained in practice when the quality of the diagnostic process can be assured, together with joint working of robustly trained radiologists and urologists, conducting biopsy procedures within multidisciplinary teams.

Conclusions: It has been shown that the test performance of PI-RADS v2 in research and clinical practice is improved, retaining higher accuracy over systematic TRUS biopsies for PCa diagnosis.

Patient Summary: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and MRI-directed biopsies using the Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System improves the detection of prostate cancers likely to cause harm, and at the same time decreases the detection of disease that does not lead to harms if left untreated. The keys to success are high-quality imaging, reporting, and biopsies by radiologists and urologists working together in multidisciplinary teams.

Citing Articles

Incorporating Spatial and Spectral Saturation Modules Into MR Fingerprinting.

Trimble C, Sorland K, Wu C, Riel M, Bathen T, Elschot M NMR Biomed. 2025; 38(3):e70000.

PMID: 39865307 PMC: 11771585. DOI: 10.1002/nbm.70000.


Meeting Cancer Detection Benchmarks in MRI/Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy for Prostate Cancer: Insights from a Retrospective Analysis of Experienced Urologists.

Utzat F, Herrmann S, May M, Moersler J, Wolff I, Lermer J Cancers (Basel). 2025; 17(2).

PMID: 39858061 PMC: 11764349. DOI: 10.3390/cancers17020277.


Development of novel nomograms for predicting prostate cancer in biopsy-naive patients with PSA < 10 ng/ml and PI-RADS ≤ 3 lesions.

Chai J, Li Y, Ke C Front Oncol. 2025; 14():1500010.

PMID: 39839793 PMC: 11746004. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1500010.


An online national quality assessment survey of prostate MRI reading: interreader variability in prostate volume measurement and PI-RADS classification.

Wallstrom J, Thimansson E, Andersson J, Karlsson M, Zackrisson S, Bratt O Eur J Radiol Open. 2025; 14:100625.

PMID: 39758711 PMC: 11699621. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejro.2024.100625.


Diffusion time effects over the adult lifespan indicates persistent zone-specific microstructural alterations in the human prostate with aging.

Ma X, Seres P, Kinnaird A, Fung C, Feiweier T, Beaulieu C Magn Reson Med. 2024; 93(5):2059-2069.

PMID: 39734280 PMC: 11893025. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.30408.


References
1.
Mohler J, Bahnson R, Boston B, Busby J, DAmico A, Eastham J . NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology: prostate cancer. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2010; 8(2):162-200. DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2010.0012. View

2.
Hansen N, Barrett T, Kesch C, Pepdjonovic L, Bonekamp D, OSullivan R . Multicentre evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging supported transperineal prostate biopsy in biopsy-naïve men with suspicion of prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2017; 122(1):40-49. DOI: 10.1111/bju.14049. View

3.
Moldovan P, Udrescu C, Ravier E, Souchon R, Rabilloud M, Bratan F . Accuracy of Elastic Fusion of Prostate Magnetic Resonance and Transrectal Ultrasound Images under Routine Conditions: A Prospective Multi-Operator Study. PLoS One. 2016; 11(12):e0169120. PMC: 5199076. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0169120. View

4.
Mowatt G, Scotland G, Boachie C, Cruickshank M, Ford J, Fraser C . The diagnostic accuracy and cost-effectiveness of magnetic resonance spectroscopy and enhanced magnetic resonance imaging techniques in aiding the localisation of prostate abnormalities for biopsy: a systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess. 2013; 17(20):vii-xix, 1-281. PMC: 4781459. DOI: 10.3310/hta17200. View

5.
Rosenkrantz A, Ginocchio L, Cornfeld D, Froemming A, Gupta R, Turkbey B . Interobserver Reproducibility of the PI-RADS Version 2 Lexicon: A Multicenter Study of Six Experienced Prostate Radiologists. Radiology. 2016; 280(3):793-804. PMC: 5006735. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2016152542. View