Diagnostic Performance of PI-RADS Version 2.1 Compared to Version 2.0 for Detection of Peripheral and Transition Zone Prostate Cancer

Overview

Journal Sci Rep

Specialty Science

Date 2020 Sep 30

PMID 32994502

Citations 17

Authors

Madhuri Monique Rudolph

Alexander Daniel Jacques Baur

Hannes Cash

Matthias Haas

Samy Mahjoub

Alexander Hartenstein

Charlie Alexander Hamm

Nick Lasse Beetz

Frank Konietschke

Bernd Hamm

Patrick Asbach

Tobias Penzkofer

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to compare diagnostic performance of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version (v) 2.1 and 2.0 for detection of Gleason Score (GS) ≥ 7 prostate cancer on MRI. Three experienced radiologists provided PI-RADS v2.0 scores and at least 12 months later v2.1 scores on lesions in 333 prostate MRI examinations acquired between 2012 and 2015. Diagnostic performance was assessed retrospectively by using MRI/transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy and 10-core systematic biopsy as the reference. From a total of 359 lesions, GS ≥ 7 tumor was present in 135 lesions (37.60%). Area under the ROC curve (AUC) revealed slightly lower values for peripheral zone (PZ) and transition zone (TZ) scoring in v2.1, but these differences did not reach statistical significance. A significant number of score 2 lesions in the TZ were downgraded to score 1 in v2.1 showing 0% GS ≥ 7 tumor (0/11). The newly introduced diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) upgrading rule in v2.1 was applied in 6 lesions from a total of 143 TZ lesions (4.2%). In summary, PI-RADS v2.1 showed no statistically significant differences in overall diagnostic performance of TZ and PZ scoring compared to v2.0. Downgraded BPH nodules showed favorable cancer frequencies. The new DWI upgrading rule for TZ lesions was applied in only few cases.

Citing Articles

Variation in Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer on Fusion Biopsy of PI-RADS 3-5 Lesions Based on Ethnicity.

Edelblute B, Aly A, Jing Z, WasayMahmood A, Watts K, Sankin A Am J Mens Health. 2025; 19(1):15579883251315099.

PMID: 40018864 PMC: 11869252. DOI: 10.1177/15579883251315099.

The Role of Radiomics in the Prediction of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in the PI-RADS v2 and v2.1 Era: A Systematic Review.

Antolin A, Roson N, Mast R, Arce J, Almodovar R, Cortada R Cancers (Basel). 2024; 16(17).

PMID: 39272809 PMC: 11393977. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16172951.

Enhancing Prostate Cancer Detection Accuracy in Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsy: Optimizing the Number of Cores Taken.

Zattoni F, Fasulo V, Kasivisvanathan V, Kesch C, Marra G, Martini A Eur Urol Open Sci. 2024; 66:16-25.

PMID: 39027654 PMC: 11254588. DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2024.05.009.

Up-to-Date Imaging and Diagnostic Techniques for Prostate Cancer: A Literature Review.

Zhu M, Liang Z, Feng T, Mai Z, Jin S, Wu L Diagnostics (Basel). 2023; 13(13).

PMID: 37443677 PMC: 10340535. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics13132283.

Prospective Evaluation of PI-RADS Version 2.1 for Prostate Cancer Detection and Investigation of Multiparametric MRI-derived Markers.

Yilmaz E, Shih J, Belue M, Harmon S, Phelps T, Garcia C Radiology. 2023; 307(4):e221309.

PMID: 37129493 PMC: 10323290. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.221309.

References

Barentsz J, Richenberg J, Clements R, Choyke P, Verma S, Villeirs G . ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol. 2012; 22(4):746-57. PMC: 3297750. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-011-2377-y. View

Weinreb J, Barentsz J, Choyke P, Cornud F, Haider M, Macura K . PI-RADS Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System: 2015, Version 2. Eur Urol. 2015; 69(1):16-40. PMC: 6467207. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.08.052. View

Padhani A, Barentsz J, Villeirs G, Rosenkrantz A, Margolis D, Turkbey B . PI-RADS Steering Committee: The PI-RADS Multiparametric MRI and MRI-directed Biopsy Pathway. Radiology. 2019; 292(2):464-474. PMC: 6677282. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2019182946. View

Giannarini G, Girometti R, Crestani A, Rossanese M, Calandriello M, Cereser L . A Prospective Accuracy Study of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 on Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer With Whole-mount Pathology. Urology. 2018; 123:191-197. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2018.07.067. View

Muller B, Shih J, Sankineni S, Marko J, Rais-Bahrami S, George A . Prostate Cancer: Interobserver Agreement and Accuracy with the Revised Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System at Multiparametric MR Imaging. Radiology. 2015; 277(3):741-50. PMC: 4666087. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2015142818. View

Greer M, Brown A, Shih J, Summers R, Marko J, Law Y . Accuracy and agreement of PIRADSv2 for prostate cancer mpMRI: A multireader study. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2016; 45(2):579-585. PMC: 7900895. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.25372. View

Tewes S, Mokov N, Hartung D, Schick V, Peters I, Schedl P . Standardized Reporting of Prostate MRI: Comparison of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) Version 1 and Version 2. PLoS One. 2016; 11(9):e0162879. PMC: 5033350. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0162879. View

Becker A, Cornelius A, Reiner C, Stocker D, Ulbrich E, Barth B . Direct comparison of PI-RADS version 2 and version 1 regarding interreader agreement and diagnostic accuracy for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. Eur J Radiol. 2017; 94:58-63. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2017.07.016. View

Turkbey B, Rosenkrantz A, Haider M, Padhani A, Villeirs G, Macura K . Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2.1: 2019 Update of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2. Eur Urol. 2019; 76(3):340-351. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.02.033. View

10.

Cash H, Gunzel K, Maxeiner A, Stephan C, Fischer T, Durmus T . Prostate cancer detection on transrectal ultrasonography-guided random biopsy despite negative real-time magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasonography fusion-guided targeted biopsy: reasons for targeted biopsy failure. BJU Int. 2015; 118(1):35-43. DOI: 10.1111/bju.13327. View

11.

Cash H, Maxeiner A, Stephan C, Fischer T, Durmus T, Holzmann J . The detection of significant prostate cancer is correlated with the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) in MRI/transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy. World J Urol. 2015; 34(4):525-32. DOI: 10.1007/s00345-015-1671-8. View

12.

Gunzel K, Cash H, Buckendahl J, Konigbauer M, Asbach P, Haas M . The addition of a sagittal image fusion improves the prostate cancer detection in a sensor-based MRI /ultrasound fusion guided targeted biopsy. BMC Urol. 2017; 17(1):7. PMC: 5234255. DOI: 10.1186/s12894-016-0196-9. View

13.

Gunzel K, Haas M, Maxeiner A, Stephan C, Buckendahl J, Asbach P . Predictive Parameters Identifying Men Eligible for a Sole MRI/Ultrasound Fusion-Guided Targeted Biopsy without an Additional Systematic Biopsy. Urol Int. 2016; 98(1):15-21. DOI: 10.1159/000449258. View

14.

Maxeiner A, Kittner B, Blobel C, Wiemer L, Hofbauer S, Fischer T . Primary magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasonography fusion-guided biopsy of the prostate. BJU Int. 2018; 122(2):211-218. DOI: 10.1111/bju.14212. View

15.

Maxeiner A, Stephan C, Durmus T, Slowinski T, Cash H, Fischer T . Added Value of Multiparametric Ultrasonography in Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Ultrasonography Fusion-guided Biopsy of the Prostate in Patients With Suspicion for Prostate Cancer. Urology. 2015; 86(1):108-14. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2015.01.055. View

16.

Rudolph M, Baur A, Haas M, Cash H, Miller K, Mahjoub S . Validation of the PI-RADS language: predictive values of PI-RADS lexicon descriptors for detection of prostate cancer. Eur Radiol. 2020; 30(8):4262-4271. PMC: 7338829. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-020-06773-1. View

17.

Kaufmann J, Werner C, Brunner E . Nonparametric methods for analysing the accuracy of diagnostic tests with multiple readers. Stat Methods Med Res. 2005; 14(2):129-46. DOI: 10.1191/0962280205sm392oa. View

18.

Rosenkrantz A, Babb J, Taneja S, Ream J . Proposed Adjustments to PI-RADS Version 2 Decision Rules: Impact on Prostate Cancer Detection. Radiology. 2016; 283(1):119-129. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2016161124. View

19.

Thai J, Narayanan H, George A, Siddiqui M, Shah P, Mertan F . Validation of PI-RADS Version 2 in Transition Zone Lesions for the Detection of Prostate Cancer. Radiology. 2018; 288(2):485-491. PMC: 6071681. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2018170425. View

20.

Tamada T, Kido A, Takeuchi M, Yamamoto A, Miyaji Y, Kanomata N . Comparison of PI-RADS version 2 and PI-RADS version 2.1 for the detection of transition zone prostate cancer. Eur J Radiol. 2019; 121:108704. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2019.108704. View