期刊
EUROPEAN UROLOGY
卷 72, 期 6, 页码 888-896出版社
ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.03.039
关键词
Prostate cancer; Magnetic resonance imaging; European Randomised Study of; Screening for Prostate Cancer; Risk model; Risk stratification; Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging
资金
- German Research Foundation
Background: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is gaining widespread acceptance in prostate cancer (PC) diagnosis and improves significant PC (sPC; Gleason score >= 3 + 4) detection. Decision making based on European Randomised Study of Screening for PC (ERSPC) risk-calculator (RC) parameters may overcome prostate-specific antigen (PSA) limitations. Objective: We added pre-biopsy mpMRI to ERSPC-RC parameters and developed risk models (RMs) to predict individual sPC risk for biopsy-naive men and men after previous biopsy. Design, setting, and participants: We retrospectively analyzed clinical parameters of 1159 men who underwent mpMRI prior to MRI/transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy between 2012 and 2015. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Multivariate regression analyses were used to determine significant sPC predictors for RM development. The prediction performance was compared with ERSPC-RCs, RCs refitted on our cohort, Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) v1.0, and ERSPC-RC plus PI-RADSv1.0 using receiver-operating characteristics (ROCs). Discrimination and calibration of the RM, as well as net decision and reduction curve analyses were evaluated based on resampling methods. Results and limitations: PSA, prostate volume, digital-rectal examination, and PI-RADS were significant sPC predictors and included in the RMs together with age. The ROC area under the curve of the RM for biopsy-naive men was comparable with ERSPC-RC3 plus PIRADSv1.0 (0.83 vs 0.84) but larger compared with ERSPC-RC3 (0.81), refitted RC3 (0.80), and PI-RADS (0.76). For postbiopsy men, the novel RM's discrimination (0.81) was higher, compared with PI-RADS (0.78), ERSPC-RC4 (0.66), refitted RC4 (0.76), and ERSPC-RC4 plus PI-RADSv1.0 (0.78). Both RM benefits exceeded those of ERSPC-RCs and PI-RADS in the decision regarding which patient to receive biopsy and enabled the highest reduction rate of unnecessary biopsies. Limitations include a monocentric design and a lack of PI-RADSv2.0. Conclusions: The novel RMs, incorporating clinical parameters and PI-RADS, performed significantly better compared with RMs without PI-RADS and provided measurable benefit in making the decision to biopsy men at a suspicion of PC. For biopsy-naive patients, both our RM and ERSPC-RC3 plus PI-RADSv1.0 exceeded the prediction performance compared with clinical parameters alone. (C) 2017 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据