Nevin Manimala Statistics

The Effectiveness of Prostate Imaging and Reporting and Data System Version 2 in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer with Screening Parameters Correlation

Arch Esp Urol. 2022 Jun;75(5):416-422. doi: 10.56434/j.arch.esp.urol.20227505.60.


PURPOSE: Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer and the second most common reason for cancer-related mortality in men. The purpose of cancer screening is to detect the disease at an early stage to help effective treatment. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of MRI and PI-RADS in the diagnosis of prostate cancer and examine the relation between screening parameters with prostate cancer.

METHODS: The PACS system was analyzed and MRI images between September 2016 and April 2018 were listed. The state of patients regarding having pathology results were obtained. PSA values were listed. The prostate volume and the prostate density was calculated. PI-RADS assessment was used for each prostate lesion.

RESULTS: Data of 138 patients were included in the study. The mean age was 63±8.9. The mean prostate gland volume was 63.8±39.3ml, the mean PSA value was 12.51±25.22 and the mean PSA density was calculated as 0.319±0.945. A statistically significant difference was found between age and prostate volume and cancer. The age of the cancer cases was higher than those who did not have cancer (p<0.05). A negative correlation was found between prostate volume and cancer status. The prostate volume of non-cancer cases was higher compared to cancer cases (p=0.0001). 55 patients had no malignancy. It was observed that 56.4% of cancer patients had significant cancer. The frequency of using PI-RADS scores was 4% for P1, 36% for P2, 14% for P3, 28% for P4, and 18% for P5. Clinically significant cancer was present in 57.9% of patients with PI-RADS score4 and 69.6% of patients with PI-RADS score5. It was found that diagnostic values were significantly high for prostate cancer screening in patients with PI-RADS scores4 and 5 (Sensitivity 76.4%, Specificity 73.5%, Negative predictive value 82.4%, Positive predictive value 65.6%).

CONCLUSION: PI-RADS and MRI can be useful for the diagnosis of the clinically significant prostate cancer in patients at risk for prostate cancer. It is a non-invasive, repeatable method for prostate cancer screening and diagnosis. In prostate screening PSA reliability may be questioned. Additional methods are needed for the diagnosis. For this reason MRI and PI-RADSv2 is an effective predictor of prostate cancer in patients with high PSA levels.

PMID:35983812 | DOI:10.56434/j.arch.esp.urol.20227505.60

By Nevin Manimala

Portfolio Website for Nevin Manimala