Abdominal Radiology
Comparison of the diagnostic value of prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 and version 2.1 in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer
Tan Shuangxiu, Zhang Yueyue, Wang Shan, Yang Shuo, Zhao Wenlu, Wei Chaogang, Chen Tong, Wang Yanfeng, Zhu Jin, Jiang Zhen, Shen Junkang
Published 2021-02-10
Cite as Chin J Radiol, 2021, 55(2): 160-165. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112149-20200212-00144
Abstract
ObjectiveTo compare the diagnostic value between prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 (PI-RADS V2) and version 2.1 (PI-RADS V2.1) for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa).
MethodsThe imaging, pathological and clinical data of 837 patients with prostatic multiparametric MRI in Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University from May 2015 to August 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. According to the pathological results of systematic biopsy, the prostate cancer with Gleason score (GS) ≥3+4 was csPCa. A total of 25% of the patients (209 cases) were selected using a simple random sampling, and the index lesions were scored by 2 radiologists with PI-RADS V2 and V2.1, respectively. The weighted Kappa test was used to evaluate the consistency of the scores interpreted between the 2 radiologists. The remaining cases were scored by one of the radiologists using the 2 scoring system respectively. The ROC curve was used to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the 2 scoring system for csPCa in total lesions, peripheral lesions and transitional lesions. Z test was used to investigate whether there was any difference in the detection efficiency between the 2 scoring system.
ResultsThere were 251 patients with csPCa, including 163 patients in peripheral zone and 88 patients in transitional zone. The weighted Kappa value of total lesions, transitional lesions, peripheral lesions was 0.757, 0.653, 0.748 for PI-RADS V2 and 0.794, 0.707, 0.759 for PI-RADS V2.1, respectively. In total lesions, transitional lesions and peripheral lesions, the area under the ROC curve of csPCa detected by PI-RADS V2.1 was 0.922, 0.932, 0.854 and 0.902, 0.905, 0.817 by PI-RADS V2, respectively, and all the differences were statistically significant (Z=4.104, P<0.001;Z=2.538, P=0.011; Z=3.350, P<0.001).
ConclusionPI-RADS V2.1 has a slightly higher consistent weighted Kappa value in evaluating prostate lesions than PI-RADS V2, and the detection efficiency of csPCa was higher than PI-RADS V2.
Key words:
Prostate neoplasms; Magnetic resonance imaging; Prostate imaging reporting and data system; Comparative study
Contributor Information
Tan Shuangxiu
Department of Imaging, Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou 215004, China
Zhang Yueyue
Department of Imaging, Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou 215004, China
Wang Shan
Department of Radiology, Jiangsu Jiangyin People′s Hospital, Jiangyin 214400, China
Yang Shuo
Department of Imaging, Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou 215004, China
Zhao Wenlu
Department of Imaging, Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou 215004, China
Wei Chaogang
Department of Imaging, Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou 215004, China
Chen Tong
Department of Imaging, Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou 215004, China
Wang Yanfeng
Department of Imaging, Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou 215004, China
Zhu Jin
Department of Urology Surgery, Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou 215004, China
Jiang Zhen
Department of Imaging, Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou 215004, China
Shen Junkang
Department of Imaging, Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou 215004, China
