THE VALUE OF THE PIRADS v2.1 CATEGORY IN COMBINATION WITH PSA DENSITY FOR THE DETECTION PROSTATE CANCER

Lê Sơn Trần, Đình Âu Hoàng, Văn Tuyền Lê, Thị Thanh Trương, Văn Điệp Phạm, Tuấn Linh Lê

Main Article Content

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of diagnosing malignant prostate lesions using a combination of the PIRADS v2.1 scoring system on MRI and PSA density (PSAD), in order to avoid unnecessary prostate biopsies. Materials and Methods: This retrospective and prospective study included 139 patients who underwent MRI and prostate biopsy from February 2021 to May 2024 at Hanoi Medical University Hospital. The study assessed the diagnostic value of the PIRADS v2.1 score, PSA levels, PSA density, and the ratio of free-to-total PSA in relation to the histopathological results post-biopsy. Results: The average PSAD of the study group was 0.53 ng/ml²; in the cancer group, it was 0.86 ± 0.88 ng/ml², while in the non-cancer group, it was 0.40 ± 0.39 ng/ml². Among patients with PIRADS 3, only 12.2% were diagnosed with cancer, whereas this figure was 85% for PIRADS 5. No cancer patients had a PIRADS classification below 3. The area under the curve (AUC) for the PIRADS score and PSAD was 0.89 and 0.701, respectively. At a threshold of PIRADS ≥ 4, PIRADS v2.1 demonstrated a sensitivity of 87.8% and specificity of 72.4%. At a PSAD threshold of ≥ 0.5 ng/ml², PSAD exhibited a sensitivity of 63.4% and specificity of 78.6%. The combination of PIRADS v2.1 and PSAD for diagnosing prostate cancer showed a sensitivity of 92.6% and specificity of 93.9%, with a positive predictive value of 86.4% and a negative predictive value of 96.8%. Conclusion: The combination of PSA density and PIRADS v2.1 improves the diagnostic accuracy for prostate cancer. Patients with a PIRADS score ≤3 and PSA density <0.15 ng/ml² may avoid unnecessary prostate biopsies.

Article Details

References

Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209-249. doi:10.3322/caac.21660
2. Stevens E, Truong M, Bullen JA, Ward RD, Purysko AS, Klein EA. Clinical utility of PSAD combined with PI-RADS category for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. Urol Oncol. 2020;38(11):846.e9-846.e16. doi:10.1016/j.urolonc.2020.05.024
3. Washino S, Okochi T, Saito K, et al. Combination of prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) score and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density predicts biopsy outcome in prostate biopsy naïve patients. BJU Int. 2017;119(2):225-233. doi:10.1111/bju.13465
4. Yusim I, Krenawi M, Mazor E, Novack V, Mabjeesh NJ. The use of prostate specific antigen density to predict clinically significant prostate cancer. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):20015. doi:10.1038/s41598-020-76786-9
5. Yanai Y, Kosaka T, Hongo H, et al. Evaluation of prostate-specific antigen density in the diagnosis of prostate cancer combined with magnetic resonance imaging before biopsy in men aged 70 years and older with elevated PSA. Mol Clin Oncol. 2018;9(6):656-660. doi:10.3892/ mco.2018.1725
6. An J, Kim Y, Seo J, et al. In prostatic transition zone lesions (PI-RADS v2.1): which subgroup should be biopsied? Egyptian Journal of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine. 2021;52:192. doi:10.1186/ s43055-021-00543-9
7. Pokorny MR, de Rooij M, Duncan E, et al. Prospective study of diagnostic accuracy comparing prostate cancer detection by transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy versus magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with subsequent MR-guided biopsy in men without previous prostate biopsies. Eur Urol. 2014;66(1): 22-29. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2014.03.002
8. Hansen NL, Kesch C, Barrett T, et al. Multicentre evaluation of targeted and systematic biopsies using magnetic resonance and ultrasound image-fusion guided transperineal prostate biopsy in patients with a previous negative biopsy. BJU Int. 2017;120(5):631-638. doi:10.1111/bju.13711