Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Detection After a Negative Prebiopsy MRI Examination: Comparison of Biparametric Versus Multiparametric MRI.

BACKGROUND. The frequency of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) following negative biparametric MRI (bpMRI) and multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) has not been well investigated in direct comparative studies. OBJECTIVE. The purposes of this study were to compare the frequency of csPCa after negative prebiopsy bpMRI and mpMRI and to evaluate factors predictive of csPCa in the two cohorts. METHODS. This retrospective study included 232 men (mean age, 64.5 years) with negative bpMRI from August 2017 to March 2020 and 193 men (mean age, 69.0 years) with negative mpMRI from January 2018 to December 2018. PI-RADS category 1 or 2 was defined as negative. The study institution offered bpMRI as a low-cost self-pay option for patients without insurer coverage of prebiospy mpMRI. Patient characteristics and subsequent biopsy results were recorded. CsPCa was defined as Gleason score of 3 + 4 or greater. Multivariable regression analyses were performed to identify independent predictors of csPCa. The AUC of PSA density (PSAD) for csPCA was computed, and the diagnostic performance of PSAD was assessed at a clinically established threshold of 0.15 ng/mL2. RESULTS. Systematic biopsy was performed after negative bpMRI for 41.4% (96/232) of patients and after negative mpMRI for 30.5% (59/193) (p = .02). Among those undergoing biopsy, csPCa was present in 15.6% (15/96) in the bpMRI cohort versus 13.6% (8/59) in the mpMRI cohort (p = .69). The NPV for csPCa was 84% (81/96) for bpMRI and 86% (51/59) for mpMRI. In multivariable analyses, independent predictors of csPCa included smaller prostate volume (OR, 0.27; p < .001) and greater PSAD (OR, 3.09; p < .001). In multivariable models, bpMRI (compared with mpMRI) was not independently predictive of csPCa (p > .05). PSAD had an AUC for csPCa of 0.71 (95% CI, 0.56-0.87) in the bpMRI cohort versus 0.68 (95% CI, 0.42-0.93) in the mpMRI cohort. For detecting csPCa, a PSAD threshold of 0.15 ng/mL2 had NPV of 90% and PPV of 28%, in the bpMRI cohort versus NPV of 92% and PPV of 44% in the mpMRI cohort. CONCLUSION. The frequencies of csPCa were not significantly different at systematic biopsy performed after negative bpMRI and mpMRI examinations. PSAD had similar diagnostic utility for csPCa in the two cohorts. CLINICAL IMPACT. Either bpMRI or mpMRI, in combination with PSAD measurement, can help avoid negative prostate biopsies.

Trends in imaging utilization for small cell lung cancer: a decision tree analysis of the NCCN guidelines.

PURPOSE: To investigate the differences in small cell lung cancer (SCLC) diagnostic imaging utilization relative to National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed SCLC records at our institution between January 1, 2003 and August 1, 2019 (n = 529). Patients were grouped by extensive-stage versus limited-stage and diagnosis date. Clinical, CT, MRI, and nuclear imaging data was collected. Imaging utilization was compared using Student's t-test or Kruskal-Wallis-test/Wilcoxon-Rank-Sums test. Survival was compared using Log-rank-test and Kaplan-Meier-curves. RESULTS: SCLC patients had a median survival of 290 days. Extensive-stage patients with SCLC demonstrated an increase in emergency imaging utilization when diagnosed in 2011-2019 compared to 2003-2010 (CT abdomen/pelvis p < 0.001, CTA chest for pulmonary embolism p < 0.01, CT head p < 0.003). Limited-stage patients with SCLC demonstrated an increase in inpatient imaging utilization (CT abdomen/pelvis p < 0.04) and decreased total/outpatient imaging utilization (CT chest-abdomen-pelvis p < 0.05, CT head p < 0.003) when diagnosed in 2011-2019 compared to 2003-2010. All patients with SCLC had decreased average number of bone-scan studies when diagnosed in 2011-2019 compared to 2003-2010 (Extensive-stage p < 0.006, Limited-stage p < 0.0006). CONCLUSION: Imaging utilization trends in the management of patients with SCLC at our institution differed between 2003 and 2010 and 2011-2019 reflecting the changes in the NCCN guidelines.

Role of Key Guidelines in an Era of Precision Oncology: A Primer for the Radiologist.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article is to familiarize radiologists with the evidence-based imaging guidelines of major oncologic societies and organizations and to discuss approaches to effective implementation of the most recent guidelines in daily radiology practice. CONCLUSION. In an era of precision oncology, radiologists in practice and radiologists in training are key stakeholders in multidisciplinary care, and their awareness and understanding of society guidelines is critically important.