Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Patient Perceptions of Standardized Risk Language Used in ACR Prostate MRI PI-RADS Scores.
Dallmer, Jeremiah R; Luu, Michael; Saouaf, Rola; Spiegel, Brennan; Freedland, Stephen J; Daskivich, Timothy J.
Afiliação
  • Dallmer JR; Resident, Department of Urology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
  • Luu M; Staff Biostatistician, Department of Biostatistics, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
  • Saouaf R; Professor of Radiology, Department of Imaging, Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
  • Spiegel B; Professor of Medicine and Public Health, George and Dorothy Gourrich Chair in Digital Health Ethics, Director of Health Services Research, Cedars-Sinai Center for Outcomes Research and Education, Department of Medicine, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
  • Freedland SJ; Professor of Urology, Warschaw Robertson, and Law Families Chair in Prostate Cancer, Director, Center for Integrated Research in Cancer and Lifestyle, Associate Director of Education and Training for Cedars-Sinai Cancer, Department of Urology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
  • Daskivich TJ; Associate Professor of Urology, Director of Academic Urologic Oncology, Department of Urology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California. Electronic address: Timothy.Daskivich@csmc.edu.
J Am Coll Radiol ; 2024 Jun 14.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38880288
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

Prostate MRI reports use standardized language to describe risk of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) from "equivocal" (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System [PI-RADS] 3), "likely" (PI-RADS 4), to "highly likely" (PI-RADS 5). These terms correspond to risks of 11%, 37%, and 70% according to American Urological Association guidelines, respectively. We assessed how men perceive risk associated with standardized PI-RADS language.

METHODOLOGY:

We conducted a crowdsourced survey of 1,204 men matching a US prostate cancer demographic. We queried participants' risk perception associated with standardized PI-RADS language across increasing contexts words only, PI-RADS sentence, full report, and full report with numeric estimate. Median perceived risk (interquartile range) and absolute under/overestimation compared with American Urological Association standards were reported. Multivariable linear mixed-effects analysis identified factors associated with accuracy of risk perception.

RESULTS:

Median perceived risks of csPCa (interquartile range) for the word-only context were "equivocal" 50% (50%-74%), "likely" 75% (68%-85%), and "highly likely" 87% (78%-92%), corresponding to +39%, +38%, and +17% overestimation, respectively. Median perceived risks for the PI-RADS-sentence context were 50% (50%-50%), 75% (68%-81%), and 90% (80%-94%) for PI-RADS 3, 4, and 5, corresponding to +39%, +38%, and +20% overestimation, respectively. Median perceived risks for the full-report context were 50% (35%-70%), 72% (50%-80%), and 84% (54%-91%) for PI-RADS 3, 4, and 5, corresponding to +39%, +35%, and +14% overestimation, respectively. For the full-report-with-numeric-estimate context describing a PI-RADS 4 lesion, median perceived risk was 70% (50%-%80), corresponding to +33% overestimation. Including numeric estimates increased correct perception of risk from 3% to 11% (P < .001), driven by men with higher numeracy (odds ratio 1.24, P = .04).

CONCLUSION:

Men overestimate risk of csPCa associated with standardized PI-RADS language regardless of context, especially for PI-RADS 3 and 4 lesions. Changes to PI-RADS language or data-sharing policies for imaging reports should be considered.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article