Perspectives on technology: Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) interobserver variability.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the topic of Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) interobserver variability, including a discussion of major sources, mitigation approaches, and future directions. METHODS: A narrative review of PI-RADS interobserver variability. RESULTS: PI-RADS was developed in 2012 to set technical standards for prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), reduce interobserver variability at interpretation, and improve diagnostic accuracy in the MRI-directed diagnostic pathway for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. While PI-RADS has been validated in selected research cohorts with prostate cancer imaging experts, subsequent prospective studies in routine clinical practice demonstrate wide variability in diagnostic performance. Radiologist and biopsy operator experience are the most important contributing drivers of high-quality care among multiple interrelated factors including variability in MRI hardware and technique, image quality, and population and patient-specific factors such as prostate cancer disease prevalence. Iterative improvements in PI-RADS have helped flatten the curve for novice readers and reduce variability. Innovations in image quality reporting, administrative and organisational workflows, and artificial intelligence hold promise in improving variability even further. CONCLUSION: Continued research into PI-RADS is needed to facilitate benchmark creation, reader certification, and independent accreditation, which are systems-level interventions needed to uphold and maintain high-quality prostate MRI across entire populations.

The Evidence for Using Artificial Intelligence to Enhance Prostate Cancer MR Imaging.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to summarize the current status of artificial intelligence applied to prostate cancer MR imaging. RECENT FINDINGS: Artificial intelligence has been applied to prostate cancer MR imaging to improve its diagnostic accuracy and reproducibility of interpretation. Multiple models have been tested for gland segmentation and volume calculation, automated lesion detection, localization, and characterization, as well as prediction of tumor aggressiveness and tumor recurrence. Studies show, for example, that very robust automated gland segmentation and volume calculations can be achieved and that lesions can be detected and accurately characterized. Although results are promising, we should view these with caution. Most studies included a small sample of patients from a single institution and most models did not undergo proper external validation. More research is needed with larger and well-design studies for the development of reliable artificial intelligence tools.

An Image Quality-informed Framework for CT Characterization.

Background Lack of standardization in CT protocol choice contributes to radiation dose variation. Purpose To create a framework to assess radiation doses within broad CT categories defined according to body region and clinical imaging indication and to cluster indications according to the dose required for sufficient image quality. Materials and Methods This was a retrospective study using Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine metadata. CT examinations in adults from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2019 from the University of California San Francisco International CT Dose Registry were grouped into 19 categories according to body region and required radiation dose levels. Five body regions had a single dose range (ie, extremities, neck, thoracolumbar spine, combined chest and abdomen, and combined thoracolumbar spine). Five additional regions were subdivided according to dose. Head, chest, cardiac, and abdomen each had low, routine, and high dose categories; combined head and neck had routine and high dose categories. For each category, the median and 75th percentile (ie, diagnostic reference level [DRL]) were determined for dose-length product, and the variation in dose within categories versus across categories was calculated and compared using an analysis of variance. Relative median and DRL (95% CI) doses comparing high dose versus low dose categories were calculated. Results Among 4.5 million examinations, the median and DRL doses varied approximately 10 times between categories compared with between indications within categories. For head, chest, abdomen, and cardiac (3 266 546 examinations [72%]), the relative median doses were higher in examinations assigned to the high dose categories than in examinations assigned to the low dose categories, suggesting the assignment of indications to the broad categories is valid (head, 3.4-fold higher [95% CI: 3.4, 3.5]; chest, 9.6 [95% CI: 9.3, 10.0]; abdomen, 2.4 [95% CI: 2.4, 2.5]; and cardiac, 18.1 [95% CI: 17.7, 18.6]). Results were similar for DRL doses (all P < .001). Conclusion Broad categories based on image quality requirements are a suitable framework for simplifying radiation dose assessment, according to expected variation between and within categories. © RSNA, 2021 See also the editorial by Mahesh in this issue.

Improving multiparametric MR-transrectal ultrasound guided fusion prostate biopsies with hyperpolarized 13 C pyruvate metabolic imaging: A technical development study.

PURPOSE: To develop techniques and establish a workflow using hyperpolarized carbon-13 (13 C) MRI and the pyruvate-to-lactate conversion rate (kPL ) biomarker to guide MR-transrectal ultrasound fusion prostate biopsies. METHODS: The integrated multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) exam consisted of a 1-min hyperpolarized 13 C-pyruvate EPI acquisition added to a conventional prostate mpMRI exam. Maps of kPL values were calculated, uploaded to a picture archiving and communication system and targeting platform, and displayed as color overlays on T2 -weighted anatomic images. Abdominal radiologists identified 13 C research biopsy targets based on the general recommendation of focal lesions with kPL >0.02(s-1 ), and created a targeting report for each study. Urologists conducted transrectal ultrasound-guided MR fusion biopsies, including the standard 1 H-mpMRI targets as well as 12-14 core systematic biopsies informed by the research 13 C-kPL targets. All biopsy results were included in the final pathology report and calculated toward clinical risk. RESULTS: This study demonstrated the safety and technical feasibility of integrating hyperpolarized 13 C metabolic targeting into routine 1 H-mpMRI and transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy workflows, evaluated via 5 men (median age 71 years, prostate-specific antigen 8.4 ng/mL, Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment score 2) on active surveillance undergoing integrated scan and subsequent biopsies. No adverse event was reported. Median turnaround time was less than 3 days from scan to 13 C-kPL targeting, and scan-to-biopsy time was 2 weeks. Median number of 13 C targets was 1 (range: 1-2) per patient, measuring 1.0 cm (range: 0.6-1.9) in diameter, with a median kPL of 0.0319 s-1 (range: 0.0198-0.0410). CONCLUSIONS: This proof-of-concept work demonstrated the safety and feasibility of integrating hyperpolarized 13 C MR biomarkers to the standard mpMRI workflow to guide MR-transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsies.

Variability of the Positive Predictive Value of PI-RADS for Prostate MRI across 26 Centers: Experience of the Society of Abdominal Radiology Prostate Cancer Disease-focused Panel.

Background Prostate MRI is used widely in clinical care for guiding tissue sampling, active surveillance, and staging. The Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) helps provide a standardized probabilistic approach for identifying clinically significant prostate cancer. Despite widespread use, the variability in performance of prostate MRI across practices remains unknown. Purpose To estimate the positive predictive value (PPV) of PI-RADS for the detection of high-grade prostate cancer across imaging centers. Materials and Methods This retrospective cross-sectional study was compliant with the HIPAA. Twenty-six centers with members in the Society of Abdominal Radiology Prostate Cancer Disease-focused Panel submitted data from men with suspected or biopsy-proven untreated prostate cancer. MRI scans were obtained between January 2015 and April 2018. This was followed with targeted biopsy. Only men with at least one MRI lesion assigned a PI-RADS score of 2-5 were included. Outcome was prostate cancer with Gleason score (GS) greater than or equal to 3+4 (International Society of Urological Pathology grade group ≥2). A mixed-model logistic regression with institution and individuals as random effects was used to estimate overall PPVs. The variability of observed PPV of PI-RADS across imaging centers was described by using the median and interquartile range. Results The authors evaluated 3449 men (mean age, 65 years ± 8 [standard deviation]) with 5082 lesions. Biopsy results showed 1698 cancers with GS greater than or equal to 3+4 (International Society of Urological Pathology grade group ≥2) in 2082 men. Across all centers, the estimated PPV was 35% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 27%, 43%) for a PI-RADS score greater than or equal to 3 and 49% (95% CI: 40%, 58%) for a PI-RADS score greater than or equal to 4. The interquartile ranges of PPV at these same PI-RADS score thresholds were 27%-44% and 27%-48%, respectively. Conclusion The positive predictive value of the Prostate Imaging and Reporting Data System was low and varied widely across centers. © RSNA, 2020 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Milot in this issue.

MRI-Based Prostate-Specific Antigen Density Predicts Gleason Score Upgrade in an Active Surveillance Cohort.

OBJECTIVE. Elevated prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) based on transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) measurements has been shown to be strongly associated with clinically significant disease and to predict progression on active surveillance (AS) for men with disease that is at a low stage or grade. We hypothesized that elevated MRI PSAD is similarly associated with increased risk of progression on subsequent biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS. In this retrospective study, men with Gleason score of 3+3 on diagnostic TRUS-guided biopsy who were managed with AS, had undergone MRI, and had at least one additional biopsy were included. MRI PSAD was calculated using prostate volume on MRI and prostate-specific antigen level temporally closest to the MRI. Multivariable logistics regression models were used to evaluate the association between MRI PSAD and predictors of upgrade on serial biopsy. RESULTS. A total of 166 patients were identified, of whom 74 (44.6%) were upgraded to a Gleason score of 7 or higher on subsequent biopsy. Lesions with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) scores of 4 and 5 more commonly had MRI PSAD of 0.15 ng/mL2 or higher (51.93% vs 22.22%, p = 0.01) than lesions with PI-RADS scores of 1-3. Median MRI PSAD was significantly higher in the upgraded group compared with the group that was not upgraded (0.15 ng/mL2 vs 0.11 ng/mL2, p = 0.01). MRI PSAD was significantly associated with increased odds of upgrading on subsequent biopsy (log transformation; odds ratio, 1.9 [95% CI, 1.2-2.8]; p = 0.01) after adjusting for age and length of follow-up. CONCLUSION. MRI PSAD was significantly associated with Gleason score upgrading on subsequent biopsy for men initially diagnosed with Gleason 3+3 disease. Although this result is intuitive, to our knowledge it has not been previously shown. As MRI utilization increases, MRI PSAD can aid in risk stratification for men managed with AS.

Prognostic Value of Pretreatment MRI in Patients With Prostate Cancer Treated With Radiation Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE. Despite a substantial increase in the use of MRI for pretreatment evaluation of prostate cancer, its prognostic value in patients undergoing radiation therapy (RT) is not well known. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to systematically review the literature and perform a meta-analysis on the prognostic value of pretreatment MRI in patients with prostate cancer who underwent external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) or brachytherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS. PubMed and Embase databases were searched for studies published on or before March 13, 2019. We included studies that evaluated pretreatment MRI as a prognostic factor in prostate cancer regarding biochemical recurrence (BCR), metastatic failure, and overall or cancer-specific mortality. Effect sizes were measured in terms of the hazard ratio (HR) and were meta-analytically pooled using the random-effects model. The quality of the studies was independently evaluated using the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool. RESULTS. Twelve studies (2205 patients) were included. All studies assessed BCR; metastasis was evaluated in three studies, and mortality was evaluated in one study. Extraprostatic extension (EPE), seminal vesicle invasion (SVI), large tumor size or volume, number of sextants involved, and tumor involvement of prostatic apex were significant prognostic factors of BCR (pooled HRs = 1.50-4.47). EPE, larger tumor size, greater tumor volume, presence of metastatic pelvic lymph nodes (LNs), and presence of SVI were significant risk factors for metastasis (pooled HRs = 1.12-11.96). Pelvic LN metastasis was significantly predictive of cancer-specific mortality (HR = 4.45 [95% CI, 1.30-15.23]). CONCLUSION. Several pretreatment MRI findings were significant prognostic factors in patients with prostate cancer who underwent RT.

Genomic Prostate Score, PI-RADS™ version 2 and Progression in Men with Prostate Cancer on Active Surveillance.

PURPOSE: The OncotypeDx® GPS (Genomic Prostate Score®) is a 17-gene RNA expression assay intended to help guide treatment decisions in men diagnosed with prostate cancer. The PI-RADS™ (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System) version 2 was developed to standardize the risk stratification of lesions identified on multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging. We sought to determine whether these tests are associated with an increased risk of biopsy upgrading in men on active surveillance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified all patients on active surveillance at the University of California-San Francisco who had low/intermediate risk prostate cancer (prostate specific antigen 20 ng/ml or less and clinical stage T1/T2) and Gleason score 6 disease who underwent multiple biopsies and had a GPS available and/or had undergone multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging with an available PI-RADS version 2 score. The primary study outcome was biopsy upgrading, defined as an increase in the Gleason score from 3 + 3 to 3 + 4 or greater, which was analyzed by Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: Of the men 140 had only GPS test findings, 169 had only a PI-RADS version 2 score and 131 had both data. Each 5-unit increase in the GPS was associated with an increased risk of biopsy upgrading (HR 1.28, 95% CI 1.19-1.39, p <0.01). PI-RADS scores of 5 vs 1-2 (HR 4.38, 95% CI 2.36-8.16, p <0.01) and 4 vs 1-2 (HR 2.62, 95% CI 1.45-4.76, p <0.01) were also associated with an increased risk of a biopsy upgrade. On subanalysis of patients with GPS and PI-RADS version 2 scores the GPS was associated with biopsy upgrading, adding value to the clinical covariates (partial likelihood ratio p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: A higher GPS or a PI-RADS version 2 score of 4 or 5 was associated with an increased risk of biopsy upgrading.

A Systematic Review of the Existing Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 (PI-RADSv2) Literature and Subset Meta-Analysis of PI-RADSv2 Categories Stratified by Gleason Scores.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to quantitatively and qualitatively assess the methodologic heterogeneity of the current Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADSv2) literature and estimate the proportions of Gleason scores (GSs) diagnosed across PI-RADSv2 categories. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was a systematic review and meta-analysis and was performed in concordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Only English-language studies and studies published before April 1, 2018, were assessed. The primary outcome of the meta-analysis was the estimated percentage of patients with GS ≥ 3 + 4 within each individual PI-RADSv2 score. We calculated the pooled estimates and 95% CIs on the basis of a random-effects model using the meta-analysis routine of Stata (version 13.1). RESULTS: Our search revealed 434 titles, and 59 of these studies were selected. These studies were remarkable for their technical and terminological diverseness. Thirteen studies had sufficient data to be included in the meta-analysis. The prevalence of ≥ GS 3 + 4 in lesions assigned a PI-RADSv2 score of 3 or higher was approximately 45%. Lesions assigned PI-RADSv2 scores 1 or 2, 3, 4, and 5 represented high-grade disease in approximately 6%, 12%, 48%, and 72% of patients. CONCLUSION: The data available in the literature are highly heterogeneous and challenging to analyze because of variations in terminology, patient cohort selection, criteria, imaging parameters, and reference standards. In spite of this heterogeneity, our meta-analysis shows that PI-RADSv2 has good sensitivity when a score of ≥ 3 is considered as a positive test.

Comparison of Positive Oral Contrast Agents for Abdominopelvic CT.

OBJECTIVE. The objective of our study was to compare the quality of bowel opacification from three different positive oral contrast agents-barium sulfate, diatrizoate, and iohexol-at abdominopelvic CT. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Abdominopelvic CT examinations with three different oral contrast agents (each contrast agent: n = 300 patients) of 900 patients were retrospectively evaluated by two independent readers. For four segments of the gastrointestinal tract (i.e., the stomach, jejunum, ileum, and colon), readers recorded qualitative data (grade of nonuniform lumen opacification, types of inhomogeneous opacifications, presence of artifacts, and distribution of contrast agent) and quantitative data (CT attenuation of lumen [in Hounsfield units]). The results were compared among the three contrast agents using the Mann-Whitney U test and repeated-measures ANOVA with a post hoc Bonferroni correction. RESULTS. Fewer artifacts were detected with iohexol (4.3%) as the oral contrast agent than with diatrizoate (13.0%) and barium sulfate (14.3%) (each, p < 0.05). Barium showed a greater frequency of bowel lumen heterogeneity (388/831 segments, 47%) than iohexol (155/679, 23%) and diatrizoate (185/763, 24% segments) (p < 0.001). Barium showed higher CT attenuation than iohexol and diatrizoate in the stomach but lower CT attenuation in the ileum (each, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION. The frequency of inhomogeneous bowel opacification was lower for iohexol than for diatrizoate or barium sulfate. Barium showed the highest frequency of bowel lumen heterogeneity. The iodinated agents showed greater increases in mean CT attenuation from the proximal bowel segments to the distal bowel segments than barium sulfate.

Detection of clinically signifi cant prostate cancer with PIRADS v2 scores, PSA density, and ADC values in regions with and without mpMRI visible lesions.

PURPOSE: To determine if PSAD, PSADtz, and ADC values improve the accuracy of PI-RADS v2 and identify men whose concurrent systematic biopsy detects clinically significant cancer on areas without mpMRI visible lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Single reference-center, cross-sectional, retrospective study of consecutive men with suspected or known low to intermediate-risk prostate cancer who underwent 3T mpMRI and TRUS-MRI fusion biopsy from 07/15/2014 to 02/17/2018. Cluster-corrected logistic regression analyses were utilized to predict clinically significant prostate cancer (Gleason score ≥3+4) at targeted mpMRI lesions and on systematic biopsy. RESULTS: 538 men (median age=66 years, median PSA=7.0ng/mL) with 780mpMRI lesions were included. Clinically significant disease was diagnosed in 371 men. PI-RADS v2 scores of 3, 4, and 5 were clinically significant cancer in 8.0% (16/201), 22.8% (90/395), and 59.2% (109/184). ADC values, PSAD, and PI-RADS v2 scores were independent predictors of clinically significant cancer in targeted lesions (OR 2.25-8.78; P values <0.05; AUROC 0.84, 95% CI 0.81-0.87). Increases in PSAD were also associated with upgrade on systematic biopsy (OR 2.39-2.48; P values <0.05; AUROC 0.69, 95% CI 0.64-0.73). CONCLUSIONS: ADC values and PSAD improve characterization of PI-RADS v2 score 4 or 5 lesions. Upgraded on systematic biopsy is slightly more likely with PSAD ≥0.15 and multiple small PI-RADS v2 score 3 or 4 lesions.

Diagnostic Accuracy of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MRI Compared with Multiparametric MRI in the Detection of Prostate Cancer.

Purpose To compare the diagnostic accuracy of gallium 68 (68Ga)-labeled prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-11 PET/MRI with that of multiparametric MRI in the detection of prostate cancer. Materials and Methods The authors performed a retrospective study of men with biopsy-proven prostate cancer who underwent simultaneous 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MRI before radical prostatectomy between December 2015 and June 2017. The reference standard was whole-mount pathologic examination. Readers were blinded to radiologic and pathologic findings. Tumor localization was based on 30 anatomic regions. Region-specific sensitivity and specificity were calculated for PET/MRI and multiparametric MRI by using raw stringent and alternative neighboring approaches. Maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) in the tumor and Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2 grade were compared with tumor Gleason score. Generalized estimating equations were used to estimate population-averaged sensitivity and specificity and to determine the association between tumor characteristics and SUVmax or PI-RADS score. Results Thirty-two men (median age, 68 years; interquartile range: 62-71 years) were imaged. The region-specific sensitivities of PET/MRI and multiparametric MRI were 74% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 70%, 77%) and 50% (95% CI: 45%, 0.54%), respectively, with the alternative neighboring approach (P < .001 for both) and 73% (95% CI: 68%, 79%) and 69% (95% CI: 62%, 75%), respectively, with the population-averaged generalized estimating equation (P = .04). Region-specific specificity of PET/MRI was similar to that of multiparametric MRI with the alternative neighboring approach (88% [95% CI: 85%, 91%] vs 90% [95% CI: 87%, 92%], P = .99) and in population-averaged estimates (70% [95% CI: 64%, 76%] vs 70% [95% CI: 64%, 75%], P = .99). SUVmax was associated with a Gleason score of 7 and higher (odds ratio: 1.71 [95% CI: 1.27, 2.31], P < .001). Conclusion The sensitivity of gallium 68-labeled prostate-specific membrane antigen-11 PET/MRI in the detection of prostate cancer is better than that of multiparametric MRI. © RSNA, 2018 See also the editorial by Civelek in this issue.

Impact of Lesion Visibility on Transrectal Ultrasound on the Prediction of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer (Gleason Score 3 + 4 or Greater) with Transrectal Ultrasound-Magnetic Resonance Imaging Fusion Biopsy.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to estimate the impact of lesion visibility with transrectal ultrasound on the prediction of clinically significant prostate cancer with transrectal ultrasound-magnetic resonance imaging fusion biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) compliant, institutional review board approved, retrospective study was performed in 178 men who were 64.7 years old with prostate specific antigen 8.9 ng/ml. They underwent transrectal ultrasound-magnetic resonance imaging fusion biopsy from January 2013 to September 2016. Visible lesions on magnetic resonance imaging were assigned a PI-RADS™ (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System), version 2 score of 3 or greater. Transrectal ultrasound was positive when a hypoechoic lesion was identified. We used a 3-level, mixed effects logistic regression model to determine how transrectal ultrasound-magnetic resonance imaging concordance predicted the presence of clinically significant prostate cancer. The diagnostic performance of the 2 methods was estimated using ROC curves. RESULTS: A total of 1,331 sextants were targeted by transrectal ultrasound-magnetic resonance imaging fusion or systematic biopsies, of which 1,037 were negative, 183 were Gleason score 3 + 3 and 111 were Gleason score 3 + 4 or greater. Clinically significant prostate cancer was diagnosed by transrectal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging alone at 20.5% and 19.7% of these locations, respectively. Men with positive imaging had higher odds of clinically significant prostate cancer than men without visible lesions regardless of modality (transrectal ultrasound OR 14.75, 95% CI 5.22-41.69, magnetic resonance imaging OR 12.27, 95% CI 6.39-23.58 and the 2 modalities OR 28.68, 95% CI 14.45-56.89, all p <0.001). The ROC AUC to detect clinically significant prostate cancer using the 2 methods (0.85, 95% CI 0.81-0.89) was statistically greater than that of transrectal ultrasound alone (0.80, 95% CI 0.76-0.85, p = 0.001) and magnetic resonance imaging alone (0.83, 95% CI 0.79-0.87, p = 0.04). The sensitivity and specificity of transrectal ultrasound were 42.3% and 91.6%, and the sensitivity and specificity of magnetic resonance imaging were 62.2% and 84.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Lesion visibility on magnetic resonance imaging or transrectal ultrasound denotes a similar probability of clinically significant prostate cancer. This probability is greater when each examination is positive.

Interobserver Reproducibility of the PI-RADS Version 2 Lexicon: A Multicenter Study of Six Experienced Prostate Radiologists.

Purpose To determine the interobserver reproducibility of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2 lexicon. Materials and Methods This retrospective HIPAA-compliant study was institutional review board-approved. Six radiologists from six separate institutions, all experienced in prostate magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, assessed prostate MR imaging examinations performed at a single center by using the PI-RADS lexicon. Readers were provided screen captures that denoted the location of one specific lesion per case. Analysis entailed two sessions (40 and 80 examinations per session) and an intersession training period for individualized feedback and group discussion. Percent agreement (fraction of pairwise reader combinations with concordant readings) was compared between sessions. κ coefficients were computed. Results No substantial difference in interobserver agreement was observed between sessions, and the sessions were subsequently pooled. Agreement for PI-RADS score of 4 or greater was 0.593 in peripheral zone (PZ) and 0.509 in transition zone (TZ). In PZ, reproducibility was moderate to substantial for features related to diffusion-weighted imaging (κ = 0.535-0.619); fair to moderate for features related to dynamic contrast material-enhanced (DCE) imaging (κ = 0.266-0.439); and fair for definite extraprostatic extension on T2-weighted images (κ = 0.289). In TZ, reproducibility for features related to lesion texture and margins on T2-weighted images ranged from 0.136 (moderately hypointense) to 0.529 (encapsulation). Among 63 lesions that underwent targeted biopsy, classification as PI-RADS score of 4 or greater by a majority of readers yielded tumor with a Gleason score of 3+4 or greater in 45.9% (17 of 37), without missing any tumor with a Gleason score of 3+4 or greater. Conclusion Experienced radiologists achieved moderate reproducibility for PI-RADS version 2, and neither required nor benefitted from a training session. Agreement tended to be better in PZ than TZ, although was weak for DCE in PZ. The findings may help guide future PI-RADS lexicon updates. (©) RSNA, 2016 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS), Version 2: A Critical Look.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to highlight the potential challenges associated with the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System, version 2 (PI-RADS v2), and to offer, when possible, suggestions and ideas for improvement. CONCLUSION: PI-RADS v2 offers clear improvements to its earlier version and will greatly benefit the prostate MRI community. Nonetheless, caution remains on the basis of early user experience, and potential ambiguities and gaps of PI-RADS v2 are noted. Continued data-driven clarification and refinement of the guidelines will be invaluable for PI-RADS v2 to achieve its goal of improving patient care.

High-Resolution 3-T Endorectal Prostate MRI: A Multireader Study of Radiologist Preference and Perceived Interpretive Quality of 2D and 3D T2-Weighted Fast Spin-Echo MR Images.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to compare the perceived quality of 3-T axial T2-weighted high-resolution 2D and high-resolution 3D fast spin-echo (FSE) endorectal MR images of the prostate. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six radiologists independently reviewed paired 3-T axial T2-weighted high-resolution 2D and 3D FSE endorectal MR images of the prostates of 85 men in two sessions. In the first session (n = 85), each reader selected his or her preferred images; in the second session (n = 28), they determined their confidence in tumor identification and compared the depiction of the prostatic anatomy, tumor conspicuity, and subjective intrinsic image quality of images. A meta-analysis using a random-effects model, logistic regression, and the paired Wilcoxon rank-sum test were used for statistical analyses. RESULTS: Three readers preferred the 2D acquisition (67-89%), and the other three preferred the 3D images (70-80%). The option for one of the techniques was not associated with any of the predictor variables. The 2D FSE images were significantly sharper than 3D FSE (p < 0.001) and significantly more likely to exhibit other (nonmotion) artifacts (p = 0.002). No other statistically significant differences were found. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that there are strong individual preferences for the 2D or 3D FSE MR images, but there was a wide variability among radiologists. There were differences in image quality (image sharpness and presence of artifacts not related to motion) but not in the sequences' ability to delineate the glandular anatomy and depict a cancerous tumor.

Beyond Prostate Adenocarcinoma: Expanding the Differential Diagnosis in Prostate Pathologic Conditions.

Recent advances in magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of the prostate gland have dramatically improved the ability to detect and stage adenocarcinoma of the prostate, one of the most frequently diagnosed cancers in men and one of the most frequently diagnosed pathologic conditions of the prostate gland. A wide variety of nonadenocarcinoma diseases can also be seen with MR imaging, ranging from benign to malignant diseases, as well as infectious and inflammatory manifestations. Many of these diseases have distinctive imaging features that allow differentiation from prostate acinar adenocarcinoma. Early recognition of these entities produces a more accurate differential diagnosis and may enable more expeditious clinical workup. Benign neoplasms of the prostate include plexiform neurofibroma and cystadenoma, both of which demonstrate distinctive imaging features. Stromal neoplasms of uncertain malignant potential are rare tumors of uncertain malignant potential that are often difficult to distinguish at imaging from more-malignant prostate sarcomas. Other malignant neoplasms of the prostate include urothelial carcinoma, primary prostatic carcinoid, carcinosarcoma, endometrioid or ductal adenocarcinoma, and mucinous adenocarcinoma. Prostatic infections can lead to abscesses of pyogenic, tuberculous, or fungal origins. Finally, miscellaneous idiopathic disorders of the prostate include amyloidosis, exophytic benign prostatic hyperplasia, and various congenital cysts. Considerable overlap can exist in the clinical history and imaging findings associated with these prostate pathologic conditions, and biopsy is often required for ultimate confirmation of the diagnosis. However, many diagnoses, including cystadenoma, mucinous adenocarcinoma, sarcoma, and abscesses, have distinct imaging features, which can enable the informed radiologist to identify the diagnosis and recommend appropriate clinical workup and management. (©)RSNA, 2016.

Imaging Manifestations of Hematologic Diseases with Renal and Perinephric Involvement.

The kidneys and perinephric tissues can be affected by a variety of hematologic disorders, which usually occur in the setting of multisystem involvement. In many of these disorders, imaging is used to evaluate the extent of disease, guide biopsy, and/or monitor disease activity and patient response to therapy. Lymphoma, leukemia, and multiple myeloma commonly manifest as multiple parenchymal or perinephric lesions. Erdheim-Chester disease and Rosai-Dorfman disease, rare forms of multisystemic histiocytosis, are often identified as perinephric and periureteral masses. Renal abnormalities depicted at imaging in patients with sickle cell disease include renal enlargement, papillary necrosis, and renal medullary carcinoma. Sickle cell disease, along with other causes of intravascular hemolysis, can also lead to hemosiderosis of the renal cortex. Thrombosis of renal veins is sometimes seen in patients with coagulation disorders but more often occurs in association with certain malignancies and nephrotic syndrome. Immunoglobulin G4-related sclerosing disease is another multisystem process that often produces focal renal lesions, seen along with involvement of more characteristic organs such as the pancreas. Perinephric lesions with calcifications should raise the possibility of secondary amyloidosis, especially in patients with a history of lymphoma and multiple myeloma. Although the imaging patterns of renal and perinephric involvement are usually not specific for a single entity, and the same entity can manifest with different or overlapping patterns, familiarity with these patterns and key clinical and histopathologic features may help to narrow the differential diagnosis and determine the next step of care. (©)RSNA, 2016.

Endorectal MRI and MR spectroscopic imaging of prostate cancer: developing selection criteria for MR-guided focal therapy.

PURPOSE: To investigate criteria that can identify dominant treatable prostate cancer foci with high certainty at endorectal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and MR spectroscopic (MRS) imaging, and thus facilitate selection of patients who are radiological candidates for MR-guided focal therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively identified 88 patients with biopsy-proven prostate cancer who underwent endorectal MRI and MRS imaging prior to radical prostatectomy with creation of histopathological tumor maps. Two independent readers noted the largest tumor foci at MRI, if visible, and the volume of concordant abnormal tissue at MRS imaging, if present. A logistic random intercept model was used to determine the association between clinical and MR findings and correct identification of treatable (over 0.5 cm3) dominant intraprostatic tumor foci. RESULTS: Readers 1 and 2 identified dominant tumor foci in 50 (57%) and 58 (65%) of 88 patients; 42 (84%) and 48 (83%) of these were dominant treatable lesions at histopathology, respectively. Within the statistical model, the volume of concordant spectroscopic abnormality was the only factor that predicted correct identification of a dominant treatable lesion on T2-weighted images (odds ratio=1.75; 95% confidence interval=1.08 to 2.82; P value=0.02). In particular, all visible lesions on T2-weighted imaging associated with at least 0.54 cm3 of concordant spectroscopic abnormality were correctly identified dominant treatable tumor foci. CONCLUSION: Patients with dominant intraprostatic tumor foci seen on T2-weighted MRI and associated with at least 0.54 cm3 of concordant MRS imaging abnormality may be radiological candidates for MR-guided focal therapy.

Clinical utility of endorectal MRI-guided prostate biopsy: preliminary experience.

PURPOSE: To investigate the potential clinical utility of endorectal MRI-guided biopsy in patients with known or suspected prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We prospectively recruited 24 men with known or suspected prostate cancer in whom MRI-guided biopsy was clinically requested after multiparametric endorectal MRI showed one or more appropriate targets. One to six 18-gauge biopsy cores were obtained from each patient. Transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy results and post MRI-guided biopsy complications were also recorded. RESULTS: MRI-guided biopsy was positive in 5 of 7 patients with suspected prostate cancer (including 2 of 4 with prior negative ultrasound-guided biopsies), in 8 of 12 with known untreated prostate cancer (including 5 where MRI-guided biopsy demonstrated a higher Gleason score than ultrasound guided biopsy results), and in 3 of 5 with treated cancer. MRI-guided biopsies had a significantly higher maximum percentage of cancer in positive cores when compared with ultrasound guided biopsy (mean of 37 ± 8% versus 13 ± 4%; P = 0.01). No serious postbiopsy complications occurred. CONCLUSION: Our preliminary experience suggests endorectal MRI-guided biopsy may safely contribute to the management of patients with known or suspected prostate cancer by making a new diagnosis of malignancy, upgrading previously diagnosed disease, or diagnosing local recurrence.