Journals / Turkish Journal of Urology / 2020 / Cilt: 46 - Sayı: 5

Value of prostate-specific antigen density in negative or equivocal lesions on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging

Pages
367–372
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The addition of this tool to mpMRI resulted in 100% sensitivity, 69% specificity, and 34.8% PPV.Conclusion: In our series, PSAD ≤0.15 increased the NPV in negative or equivocal mpMRI, and through this unnecessary prostate biopsies could be avoided.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: The prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) is an accessory tool when suspecting prostate cancer.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) of the prostate has a high rate of false negatives.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The addition of this tool to mpMRI resulted in 100% sensitivity, 69% specificity, and 34.8% PPV.Conclusion: In our series, PSAD ≤0.15 increased the NPV in negative or equivocal mpMRI, and through this unnecessary prostate biopsies could be avoided.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2015 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Objective: The prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) is an accessory tool when suspecting prostate cancer. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) of the prostate has a high rate of false negatives. The aim of this study is to evaluate the sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value (PPV) when adding the PSAD and negative or equivocal mpMRI.Material and methods: A retrospective study that included prostate biopsies performed using a transperineal approach and guided by ultrasound between 2015 and 2019 was conducted. Clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) was defined as Gleason score ≥3+4. The population was divided into groups according to the PSAD level-≤0.15 and >0.15. Sensitivity, specificity, NPV, and PPV of mpMRI were calculated.Results: A total of 292 patients were included; 12.1% (4/33 patients) of the negative mpMRI group presented csPCa, and only 7 in the equivocal mpMRI group presented csPCa. NPV and sensitivity were 91.15% and 90.5%, respectively. In the positive mpMRI group, 53.7% (96/179) had csPCa, with a PPV of 53.6% and specificity of 55.3%. Of the patients with PSAD ≤0.15, 23 (16.54%) presented csPCa. All of them presented a positive mpMRI. All patients with a negative or equivocal mpMRI and a PSAD ≤0.15 presented a clinically non-significant tumor or benign result. The addition of this tool to mpMRI resulted in 100% sensitivity, 69% specificity, and 34.8% PPV.Conclusion: In our series, PSAD ≤0.15 increased the NPV in negative or equivocal mpMRI, and through this unnecessary prostate biopsies could be avoided.

🔖

Cite This Article

RİCO, L., CONTRERAS, P., VİTAGLİANO, G., PİTA, H. R., AMERİ, C., BLAS, L. (2020). Value of prostate-specific antigen density in negative or equivocal lesions on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. Turkish Journal of Urology, Cilt: 46 - Sayı: 5, 367–372. https://ajindex.com/articles/379694

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (1)

  1. Center MM, Jemal A, Lortet-Tieulent J, Ward E, Ferlay J, Brawley O, et al. International variation in prostate cancer incidence and mortality rates. Eur Urol 2012;61:1079-92. [Crossref] 2. Roobol MJ, Kranse R, Bangma CH, van Leenders AG, Blijenberg BG, van Schaik RH, et al. Screening for prostate cancer: results of the Rotterdam Section of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol 2013;64:530-9. [Crossref] 3. Pokorny MR, De Rooij M, Duncan E, Schröder FH, Parkinson R, Barentsz JO, 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;66:22-9. [Crossref] 4. Rosario DJ, Lane JA, Metcalfe C, Donovan JL, Doble A, Goodwin L, et al. Short term outcomes of prostate biopsy in men tested for cancer by prostate specific antigen: prospective evaluation within ProtecT study. BMJ 2012;344:d7894. [Crossref] 5. Ramon J, Boccon-Gibod L, Billebaud T, Astier L, Kobelinsky M, Meulemans A, et al. Prostate-specific antigen density: a means to enhance detection of prostate cancer. Eur Urol 1994;25:288-94; discussion 304. [Crossref] 6. Mueller EJ, Coventry J, Desmond PM, Zeidman EJ, Thompson IM. Relative performance characteristics of prostate specific antigen and prostatic specific antigen density for the diagnosis of carcinoma of the prostate. Urol Oncol 1995;1:84-7. [Crossref] 7. Van den Bergh RCN, Roemeling S, Roobol MJ, Roobol W, Schröder FH, Bangma CH. Prospective validation of active surveillance in prostate cancer: the PRIAS study. Eur Urol 2007;52:1560-3. [Crossref] 8. Akdas A, Tarcan T, Türkeri L, Cevik I, Biren T, Ilker Y. The impact of prostate- specific antigen density in predicting prostate cancer when serum prostate- specific antigen levels are less than 10 ng/ml. Eur Urol 1996;29:189-92. 9. De Castro HAS, Iared W, Santos JEM, Solha RS, Shigueoka DC, Ajzen SA. Contribution of PSA density in the prediction of prostate cancer in patients with PSA values between 2.6 and 10.0 ng/ml. Radiol Bras 2011;44:205-9. [Crossref] 10. Quentin M, Blondin D, Arsov C, Schimmöller L, Hiester A, Godehardt E, et al. Prospective evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging guided in-bore prostate biopsy versus systematic transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy in biopsy naive men with elevated prostate specific antigen. J Urol 2014;192:1374-9. [Crossref]