Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to explore the value of combining bpMRI and clinical indicators in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa), and developing a prediction model and Nomogram to guide clinical decision-making.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed 530 patients who underwent prostate biopsy due to elevated serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels and/or suspicious digital rectal examination (DRE). Enrolled patients were randomly assigned to the training group (n = 371, 70%) and validation group (n = 159, 30%). All patients underwent prostate bpMRI examination, and T2-weighted imaging (T2WI) and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) sequences were collected before biopsy and were scored, which were respectively named T2WI score and DWI score according to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADS v.2) scoring protocol, and then PI-RADS scoring was performed. We defined a new bpMRI-based parameter named Total score (Total score = T2WI score + DWI score). PI-RADS score and Total score were separately included in the multivariate analysis of the training group to determine independent predictors for csPCa and establish prediction models. Then, prediction models and clinical indicators were compared by analyzing the area under the curve (AUC) and decision curves. A Nomogram for predicting csPCa was established using data from the training group.ResultsIn the training group, 160 (43.1%) patients had prostate cancer (PCa), including 128 (34.5%) with csPCa. Multivariate regression analysis showed that the PI-RADS score, Total score, f/tPSA, and PSA density (PSAD) were independent predictors of csPCa. The prediction model that was defined by Total score, f/tPSA, and PSAD had the highest discriminatory power of csPCa (AUC = 0.931), and the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity were 85.1% and 87.5%, respectively. Decision curve analysis (DCA) showed that the prediction model achieved an optimal overall net benefit in both the training group and the validation group. In addition, the Nomogram predicted csPCa revealed good estimation when compared with clinical indicators.ConclusionThe prediction model and Nomogram based on bpMRI and clinical indicators exhibit a satisfactory predictive value and improved risk stratification for csPCa, which could be used for clinical biopsy decision-making.

Highlights

  • PCa is the second leading cause of cancer death in American men [1]

  • Model 2 = f/tPSA + PSA density (PSAD) + Total score; AUC, area under the curve; 95% CI, 95% confidence interval for AUC; Cutoff, best cutoff; PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value

  • Several novel biomarkers including Prostate Health Index (PHI), Prostate Cancer Antigen 3 (PCA3), 4K Score, and a number of non-coding RNAs have been reported in improving the diagnosis accuracy of PCa, especially at initial biopsy [27,28,29,30], but most of them are not widely used at present

Read more

Summary

Introduction

PCa is the second leading cause of cancer death in American men [1]. An estimated 174,650 new cases were diagnosed in America in 2019, and 31,620 men are likely to die due to this malignant disease [2]. Serum PSA is widely used in PCa screening due to its high diagnostic sensitivity and low testing cost [3]. Decades of clinical experience have shown that PSA is not ideal in terms of specificity, often leading to either overdiagnosis or overtreatment [4,5,6]. Prostate biopsy is the most valuable method in the diagnosis of PCa [7, 8]. Development of specific biomarkers or diagnostic tools for PCa is necessary [4, 10]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call