Local staging of prostate cancer with multiparametric-MRI: accuracy and inter-reader agreement

Le résumé fourni par la source

Background. The accuracy of prostate cancer local staging at the time of diagnosis directly influences patient prognosis and treatment. Aim. To evaluate the diagnostic performance and interobserver variability of mp-MRI in local staging of prostate cancer, using the histopathologic findings at prostatectomy as the reference standard. Methods. Fifty patients (mean age 64.4±7.2) with biopsy confirmed prostate cancer were included in this prospective study. All patients were examined with mp-MRI before radical prostatectomy and images were read by three independent radiologists. Sensitivity (Se), specificity (Sp), positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy rate were calculated and compared for all three readers. Interobserver agreement was evaluated using Kappa Cohen coefficient of agreement. Results. The overall Se, Sp, PPV, NPV and accuracy rates for detecting extraprostatic tumor extension (EPE) ranged between 76.5-94.1%, 45.5-84.9%, 43.8-76.2%, 83.3-96.6% and 58-88%. For evaluation of seminal vesicle invasion (SVI), the overall Se, Sp, PPV, NPV and accuracy rates ranged between 57.1-85.7%, 86.1-97.7%, 40.0-85.7%, 92.5-97.7% and 82-96%, respectively. The overall Kappa Cohen coefficient of agreement varied between 0.349-0.638 for EPE and between 0.507-0.668 for SVI. Conclusions. Our results showed that 1.5T mp-MRI is a reliable method for local staging of prostate cancer, with good diagnostic performance in detecting EPE and SVI. The overall interobserver agreement rates between readers with the same level of experience in prostate MRI ranged from fair to good in the evaluation of EPE and from moderate to good for the assessment of SVI. Conclusions. Our results showed that 1.5T mp-MRI is a reliable method for local staging of prostate cancer, with good diagnostic performance in detecting EPE and SVI. The overall interobserver agreement rates between readers with the same level of experience in prostate MRI ranged from fair to good in the evaluation of EPE and from moderate to good for the assessment of SVI.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.