Detailed Information

Cited 48 time in webofscience Cited 56 time in scopus
Metadata Downloads

Reliability of Serial Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Detect Prostate Cancer Progression During Active Surveillance: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Authors
Rajwa, PawelPradere, BenjaminQuhal, FahadMori, KeiichiroLaukhtina, EkaterinaHuebner, Nicolai A.D'Andrea, DavidKrzywon, AleksandraShim, Sung RyulBaltzer, Pascal A.Renard-Penna, RaphaeleLeapman, Michael S.Shariat, ShahrokhPloussard, Guillaume
Issue Date
Nov-2021
Publisher
Elsevier B.V.
Keywords
Active surveillance; Biopsy; Magnetic resonance imaging; Prostate cancer; Upgrading
Citation
European Urology, v.80, no.5, pp 549 - 563
Pages
15
Indexed
SCIE
SCOPUS
Journal Title
European Urology
Volume
80
Number
5
Start Page
549
End Page
563
URI
https://scholarworks.korea.ac.kr/kumedicine/handle/2020.sw.kumedicine/53868
DOI
10.1016/j.eururo.2021.05.001
ISSN
0302-2838
1421-993X
Abstract
Context: Although magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is broadly implemented into active surveillance (AS) protocols, data on the reliability of serial MRI in order to help guide follow-up biopsy are inconclusive. Objective: To assess the diagnostic estimates of serial prostate MRI for prostate cancer (PCa) progression during AS. Evidence acquisition: We systematically searched PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases to select studies analyzing the association between changes on serial prostate MRI and PCa progression during AS. We included studies that provided data for MRI progression, which allowed us to calculate diagnostic estimates. We compared Prostate Cancer Radiological Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation (PRECISE) accuracy with institution-specific definitions. Evidence synthesis: We included 15 studies with 2240 patients. Six used PRECISE criteria and nine institution-specific definitions of MRI progression. The pooled PCa progression rate, which included histological progression to Gleason grade ≥2, was 27%. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.59 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.44–0.73) and 0.75 (95% CI 0.66–0.84) respectively. There was significant heterogeneity between included studies. Depending on PCa progression prevalence, the pooled negative predictive value for serial prostate MRI ranged from 0.81 (95% CI 0.73–0.88) to 0.88 (95% CI 0.83–0.93) and the pooled positive predictive value ranged from 0.37 (95% CI 0.24–0.54) to 0.50 (95% CI 0.36–0.66). There were no significant differences in the pooled sensitivity (p = 0.37) and specificity (p = 0.74) of PRECISE and institution-specific schemes. Conclusions: Serial MRI still should not be considered a sole factor for excluding PCa progression during AS, and changes on MRI are not accurate enough to indicate PCa progression. There was a nonsignificant trend toward improved diagnostic estimates of PRECISE recommendations. These findings highlight the need to further define the optimal triggers and timing of biopsy during AS, as well as the need for optimizing the quality, interpretation, and reporting of serial prostate MRI. Patient summary: Our study suggests that serial prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) alone in patients on active surveillance is not accurate enough to reliably rule out or rule in prostate cancer progression. Other clinical factors and biomarkers along with serial MRI are required to safely tailor the intensity of follow-up biopsies. © 2021 The Authors
Files in This Item
There are no files associated with this item.
Appears in
Collections
3. Graduate School > Graduate School of Public Health > 1. Journal Articles

qrcode

Items in ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Altmetrics

Total Views & Downloads

BROWSE