Prague Med. Rep. 2023, 124, 40-51

https://doi.org/10.14712/23362936.2023.4

A Critical Analysis of the Magnetic Resonance Imaging Lesion Diameter Threshold for Adverse Pathology Features

Yavuz Onur Danacıoğlu1, Rustu Turkay2, Omer Yildiz3, Salih Polat4, Yusuf Arikan1, Hakan Polat1, Mustafa Gurkan Yenice1, Halil Firat Baytekin5, Ercan Inci3, Ali İhsan Tasci1

1Department of Urology, Bakirkoy Dr. Sadi Konuk Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
2Department of Radiology, Haseki Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
3Department of Radiology, Bakirkoy Dr. Sadi Konuk Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
4Department of Urology, Amasya University, Amasya, Turkey
5Department of Pathology, Bakirkoy Dr. Sadi Konuk Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey

Received May 6, 2022
Accepted January 18, 2023

References

1. Arsov, C., Becker, N., Rabenalt, R., Hiester, A., Quentin, M., Dietzel, F., Antoch, G., Gabbert, H. E., Albers, P., Schimmöller, L. (2015) The use of targeted MR-guided prostate biopsy reduces the risk of Gleason upgrading on radical prostatectomy. J. Cancer Res. Clin. Oncol. 141(11), 2061–2068. <https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-015-1991-5>
2. Caverly, T. J., Hayward, R. A., Reamer, E., Zikmund-Fisher, B. J., Connochie, D., Heisler, M., Fagerlin, A. (2016) Presentation of benefits and harms in US cancer screening and prevention guidelines: systematic review. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 108(6), djv436. <https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djv436>
3. Dvorak, T., Chen, M.-H., Renshaw, A. A., Loffredo, M., Richie, J. P., D’Amico, A. V. (2005) Maximal tumor diameter and the risk of PSA failure in men with specimen-confined prostate cancer. Urology 66(5), 1024–1028. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2005.05.037>
4. Elkhoury, F. F., Felker, E. R., Kwan, L., Sisk, A. E., Delfin, M., Natarajan, S., Marks, L. S. (2019) Comparison of targeted vs systematic prostate biopsy in men who are biopsy naive: The prospective assessment of image registration in the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PAIREDCAP) study. JAMA Surg. 154(9), 811–818. <https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2019.1734>
5. Epstein, J. I., Egevad, L., Amin, M. B., Delahunt, B., Srigley, J. R., Humphrey, P. A. (2016) The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 40(2), 244–252. <https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0000000000000530>
6. Felker, E. R., Margolis, D. J., Nassiri, N., Marks, L. S. (2016) Prostate cancer risk stratification with magnetic resonance imaging. Urol. Oncol. 34(7), 311–319. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2016.03.001>
7. Freedland, S. J., Kane, C. J., Amling, C. L., Aronson, W. J., Terris, M. K., Presti, J. C. Jr. (2007) Upgrading and downgrading of prostate needle biopsy specimens: Risk factors and clinical implications. Urology 69(3), 495–499. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2006.10.036>
8. Godtman, R. A., Holmberg, E., Lilja, H., Stranne, J., Hugosson, J. (2015) Opportunistic testing versus organized prostate-specific antigen screening: Outcome after 18 years in the Göteborg randomized population-based prostate cancer screening trial. Eur. Urol. 68(3), 354–360. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.12.006>
9. Ho, R., Siddiqui, M. M., George, A. K., Frye, T., Kilchevsky, A., Fascelli, M., Shakir, N. A., Chelluri, R., Abboud, S. F., Walton-Diaz, A., Sankineni, S., Merino, M. J., Turkbey, B., Choyke, P. L., Wood, B. J., Pinto, P. A. (2016) Preoperative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging predicts biochemical recurrence in prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. PLoS One 11(6), e0157313. <https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0157313>
10. Kattan, M. W., Stapleton, A. M., Wheeler, T. M., Scardino, P. T. (1997) Evaluation of a nomogram used to predict the pathologic stage of clinically localized prostate carcinoma. Cancer 79(3), 528–537. <https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19970201)79:3<528::AID-CNCR15>3.0.CO;2-5>
11. Lebacle, C., Roudot-Thoraval, F., Moktefi, A., Bouanane, M., De La Taille, A., Salomon, L. (2017) Integration of MRI to clinical nomogram for predicting pathological stage before radical prostatectomy. World J. Urol. 35(9), 1409–1415. <https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-016-1981-5>
12. Lee, D. H., Koo, K. C., Lee, S. H., Rha, K. H., Choi, Y. D., Hong, S. J., Chung, B. H. (2013) Tumor lesion diameter on diffusion weighted magnetic resonance imaging could help predict insignificant prostate cancer in patients eligible for active surveillance: Preliminary analysis. J. Urol. 190(4), 1213–1217. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.03.127>
13. Morlacco, A., Sharma, V., Viers, B. R., Rangel, L. J., Carlson, R. E., Froemming, A. T., Karnes, R. J. (2017) The incremental role of magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer staging before radical prostatectomy. Eur. Urol. 71(5), 701–704. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.08.015>
14. Mottet, N., van den Bergh, R., Briers, E. (2019) EAU Guidelines Edn. presented at the EAU Annual Congress Barcelona.
15. Nassiri, N., Chang, E., Lieu, P., Priester, A. M., Margolis, D. J., Huang, J., Reiter, R. E., Dorey, F. J., Marks, L. S., Natarajan, S. (2018) Focal therapy eligibility determined by magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion biopsy. J. Urol. 199(2), 453–458. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.08.085>
16. Özden, E., Akpınar, Ç., İbiş, A., Kubilay, E., Erden, A., Yaman, Ö. (2021) Effect of lesion diameter and prostate volume on prostate cancer detection rate of magnetic resonance imaging: Transrectal-ultrasonography-guided fusion biopsies using cognitive targeting. Turk. J. Urol. 47(1), 22. <https://doi.org/10.5152/tud.2020.20238>
17. Rosenkrantz, A. B., Babb, J. S., Taneja, S. S., Ream, J. M. (2017) Proposed adjustments to PI-RADS version 2 decision rules: Impact on prostate cancer detection. Radiology 283(1), 119–129. <https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2016161124>
18. Sanda, M. G., Dunn, R. L., Michalski, J., Sandler, H. M., Northouse, L., Hembroff, L., Lin, X., Greenfield, T. K., Litwin, M. S., Saigal, C. S., Mahadevan, A., Klein, E., Kibel, A., Pisters, L. L., Kuban, D., Kaplan, I., Wood, D., Ciezki, J., Shah, N., Wei, J. T. (2008) Quality of life and satisfaction with outcome among prostate-cancer survivors. N. Engl. J. Med. 358(12), 1250–1261. <https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa074311>
19. Schröder, F. H., Hugosson, J., Roobol, M. J., Tammela, T. L., Zappa, M., Nelen, V., Kwiatkowski, M., Lujan, M., Määttänen, L., Lilja, H., Denis, L. J., Recker, F., Paez, A., Bangma, C. H., Carlsson, S., Puliti, D., Villers, A., Rebillard, X., Hakama, M., Stenman, U. H., Kujala, P., Taari, K., Aus, G., Huber, A., van der Kwast, T. H., van Schaik, R. H., de Koning, H. J., Moss, S. M., Auvinen, A. (2014) Screening and prostate cancer mortality: Results of the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) at 13 years of follow-up. Lancet 384(9959), 2027–2035. <https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60525-0>
20. Steinberg, D. M., Sauvageot, J., Piantadosi, S., Epstein, J. I. (1997) Correlation of prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy Gleason grade in academic and community settings. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 21(5), 566–576. <https://doi.org/10.1097/00000478-199705000-00010>
21. Toledano, A. Y., Obuchowski, N. A. (2016) Methods for quantitative imaging biomarker studies. In: Handbook for Clinical Trials of Imaging and Image-guided Interventions. Obuchowski, N. A., Scott Gazelle, G., pp. 170–188, Wiley Blackwell, Hoboken.
22. Tonttila, P. P., Kuisma, M., Pääkkö, E., Hirvikoski, P., Vaarala, M. H. (2018) Lesion size on prostate magnetic resonance imaging predicts adverse radical prostatectomy pathology. Scand. J. Urol. 52(2), 111–115. <https://doi.org/10.1080/21681805.2017.1414872>
23. Turkbey, B., Mani, H., Shah, V., Rastinehad, A. R., Bernardo, M., Pohida, T., Pang, Y., Daar, D., Benjamin, C., McKinney, Y. L., Trivedi, H., Chua, C., Bratslavsky, G., Shih, J. H., Linehan, W. M., Merino, M. J., Choyke, P. L., Pinto, P. A. (2011) Multiparametric 3T prostate magnetic resonance imaging to detect cancer: Histopathological correlation using prostatectomy specimens processed in customized magnetic resonance imaging based molds. J. Urol. 186(5), 1818–1824. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2011.07.013>
24. Weinreb, J. C., Barentsz, J. O., Choyke, P. L., Cornud, F., Haider, M. A., Macura, K. J., Margolis, D., Schnall, M. D., Shtern, F., Tempany, C. M., Thoeny, H. C., Verma, S. (2016) PI-RADS Prostate Imaging – Reporting and Data System: 2015, Version 2. Eur. Urol. 69(1), 16–40. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.08.052>
front cover

ISSN 1214-6994 (Print) ISSN 2336-2936 (Online)

Archive