Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging Using the Prostate Imaging for Recurrence Reporting (PI-RR) Scoring System to Detect Recurrent Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Prostate Imaging for Recurrence Reporting (PI-RR) was introduced in 2021 to standardize the interpretation and reporting of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for prostate cancer following whole-gland treatment. The system scores image on a scale from 1 to 5 and has shown promising results in single-center studies. The aim of our systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the diagnostic performance of the PI-RR system in predicting the likelihood of local recurrence after whole-gland treatment. METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for diagnostic test accuracy were followed. Relevant databases were searched up to December 2023. Primary studies met the eligibility criteria if they reported MRI diagnostic performance in prostate cancer recurrence using PI-RR. Diagnostic performance for MRI was assessed using two different cutoff points (≥3 or ≥4 for positivity according to the PI-RR system). A meta-analysis with a random-effects model was used to estimate pooled sensitivity and specificity values. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: Sixteen articles were identified for full-text reading, of which six were considered eligible, involving a total of 467 patients. Using a cutoff of PI-RR ≥3 (4 studies) for recurrent disease, the sensitivity was 77.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 69.9-84.1%) and the specificity was 80.2% (95% CI 58.2-92.2%). Using a cutoff of PI-RR ≥4 (4 studies), the sensitivity was 61.9% (95% CI 35.6-82.7%) and the specificity was 86.6% (95% CI 75.1-93.3%). Overall, the inter-rater agreement varied from fair to excellent. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: PI-RR is accurate in detecting local recurrence after whole-gland treatment for prostate cancer and shows fair-to-good to excellent inter-reader agreement. Overall, a PI-RR cutoff of ≥3 showed high sensitivity and specificity. PATIENT SUMMARY: We reviewed studies that reported on how good MRI scans using a scoring system called PI-RR were in detecting recurrence of prostate cancer. We found that this system shows good performance, with fair to excellent agreement between different radiologists.

PI-QUAL version 2: an update of a standardised scoring system for the assessment of image quality of prostate MRI.

Multiparametric MRI is the optimal primary investigation when prostate cancer is suspected, and its ability to rule in and rule out clinically significant disease relies on high-quality anatomical and functional images. Avenues for achieving consistent high-quality acquisitions include meticulous patient preparation, scanner setup, optimised pulse sequences, personnel training, and artificial intelligence systems. The impact of these interventions on the final images needs to be quantified. The prostate imaging quality (PI-QUAL) scoring system was the first standardised quantification method that demonstrated the potential for clinical benefit by relating image quality to cancer detection ability by MRI. We present the updated version of PI-QUAL (PI-QUAL v2) which applies to prostate MRI performed with or without intravenous contrast medium using a simplified 3-point scale focused on critical technical and qualitative image parameters. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: High image quality is crucial for prostate MRI, and the updated version of the PI-QUAL score (PI-QUAL v2) aims to address the limitations of version 1. It is now applicable to both multiparametric MRI and MRI without intravenous contrast medium. KEY POINTS: High-quality images are essential for prostate cancer diagnosis and management using MRI. PI-QUAL v2 simplifies image assessment and expands its applicability to prostate MRI without contrast medium. PI-QUAL v2 focuses on critical technical and qualitative image parameters and emphasises T2-WI and DWI.

PRECISE Version 2: Updated Recommendations for Reporting Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Patients on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The Prostate Cancer Radiological Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation (PRECISE) recommendations standardise the reporting of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients on active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer. An international consensus group recently updated these recommendations and identified the areas of uncertainty. METHODS: A panel of 38 experts used the formal RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method consensus methodology. Panellists scored 193 statements using a 1-9 agreement scale, where 9 means full agreement. A summary of agreement, uncertainty, or disagreement (derived from the group median score) and consensus (determined using the Interpercentile Range Adjusted for Symmetry method) was calculated for each statement and presented for discussion before individual rescoring. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: Participants agreed that MRI scans must meet a minimum image quality standard (median 9) or be given a score of 'X' for insufficient quality. The current scan should be compared with both baseline and previous scans (median 9), with the PRECISE score being the maximum from any lesion (median 8). PRECISE 3 (stable MRI) was subdivided into 3-V (visible) and 3-NonV (nonvisible) disease (median 9). Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System/Likert ≥3 lesions should be measured on T2-weighted imaging, using other sequences to aid in the identification (median 8), and whenever possible, reported pictorially (diagrams, screenshots, or contours; median 9). There was no consensus on how to measure tumour size. More research is needed to determine a significant size increase (median 9). PRECISE 5 was clarified as progression to stage ≥T3a (median 9). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The updated PRECISE recommendations reflect expert consensus opinion on minimal standards and reporting criteria for prostate MRI in AS. PATIENT SUMMARY: The Prostate Cancer Radiological Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation (PRECISE) recommendations are used in clinical practice and research to guide the interpretation and reporting of magnetic resonance imaging for patients on active surveillance for prostate cancer. An international panel has updated these recommendations, clarified the areas of uncertainty, and highlighted the areas for further research.

MRI-guided Minimally Invasive Focal Therapies for Prostate Cancer.

Two cases involving patients diagnosed with localized prostate cancer and treated with MRI-guided focal therapies are presented. Patient selection procedures, techniques, outcomes, challenges, and future directions of MRI-guided focal therapies, as well as their role in the treatment of low- to intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer, are summarized.

Current Status of Cancer Genomics and Imaging Phenotypes: What Radiologists Need to Know.

Ongoing discoveries in cancer genomics and epigenomics have revolutionized clinical oncology and precision health care. This knowledge provides unprecedented insights into tumor biology and heterogeneity within a single tumor, among primary and metastatic lesions, and among patients with the same histologic type of cancer. Large-scale genomic sequencing studies also sparked the development of new tumor classifications, biomarkers, and targeted therapies. Because of the central role of imaging in cancer diagnosis and therapy, radiologists need to be familiar with the basic concepts of genomics, which are now becoming the new norm in oncologic clinical practice. By incorporating these concepts into clinical practice, radiologists can make their imaging interpretations more meaningful and specific, facilitate multidisciplinary clinical dialogue and interventions, and provide better patient-centric care. This review article highlights basic concepts of genomics and epigenomics, reviews the most common genetic alterations in cancer, and discusses the implications of these concepts on imaging by organ system in a case-based manner. This information will help stimulate new innovations in imaging research, accelerate the development and validation of new imaging biomarkers, and motivate efforts to bring new molecular and functional imaging methods to clinical radiology. Keywords: Oncology, Cancer Genomics, Epignomics, Radiogenomics, Imaging Markers Supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 2023.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted Versus Systematic Prostate Biopsies: 2-year Follow-up of a Prospective Randomized Trial (PRECISE).

BACKGROUND: The prospective randomized PRECISE trial demonstrated that magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with only targeted biopsy (TBx) was noninferior to systematic transrectal ultrasound biopsy (SBx) in the detection of International Society of Urological Pathology grade group (GG) ≥2 prostate cancer (PC). An unanswered question is the outcome for patients who avoided a biopsy because of negative MRI findings. OBJECTIVE: To explore the rate of PC diagnosis based on 2-yr MRI for PRECISE participants who had no biopsy and for patients who had a negative result or GG 1 on TBx in comparison to those with a negative result or GG 1 on SBx. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The PRECISE prospective trial was conducted at five Canadian academic centers. The present analysis was for trial participants who were not diagnosed with clinically significant PC (csPC) at baseline. Of 453 randomized patients, 146 were diagnosed with GG ≥2 at baseline and were excluded. Eligible patients for this study included 83 men from the MRI arm who had negative MRI findings and no biopsy, 120 from the overall cohort who had a negative SBx or TBx, and 72 from the overall cohort who were diagnosed with GG 1 disease. INTERVENTION: MRI at 2 yr in all men in the MRI and SBx arms and TBx for lesions with a Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System score of ≥3 or on the basis of clinical suspicion. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary outcome was the proportion of men diagnosed with GG ≥2 cancer. Secondary outcomes included the MRI outcome and the proportion of men diagnosed with GG 1 PC. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Evaluable 2-yr MRI scans were available for 75 (56%) eligible patients in the MRI arm and 69 (49%) in the SBx arm. Of these patients, 55 (73%) in the MRI arm and 51 (67%) SBx arm had negative 2-yr MRI. Of the 76 patients in the SBx arm with 2-yr MRI, 16 (21%) had a biopsy, for which the result was negative in eight (10%), GG1 in two (2.6%), and GG ≥2 in six (7.9%) cases. Of the 75 men in the MRI arm with 2-yr MRI, eight (11%) were biopsied, for which the result was negative in four cases (5%) and GG ≥2 in the other four (5%). At 2 yr, including baseline biopsy results, 116/221 (52.5%) in the MRI arm and 113/204 (55%) in the SBx arm were free of GG ≥2 disease, treatment, death from any cause, or progression (OR 1.08; p = 0.66). CONCLUSIONS: After 2-yr follow-up including MRI for patients in both arms of PRECISE, there was no difference in the rate of csPC diagnosis between the MRI and SBx groups, even though 38% of men in the MRI group avoided an initial biopsy. PATIENT SUMMARY: The PRECISE trial compared systematic biopsy of the prostate to a strategy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with targeted biopsy of any lesions suspicious for cancer on the scan. After 2 years of follow-up that included 2-year MRI with or without biopsy in both groups, there was no difference in the rate of diagnosis of significant cancer, even though 38% of men in the initial MRI arm avoided an initial biopsy, and 30% avoided biopsy altogether. The PRECISE trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02936258.

Inter-reader variability and reproducibility of the PI-QUAL score in a multicentre setting.

PURPOSE: To assess the inter-reader reproducibility of the Prostate Imaging Quality (PI-QUAL) score between readers with varying clinical experience and its reproducibility at assessing imaging quality between different institutions. METHODS: Following IRB approval, we assessed 60 consecutive prostate MRI scans performed at different academic teaching and non-academic hospitals uploaded to our institutes' PACS for second opinion or discussion in case conferences. Anonymized scans were independently reviewed using the PI-QUAL scoring sheet by three readers - two radiologists (with 1 and 12 years Prostate MRI reporting experience), and an experienced MRI technician with interest in image acquisition and quality. All readers were blinded to the site where scans were acquired. RESULTS: Agreement coefficients between the 3 readers in paired comparison for each individual PI-QUAL score was moderate. When the scans were clustered into 2 groups according to their ability to rule in or rule out clinically significant prostate cancer [i.e., PI-QUAL score 1-3 vs PI-QUAL score 4-5], the Gwet AC1 coefficients between the three readers in paired comparison was good to very good [Gwet AC 1:0.77, 0.67, 0.836 respectively] with agreement percentage of 88.3%, 83.3% and 91.7% respectively. Agreement coefficient was higher between the experienced radiologist and the experienced MRI technician than between the less experienced trainee radiologist and the other two readers. The mean PI-QUAL score provided by each reader for the scans was significantly higher in the academic hospitals (n = 32) compared to the community hospital (n = 28) [experienced radiologist 4.6 vs 2.9; trainee radiologist 4.5 vs 2.4; experienced technologist 4.4 vs 2.4; p value < 0.001]. CONCLUSION: We observed good to very good reproducibility in the assessment of each MRI sequence and when scans were clustered into two groups [PI-QUAL 1-3 vs PI-QUAL 4-5] between readers with varying clinical experience. However, the reproducibility for each single PI-QUAL score between readers was moderate. Better definitions for each PI-QUAL score criteria may further improve reproducibility between readers. Additionally, the mean PI-QUAL score provided by all three readers was significantly higher for scans performed at academic teaching hospitals compared to community hospital.

Development of a Radiomics-Based Model to Predict Graft Fibrosis in Liver Transplant Recipients: A Pilot Study.

Liver Transplantation is complicated by recurrent fibrosis in 40% of recipients. We evaluated the ability of clinical and radiomic features to flag patients at risk of developing future graft fibrosis. CT scans of 254 patients at 3-6 months post-liver transplant were retrospectively analyzed. Volumetric radiomic features were extracted from the portal phase using an Artificial Intelligence-based tool (PyRadiomics). The primary endpoint was clinically significant (≥F2) graft fibrosis. A 10-fold cross-validated LASSO model using clinical and radiomic features was developed. In total, 75 patients (29.5%) developed ≥F2 fibrosis by a median of 19 (4.3-121.8) months. The maximum liver attenuation at the venous phase (a radiomic feature reflecting venous perfusion), primary etiology, donor/recipient age, recurrence of disease, brain-dead donor, tacrolimus use at 3 months, and APRI score at 3 months were predictive of ≥F2 fibrosis. The combination of radiomics and the clinical features increased the AUC to 0.811 from 0.793 for the clinical-only model (p = 0.008) and from 0.664 for the radiomics-only model (p < 0.001) to predict future ≥F2 fibrosis. This pilot study exploring the role of radiomics demonstrates that the addition of radiomic features in a clinical model increased the model's performance. Further studies are required to investigate the generalizability of this experimental tool.

mpMRI Interpretation in Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer-An overview of the PRECISE score.

Active surveillance (AS) is now included in all major guidelines for patients with low-risk PCa and selected patients with intermediate-risk PCa. Several studies have highlighted the potential benefit of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in AS and it has been adopted in some guidelines. However, uncertainty remains about whether serial mpMRI can help to safely reduce the number of required repeat biopsies under AS. In 2017, the European School of Oncology initiated the Prostate Cancer Radiological Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation (PRECISE) panel which proposed the PRECISE scoring system to assess the likelihood of radiological tumor progression on serial mpMRI. The PRECISE scoring system remains the only major system evaluated in multiple publications. In this review article, we discuss the current body of literature investigating the application of PRECISE as it is not as yet an established standard in mpMRI reporting. We delineate the strengths of PRECISE and its potential added value. Also, we underline potential weaknesses of the PRECISE scoring system, which might be tackled in future versions to further increase its value in AS.

Predicting the recurrence risk of renal cell carcinoma after nephrectomy: potential role of CT-radiomics for adjuvant treatment decisions.

OBJECTIVES: Previous trial results suggest that only a small number of patients with non-metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) benefit from adjuvant therapy. We assessed whether the addition of CT-based radiomics to established clinico-pathological biomarkers improves recurrence risk prediction for adjuvant treatment decisions. METHODS: This retrospective study included 453 patients with non-metastatic RCC undergoing nephrectomy. Cox models were trained to predict disease-free survival (DFS) using post-operative biomarkers (age, stage, tumor size and grade) with and without radiomics selected on pre-operative CT. Models were assessed using C-statistic, calibration, and decision curve analyses (repeated tenfold cross-validation). RESULTS: At multivariable analysis, one of four selected radiomic features (wavelet-HHL_glcm_ClusterShade) was prognostic for DFS with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0.44 (p = 0.02), along with American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage group (III versus I, HR 2.90; p = 0.002), grade 4 (versus grade 1, HR 8.90; p = 0.001), age (per 10 years HR 1.29; p = 0.03), and tumor size (per cm HR 1.13; p = 0.003). The discriminatory ability of the combined clinical-radiomic model (C = 0.80) was superior to that of the clinical model (C = 0.78; p < 0.001). Decision curve analysis revealed a net benefit of the combined model when used for adjuvant treatment decisions. At an exemplary threshold probability of ≥ 25% for disease recurrence within 5 years, using the combined versus the clinical model was equivalent to treating 9 additional patients (per 1000 assessed) who would recur without treatment (i.e., true-positive predictions) with no increase in false-positive predictions. CONCLUSION: Adding CT-based radiomic features to established prognostic biomarkers improved post-operative recurrence risk assessment in our internal validation study and may help guide decisions regarding adjuvant therapy. KEY POINTS: In patients with non-metastatic renal cell carcinoma undergoing nephrectomy, CT-based radiomics combined with established clinical and pathological biomarkers improved recurrence risk assessment. Compared to a clinical base model, the combined risk model enabled superior clinical utility if used to guide decisions on adjuvant treatment.

Best Current Practice and Research Priorities in Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer-A Report of a Movember International Consensus Meeting.

BACKGROUND: Active surveillance (AS) is recommended for low-risk and some intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Uptake and practice of AS vary significantly across different settings, as does the experience of surveillance-from which tests are offered, and to the levels of psychological support. OBJECTIVE: To explore the current best practice and determine the most important research priorities in AS for prostate cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A formal consensus process was followed, with an international expert panel of purposively sampled participants across a range of health care professionals and researchers, and those with lived experience of prostate cancer. Statements regarding the practice of AS and potential research priorities spanning the patient journey from surveillance to initiating treatment were developed. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Panel members scored each statement on a Likert scale. The group median score and measure of consensus were presented to participants prior to discussion and rescoring at panel meetings. Current best practice and future research priorities were identified, agreed upon, and finally ranked by panel members. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: There was consensus agreement that best practice includes the use of high-quality magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which allows digital rectal examination (DRE) to be omitted, that repeat standard biopsy can be omitted when MRI and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) kinetics are stable, and that changes in PSA or DRE should prompt MRI ± biopsy rather than immediate active treatment. The highest ranked research priority was a dynamic, risk-adjusted AS approach, reducing testing for those at the least risk of progression. Improving the tests used in surveillance, ensuring equity of access and experience across different patients and settings, and improving information and communication between and within clinicians and patients were also high priorities. Limitations include the use of a limited number of panel members for practical reasons. CONCLUSIONS: The current best practice in AS includes the use of high-quality MRI to avoid DRE and as the first assessment for changes in PSA, with omission of repeat standard biopsy when PSA and MRI are stable. Development of a robust, dynamic, risk-adapted approach to surveillance is the highest research priority in AS for prostate cancer. PATIENT SUMMARY: A diverse group of experts in active surveillance, including a broad range of health care professionals and researchers and those with lived experience of prostate cancer, agreed that best practice includes the use of high-quality magnetic resonance imaging, which can allow digital rectal examination and some biopsies to be omitted. The highest research priority in active surveillance research was identified as the development of a dynamic, risk-adjusted approach.

Prostate MRI versus PSA screening for prostate cancer detection (the MVP Study): a randomised clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to compare prostate cancer detection rates between patients undergoing serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) vs magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for prostate cancer screening. DESIGN: Phase III open-label randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Single tertiary cancer centre in Toronto, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Men 50 years of age and older with no history of PSA screening for ≥3 years, a negative digital rectal exam and no prior prostate biopsy. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were recommended to undergo a prostate biopsy if their PSA was ≥2.6 ng/mL (PSA arm) or if they had a PIRADS score of 4 or 5 (MRI arm). Patients underwent an end-of-study PSA in the MRI arm. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Adenocarcinoma on prostate biopsy. Prostate biopsy rates and the presence of clinically significant prostate cancer were also compared. RESULTS: A total of 525 patients were randomised, with 266 in the PSA arm and 248 in the MRI arm. Due to challenges with accrual and study execution during the COVID-19 pandemic, the study was terminated early. In the PSA arm, 48 patients had an abnormal PSA and 28 (58%) agreed to undergo a prostate biopsy. In the MRI arm, 25 patients had a PIRADS score of 4 or 5 and 24 (96%) agreed to undergo a biopsy. The relative risk for MRI to recommend a prostate biopsy was 0.52 (95% CI 0.33 to 0.82, p=0.005), compared with PSA. The cancer detection rate for patients in the PSA arm was 29% (8 of 28) vs 63% (15 of 24, p=0.019) in the MRI arm, with a higher proportion of clinically significant cancer detected in the MRI arm (73% vs 50%). The relative risk for detecting cancer and clinically significant with MRI compared with PSA was 1.89 (95% CI 0.82 to 4.38, p=0.14) and 2.77 (95% CI 0.89 to 8.59, p=0.07), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Prostate MRI as a stand-alone screening test reduced the rate of prostate biopsy. The number of clinically significant cancers detected was higher in the MRI arm, but this did not reach statistical significance. Due to early termination, the study was underpowered. More patients were willing to follow recommendations for prostate biopsy based on MRI results. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02799303.

Correlation of transcriptional subtypes with a validated CT radiomics score in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVES: Transcriptional classifiers (Bailey, Moffitt and Collison) are key prognostic factors of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Among these classifiers, the squamous, basal-like, and quasimesenchymal subtypes overlap and have inferior survival. Currently, only an invasive biopsy can determine these subtypes, possibly resulting in treatment delay. This study aimed to investigate the association between transcriptional subtypes and an externally validated preoperative CT-based radiomic prognostic score (Rad-score). METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 122 patients who underwent resection for PDAC. All treatment decisions were determined at multidisciplinary tumor boards. Tumor Rad-score values from preoperative CT were dichotomized into high or llow categories. The primary endpoint was the correlation between the transcriptional subtypes and the Rad-score using multivariable linear regression, adjusting for clinical and histopathological variables (i.e., tumor size). Prediction of overall survival (OS) was secondary endpoint. RESULTS: The Bailey transcriptional classifier significantly associated with the Rad-score (coefficient = 0.31, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.13-0.44, p = 0.001). Squamous subtype was associated with high Rad-scores while non-squamous subtype was associated with low Rad-scores (adjusted p = 0.03). Squamous subtype and high Rad-score were both prognostic for OS at multivariable analysis with hazard ratios (HR) of 2.79 (95% CI: 1.12-6.92, p = 0.03) and 4.03 (95% CI: 1.42-11.39, p = 0.01), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with resectable PDAC, an externally validated prognostic radiomic model derived from preoperative CT is associated with the Bailey transcriptional classifier. Higher Rad-scores were correlated with the squamous subtype, while lower Rad-scores were associated with the less lethal subtypes (immunogenic, ADEX, pancreatic progenitor). KEY POINTS: • The transcriptional subtypes of PDAC have been shown to have prognostic importance but they require invasive biopsy to be assessed. • The Rad-score radiomic biomarker, which is obtained non-invasively from preoperative CT, correlates with the Bailey squamous transcriptional subtype and both are negative prognostic biomarkers. • The Rad-score is a promising non-invasive imaging biomarker for personalizing neoadjuvant approaches in patients undergoing resection for PDAC, although additional validation studies are required.

Canadian Association of Radiologists Prostate MRI White Paper.

Prostate cancer is the most common malignancy and the third most common cause of death in Canadian men. In light of evolving diagnostic pathways for prostate cancer and the increased use of MRI, which now includes its use in men prior to biopsy, the Canadian Association of Radiologists established a Prostate MRI Working Group to produce a white paper to provide recommendations on establishing and maintaining a Prostate MRI Programme in the context of the Canadian healthcare system. The recommendations, which are based on available scientific evidence and/or expert consensus, are intended to maintain quality in image acquisition, interpretation, reporting and targeted biopsy to ensure optimal patient care. The paper covers technique, reporting, quality assurance and targeted biopsy considerations and includes appendices detailing suggested reporting templates, quality assessment tools and sample image acquisition protocols relevant to the Canadian healthcare context.

Comparison of Micro-US and Multiparametric MRI for Prostate Cancer Detection in Biopsy-Naive Men.

Background Multiparametric MRI has led to increased detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). Micro-US is being investigated for csPCa detection. Purpose To compare multiparametric MRI and micro-US in detecting csPCa (grade group ≥2) and to determine the proportion of MRI nodules visible at micro-US for real-time targeted biopsy. Materials and methods This prospective, single-center trial enrolled biopsy-naive men with suspected prostate cancer (PCa) between May 2019 and September 2020. All patients underwent multiparametric MRI followed by micro-US; findings at both were interpreted in a blinded fashion, followed by targeted biopsy and nontargeted systematic biopsy using micro-US. Proportions were compared using the exact McNemar test. The differences in proportions were calculated. Results Ninety-four men (median age, 61 years; IQR, 57-68 years) were included. MRI- and micro-US-targeted biopsy depicted csPCa in 37 (39%) and 33 (35%) of the 94 men, respectively (P = .22); clinically insignificant PCa in 14 (15%) and 15 (16%) (P > .99); and cribriform and/or intraductal PCa in 14 (15%) and 13 (14%) (P > .99). The MRI- plus micro-US-targeted biopsy pathway depicted csPCa in 38 of the 94 (40%) men. The addition of nontargeted systematic biopsy to MRI- plus micro-US-targeted biopsy did not enable identification of any additional men with csPCa but did help identify nine additional men with clinically insignificant PCa (P = .04). Biopsy was avoided in 32 of the 94 men (34%) with MRI and nine of the 94 men (10%) with micro-US (P < .001). Among 93 MRI targets, 62 (67%) were prospectively visible at micro-US. Conclusion MRI and micro-US showed similar rates of prostate cancer detection, but more biopsies were avoided with the MRI pathway than with micro-US, with no benefit of adding nontargeted systematic biopsy to the MRI- plus micro-US-targeted biopsy pathway. Most MRI lesions were prospectively visible at micro-US, allowing real-time targeted biopsy. ClinicalTrials.gov registration no.: NCT03938376 © RSNA, 2022 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Radiomics in Abdominopelvic Solid-Organ Oncologic Imaging: Current Status.

Radiomics is the process of extraction of high-throughput quantitative imaging features from medical images. These features represent noninvasive quantitative biomarkers that go beyond the traditional imaging features visible to the human eye. This article first reviews the steps of the radiomics pipeline, including image acquisition, ROI selection and image segmentation, image preprocessing, feature extraction, feature selection, and model development and application. Current evidence for the application of radiomics in abdominopelvic solid-organ cancers is then reviewed. Applications including diagnosis, subtype determination, treatment response assessment, and outcome prediction are explored within the context of hepatobiliary and pancreatic cancer, renal cell carcinoma, prostate cancer, gynecologic cancer, and adrenal masses. This literature review focuses on the strongest available evidence, including systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and large multicenter studies. Limitations of the available literature are highlighted, including marked heterogeneity in radiomics methodology, frequent use of small sample sizes with high risk of overfitting, and lack of prospective design, external validation, and standardized radiomics workflow. Thus, although studies have laid a foundation that supports continued investigation into radiomics models, stronger evidence is needed before clinical adoption.

Exploring the value of using patient-oriented MRI reports in clinical practice - a pilot study.

PURPOSE: Standard radiology reports (SRR) are designed to communicate information between doctors. With many patients having instantaneous access to SRRs on patient portals, interpretation without guidance from doctors can cause anxiety and panic. In this pilot study, we designed a patient-centred prostate MRI template report (PACERR) to address some of these challenges and tested whether PACERRs improve patient knowledge and experience. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients booked for clinical prostate MRI were randomly assigned to SRR or SRR + PACERR. Questionnaires included multiple-choice that targeted 4 domains (understanding, usefulness, next steps, emotional experience) hypothesized to improve with patient-centred reports and short answer questions, testing knowledge regarding MRI results. Clinical encounters were observed and recorded to explore whether adding PACERR improved communication. Likert scaled-responses and short-answer questions were compared using Mann-Whitney U test and Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: Of the 40 participants, the majority were MRI naïve (70%). Patients receiving a PACERR had higher scores in the categories of patient understanding (mean: 4.17 vs. 3.39, p=0.006), usefulness (mean: 4.58 vs. 3.07, p<0.001), and identifying next steps (mean: 1.89 vs. 3.03, p=0.003) but not emotional experience (mean: 4.18 vs. 3.79, p=0.22). PACERR participants found the layout and design more patient friendly (mean: 4.47 vs. 2.61, p<0.001) and easier to understand (mean: 4.37 vs. 2.38, p<0.001). In the knowledge section, overall, the PACERR arm scored better (87% vs. 56%, p=0.004). CONCLUSION: With the addition of prostate MRI PACERR, participants had better understanding of their results and felt more prepared to involve themselves in discussions with their doctor.

Prostate biopsy in the era of MRI-targeting: towards a judicious use of additional systematic biopsy.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to develop and compare strategies that help optimize current prostate biopsy practice by identifying patients who may forgo concurrent systematic biopsy (SBx) in favor of MRI-targeted (TBx) alone. METHODS: Retrospective study on 745 patients who underwent combined MRI-TBx plus SBx. Primary outcome was the upgrade to clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa; grade group ≥ 2) on SBx versus MRI-TBx. Variables (age, previous biopsy status, Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score, index lesion size/location, number of lesions, PSA, PSA density, prostate volume) associated with the primary outcome were identified by logistic regression and used for biopsy strategies. Clinical utility was assessed by decision curve analysis (DCA). RESULTS: SBx detected 47 (6%) additional men with csPCa. The risk of detecting csPCa uniquely on SBx was significantly lower in men with PI-RADS 5 (versus PI-RADS 3: OR 0.30, p = 0.03; versus PI-RADS 4: OR 0.33, p = 0.01), and previous negative biopsy (versus previous positive biopsy: OR 0.40, p = 0.007), and increased with age (per 10 years: OR 1.64, p = 0.016). No significant association was observed for other variables. DCA identified the following strategies as most useful: (a) avoid SBx in men with PI-RADS 5 and (b) additionally in those with previous negative biopsy, resulting in avoiding SBx in 201 (27%) and 429 (58%), while missing csPCa in 5 (1%) and 15 (2%) patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: Not all men benefit equally from the combination of SBx and MRI-TBx. SBx avoidance in men with PI-RADS 5 and/or previous negative biopsy may reduce the risk of excess biopsies with a low risk of missing csPCa. KEY POINTS: • In men undergoing MRI-targeted biopsy, the risk of detecting clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) only on additional systematic biopsy (SBx) decreased in men with PI-RADS 5, previous negative biopsy, and younger age. • Using these variables may help select men who could avoid the risk of excess SBx. • If missing csPCa in 5% was acceptable, forgoing SBx in men with PI-RADS 5 and/or previous negative biopsy enabled the highest net reduction in SBx.