Performance of multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging through PIRADS scoring system in biopsy naïve patients with suspicious prostate cancer.

Background: Use of multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) and Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) scoring system allowed more precise detection of prostate cancer (PCa). Our study aimed at evaluating the diagnostic performance of mp-MRI in detection of PCa. Methods: Eighty-six patients suspected to have prostate cancer were enrolled. All patients underwent mp-MRI followed by systematic and targeted trans-rectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostate biopsies. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy of mp-MRI were evaluated. Results: Forty-six patients (53.5%) had prostate cancer on targeted and systematic TRUS biopsies. On mp-MRI, 96.6% of lesions with PI-RADS < 3 revealed to be benign by TRUS biopsy, 73.3% of lesions with PI-RADS 4 showed ISUP grades ≥1, whereas all PI-RADS 5 lesions showed high ISUP grades ≥ 3. For PI-RADS 3 lesions, 62.5% of them revealed to be benign and 37.5% showed ISUP grades ≥1 by TRUS biopsy. PI-RADS scores ˃3 had 69.57% sensitivity and 85% specificity for detection of PCa. On adding the equivocal PI-RADS 3 lesions, PI-RADS scores ≥3 had higher sensitivity (97.83%), but at the cost of lower specificity (32.5%). Conclusion: Mp-MRI using PI-RADS V2 scoring system categories ≤3 and >3 could help in detection of PCa. PI-RADS 3 lesions are equivocal. Including PI-RADS lesions ≥3 demonstrated higher sensitivity, but at the cost of lower specificity for mp-MRI in diagnosis for Pca. Abbreviations: CDR: cancer detection rates; DRE: digital rectal examination; ISUP: international society of urological pathology; mp-MRI: multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging; NPV: negative predictive value; PCa: prosatate cancer; PI-RADS: Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System; PPV: Positive predictive value; PSA: prostate specific antigen; TRUS: transrectal ultrasound.

Consensus on Screening, Diagnosis, and Staging Tools for Prostate Cancer in Developing Countries: A Report From the First Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference for Developing Countries (PCCCDC).

PURPOSE: To generate and present the survey results on critical issues relevant to screening, diagnosis, and staging tools for prostate cancer (PCa) focused on developing countries. METHODS: A total of 36 of 300 questions concern the main areas of interest of this paper: (1) screening, (2) diagnosis, and (3) staging for various risk levels of PCa in developing countries. A panel of 99 international multidisciplinary cancer experts voted on these questions to create recommendations for screening, diagnosing, and staging tools for PCa in areas of limited resources discussed in this manuscript. RESULTS: The panel voted publicly but anonymously on the predefined questions. Each question was deemed consensus if 75% or more of the full panel had selected a particular answer. These answers are based on panelist opinion not a literature review or meta-analysis. For questions that refer to an area of limited resources, the recommendations consider cost-effectiveness and the possible therapies with easier and greater access. Each question had five to seven relevant answers including two nonanswers. The results were tabulated in real time. CONCLUSION: The voting results and recommendations presented in this document can be used by physicians to support the screening, diagnosis, and staging of PCa in areas of limited resources. Individual clinical decision making should be supported by available data; however, as guidelines for screening, diagnosis, and staging of PCa in developing countries have not been developed, this document will serve as a point of reference when confronted with this disease.

Consensus on Prostate Cancer Treatment of Localized Disease With Very Low, Low, and Intermediate Risk: A Report From the First Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference for Developing Countries (PCCCDC).

PURPOSE: A group of international urology and medical oncology experts developed and completed a survey on prostate cancer (PCa) in developing countries. The results are reviewed and summarized, and recommendations on consensus statements for very low-, low-, and intermediate-risk PCa focused on developing countries were developed. METHODS: A panel of experts developed more than 300 survey questions of which 66 questions concern the principal areas of interest of this paper: very low, low, and intermediate risk of PCa in developing countries. A larger panel of 99 international multidisciplinary cancer experts voted on these questions to create the recommendations for treatment and follow-up for very low-, low-, and intermediate-risk PCa in areas of limited resources discussed in this manuscript. RESULTS: The panel voted publicly but anonymously on the predefined questions. Each question was deemed consensus if 75% or more of the full panel had selected a particular answer. These answers are based on panelist opinion not a literature review or meta-analysis. For questions that refer to an area of limited resources, the recommendations consider cost-effectiveness and the possible therapies with easier and greater access. Each question had five to seven relevant answers including two nonanswers. The results were tabulated in real time. CONCLUSION: The voting results and recommendations presented in this document can be used by physicians to support management for very low, low, and intermediate risk of PCa in areas of limited resources. Individual clinical decision making should be supported by available data; however, as guidelines for treatment for very low, low, and intermediate risk of PCa in developing countries have not been developed, this document will serve as a point of reference when confronted with this disease.