ISSN 1004-4140
CN 11-3017/P
ZHANG Subo, XU Yongjun, SUN Yi, WAN Jinxin, ZHAO Yan, LIU Jingfang, WANG Rui. Study on the Value of Predicting Prostate Cancer in the Grey Zone of PSA by Use of PI-RADS v2.1 Combined with PSA-related Indicators[J]. CT Theory and Applications, 2021, 30(5): 567-574. DOI: 10.15953/j.1004-4140.2021.30.05.04
Citation: ZHANG Subo, XU Yongjun, SUN Yi, WAN Jinxin, ZHAO Yan, LIU Jingfang, WANG Rui. Study on the Value of Predicting Prostate Cancer in the Grey Zone of PSA by Use of PI-RADS v2.1 Combined with PSA-related Indicators[J]. CT Theory and Applications, 2021, 30(5): 567-574. DOI: 10.15953/j.1004-4140.2021.30.05.04

Study on the Value of Predicting Prostate Cancer in the Grey Zone of PSA by Use of PI-RADS v2.1 Combined with PSA-related Indicators

More Information
  • Received Date: January 06, 2021
  • Available Online: September 22, 2021
  • Objective: We intend to investigate the diagnostic value of establishing the Logistic regression model based on Prostate Imaging Report and Data System (PI-RADS v2.1) combined with prostate specific antigen (PSA) which is applied in PSA gray area(4~10ng/mL) prostate cancer. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the pathologically-certified clinical data of 49 cases with prostate cancer (PCa) and 118 non-cancer cases who underwent prostate biopsy, the data covered age, tPSA, fPSA, PI-RADS v2.1 evaluation, PSAD and fPSA/tPSA. We performed logistic regression analysis on the indicators with statistical difference between the groups, and obtained ascertained independent PCa predictors, furthermore we respectively established regression prediction model by combination with PI-RADS v2.1 evaluation. The diagnostic efficacy of each model was evaluated by the operating characteristic curve (ROC) of subjects. Results: (1) There was no significant statistical difference in age, tPSA and fPSA between the PCa and non-cancer patients. But evaluation of PI-RADS v2.1, fPSA/tPSA, and PSAD showed significant statistical differences. (2) Logistic regression analysis indicated that PI-RADS v2.1evaluation, PSAD, and fPSA/tPSA are independent predictors of PCa; we established prediction models A and B as follows;Model A: Logit (P)=-10.82+2.32×PI-RADS v2.1+11.89×PSAD; Model B: Logit (P)=-6.13+2.19×PI-RADS v2.1-12.02×fPSA/tPSA. The area under the ROC curve was respectively 0.918 and 0.893, both were higher than the PI-RADS v2.1 evaluation independently applied, and we found that the differences were statistically significant. The sensitivity of model A was 0.843 and the specificity was 0.829, which showed better diagnostic efficacy compared with the sensitivity and specificity we got when the PI-RADS v2.1 evaluation was independently used (sensitivity 0.767 and specificity 0.801).Conclusion: The Logistic model established by combing PI-RADS v2.1 evaluation with PSA-related indicators showed better diagnostic efficacy in PSA grey area prostate cancer than PI-RADS v2.1 applied independently, in this way unnecessary needle biopsy can be avoided, and would play a significant instructive role in optimizing clinical treatment strategies.
  • [1]
    韩苏军, 张思维, 陈万青, 等. 中国前列腺癌发病现状和流行趋势分析[J]. 临床肿瘤学, 2013, 18(4):330-334.

    HAN S J, ZHANG S W, CHEN W Q, et al. Analysis of the status and trends of prostate cancer incidence in China[J]. Chinese Clinical Oncology, 2013, 18(4):330-334. (in Chinese).
    [2]
    ROOBOL M J, KRANSE R, BANGMA C H, et a1.Screening for prostate cancer:Results of the Rotterdam section of the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer[J]. European Urology, 2013, 64(4):530-539.
    [3]
    SALIDO-GUADARRAMA A I, MORALES-MONTOR J G, RANGEL-ES-CAREO C, et a1.Urinary micro RNA-based signature improves accuracy of detection of clinically relevant prostate cancer within the prostate-specific antigen grey zone[J]. Molecular Medicine Reports, 2016, 13(6):4549-4560.
    [4]
    CHEN R, SJOBERG D D, HUANG Y, et al. Prostate specific antigen and prostate cancer in Chinese men undergoing initial prostate biopsies compared with western cohorts[J]. Journal of Urology, 2017, 197(1):90-96.
    [5]
    康振, 张配配, 李拔森, 等. 前列腺影像报告与数据系统对前列腺特异性抗原灰区前列腺癌的诊断价值[J]. 重庆医学, 2017, 46(22):3050-3052

    , 3056. KANG Z, ZHANG P P, LI B S, et al. Diagnostic value of prostate image report and data system (PIRADS version 2) in prostate cancer with grey zone of prostate specific antigen[J]. Chongqing Medicine, 2017, 46(22):3050-3052, 3056. (in Chinese).
    [6]
    BARRETT T, RAJESH A, ROSENKRANTZ A B, et al. PI -RADS version 2.1:One small step for prostate MRI[J]. Clinical Radiology, 2019, 74:841-852.
    [7]
    DRAISMA G, ETZIONI R, TSODIKOV A, et al. Lead time and overdiagnosis in prostate-specific antigen screening:Importance of methods and context[J]. National Cancer Institute, 2009, 101(6):374-383.
    [8]
    马文斌, 郭顺华, 过新民, 等.MRI联合PSAD对前列腺癌和前列腺增生的诊断价值[J].中国实用医药, 2017, 12(6):35-37.

    MA W B, GUO S H, GUO X M, et al. Diagnostic value of MRI combined with PSAD in prostate cancer and benign prostatic hyperplasia[J]. China Practical Medical, 2017, 12(6):35-37. (in Chinese).
    [9]
    BARUAH S K, DAS N, BARUAH S J, et al. Combining prostate-specific antigen parameters with prostate imaging reporting and data system score Version 2.0 to improve its diagnostic accuracy[J]. World Journal of Oncology, 2019, 10(6):218-225.
    [10]
    LIU B, PAN T J.Role of PSA-related variables in improving positive ratio of biopsy of prostate cancer within serum PSA gray zone[J]. Urologia, 2015, 81(3):173-176.
    [11]
    VARGAS H A, HOTKER A M, GOLDMAN D A, et al.Updated prostate imaging reporting and data system(PIRADS v2) recommendations for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer using multiparametric MRI:Critical evaluation using whole-mount pathology as standard of reference[J]. European Radiology, 2016, 26(6):1606-1612.
    [12]
    CASH H, GUNZEL K, MAXEINER A, et al. Men with a negative real-time MRI/ultrasound-usion guided targeted biopsy but prostate cancer detection on TRUS-guided random biopsy-what are the reasons for targeted biopsy failure?[J]. The British Journal of Urology International, 2016, 118(1):35-43.
    [13]
    WOO S, SUB C H, KIM S Y, et al. Diagnostic performance of prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 for detection of prostate cancer:A systematic review and diagnostic meta-analysis[J].European Urology, 2017, 72(2):177-188.
    [14]
    LIU C, LIU S L, WANG Z X, et al. Using the prostate imaging reporting and data system version (PI-RADS v2) to detect prostate cancer can provent unnecessary biopsies and invasive treatment[J]. Asian Journal Andrology, 2018, 20(5):459-464.
    [15]
    潘俊, 谢旻君, 胡萍, 等. 联合联合PSAD及MRI建立PSA 4~10ng/mL患者前列腺穿刺活检阳性风险分层[J]. 临床泌尿外科杂志, 2019, 34(4):289-292.

    PAN J, XIE M J, HU P, et al. Risk stratification of prostate biopsy by combining PSAD and MRI among men with PSA 4~10ng/mL[J]. Journal of Clinical Urology, 2019, 34(4):289-292. (in Chinese).
    [16]
    梁震, 朱军, 康家旗, 等. 双参数磁共振PI-RADS联合PSA相关指标在首次前列腺穿刺活检中的诊断价值[J]. 中华泌尿外科杂志, 2019, 40(10):768-773.

    LIANG Z, ZHU J, KANG J Q, et al. Diagnostic value of biparameter magnetic resonance imaging of PI-RADS and PSA related markers in first prostate biopsy[J]. Chinese Journal Urology, 2019, 40(10):768-773. (in Chinese).
  • Cited by

    Periodical cited type(4)

    1. 张元飞. 动态增强磁共振成像联合弥散加权成像对前列腺癌的诊断效能. 实用临床医药杂志. 2024(24): 26-30 .
    2. 殷帅涛,王嘉南,蒋召强,王向阳,姬彤宇,单磊. PI-RADS v2.1评分联合前列腺特异性抗原衍生指标对灰区前列腺癌的诊断价值. 中华实用诊断与治疗杂志. 2023(04): 372-376 .
    3. 李媛媛,张显利. f-PSA/t-PSA联合基于PI-RADS v2评分的多参数MRI在前列腺癌中的诊断价值. 临床医学研究与实践. 2022(28): 119-122+136 .
    4. 孙东方,姚伟根,刘洁,鲁鹏聪,康聪. 基于PI-RADS联合PSA及衍生物构建前列腺癌定量评分体系的研究. 现代实用医学. 2022(12): 1564-1566 .

    Other cited types(2)

Catalog

    Article views (467) PDF downloads (38) Cited by(6)
    Related

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return