Clinical evaluation and disease management of PI-RADS 3 lesions. Analysis from a single tertiary high-volume center

References

• Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, et al. (2016) EAU-ESTRO-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol. 2017;71:618–629.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carroll PR, Parsons JK, Andriole G, et al. (2016) NCCN guidelines insights: prostate cancer early detection, version 2. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2016;14:509–519.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Junker D, Quentin M, Nagele U, et al. (2014) Evaluation of the PI-RADS scoring system for mpMRI of the prostate: a whole-mount step-section analysis. World J Urol. 2015;33:1023–1030.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borkowetz A, Platzek I, Toma M, et al. Direct comparison of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) results with final histopathology in patients with proven prostate cancer in MRI/ultrasonography-fusion biopsy. BJU Int. 2016;118:213–220.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slaoui H, Neuzillet Y, Ghoneim T, et al. Gleason score within prostate abnormal areas defined by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging did not vary according to the PI-RADS score. Urol Int. 2017;99:156–161.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liddell H, Jyoti R, Haxhimolla HZ. mp-MRI prostate characterised PIRADS 3 lesions are associated with a low risk of clinically significant prostate cancer – a retrospective review of 92 biopsied PIRADS 3 lesions. Curr Urol. 2015;8:96–100.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bul M, Zhu X, Valdagni R, et al. Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer worldwide: the PRIAS study. Eur Urol. 2013;63:597–603.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walsh PC, Donker PJ. Impotence following radical prostatectomy: insight into etiology and prevention. J Urol. 1982;128:492–497.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montorsi F, Salonia A, Suardi N, et al. Improving the preservation of the urethral sphincter and neurovascular bundles during open radical retropubic prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2005;48:938–945.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montorsi F, Wilson TG, Rosen RC, et al. Best practices in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: recommendations of the Pasadena Consensus Panel. Eur Urol. 2012;62:36.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barrett T, Turkbey B, Choyke PL. PI-RADS version 2: what you need to know. Clin Radiol. 2015;70:1165–1176.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scattoni V, Maccagnano C, Capitanio U, et al. Random biopsy: when, how many and where to take the cores? World J Urol. 2014;32:859–869.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore CM, Giganti F, Albertsen P, et al. Reporting magnetic resonance imaging in men on active surveillance for prostate cancer: the PRECISE recommendations – a report of a European School of Oncology Task Force. Eur Urol. 2017;71:648–655.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giganti F, Allen C, Piper JW, et al. Sequential prostate MRI reporting in men on active surveillance: initial experience of a dedicated PRECISE software program. Magn Reson Imaging. 2019;57:34–39.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vickers AJ, Sjoberg DD2, European Urology. Guidelines for reporting of statistics in European Urology. Eur Urol. 2015;67:181–187.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ploussard G, Epstein JI, Montironi R, et al. The contemporary concept of significant versus insignificant prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2011;60:291–303.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pokorny MR, de Rooij M, Duncan E, et al. Prospective study of diagnostic accuracy comparing prostate cancer detection by transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy versus magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with subsequent MR-guided biopsy in men without previous prostate biopsies. Eur Urol. 2014;66:22–29.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson J, Lawrentschuk N, Frydenberg M, et al.; USANZ. The role of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis and management of prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2013;112:6–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Distler FA, Radtke JP, Bonekamp D, et al. The value of PSA density in combination with PI-RADS™ for the accuracy of prostate cancer prediction. J Urol. 2017;198:575–582.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mullins JK, Bonekamp D, Landis P, et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging findings in men with low-risk prostate cancerfollowed using active surveillance. BJU Int. 2013;111:1037–1045.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bianchi R, Cozzi G, Petralia G, et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and frozen-section analysis efficiently predict upgrading, upstaging, and extraprostatic extension in patients undergoing nerve-sparing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016;95:e4519.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baco E, Ukimura O, Rud E, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging–transectal ultrasound image-fusion biopsies accurately characterize the index tumor: correlation with step-sectioned radical prostatectomy specimens in 135 patients. Eur Urol. 2015;67:787–794.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Houlahan KE, Salmasi A, Sadun TY, et al. Molecular hallmarks of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging visibility in prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2019;76:18–23.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahmed HU, El-Shater Bosaily A, Brown LC, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet. 2017;389:815–822.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Minhaj Siddiqui M, Rais-Bahrami S, Turkbey B, et al. Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion–guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. JAMA. 2015;313:390–397.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luzzago S, Petralia G, Musi G, et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging second opinion may reduce the number of unnecessary prostate biopsies: time to improve radiologists’ training program? Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2019;17:88–96.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moldovan PC, Van den Broeck T, Sylvester R, et al. What is the negative predictive value of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in excluding prostate cancer at biopsy? A systematic review and meta-analysis from the European Association of Urology Prostate Cancer Guidelines Panel. Eur Urol. 2017;72:250–266.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar