Research
Print page Print page
Switch language
The Capital Region of Denmark - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital
Published

The primacy of multiparametric MRI in men with suspected prostate cancer

Research output: Contribution to journalReviewResearchpeer-review

  1. Facing privacy in neuroimaging: removing facial features degrades performance of image analysis methods

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Automated 3D segmentation and diameter measurement of the thoracic aorta on non-contrast enhanced CT

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. Automatically computed rating scales from MRI for patients with cognitive disorders

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  • Jonathan Richenberg
  • Vibeke Løgager
  • Valeria Panebianco
  • Olivier Rouviere
  • Geert Villeirs
  • Ivo G Schoots
View graph of relations

BACKGROUND: Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) became recognised in investigating those with suspected prostate cancer between 2010 and 2012; in the USA, the preventative task force moratorium on PSA screening was a strong catalyst. In a few short years, it has been adopted into daily urological and oncological practice. The pace of clinical uptake, born along by countless papers proclaiming high accuracy in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer, has sparked much debate about the timing of mpMRI within the traditional biopsy-driven clinical pathways. There are strongly held opposing views on using mpMRI as a triage test regarding the need for biopsy and/or guiding the biopsy pattern.

OBJECTIVE: To review the evidence base and present a position paper on the role of mpMRI in the diagnosis and management of prostate cancer.

METHODS: A subgroup of experts from the ESUR Prostate MRI Working Group conducted literature review and face to face and electronic exchanges to draw up a position statement.

RESULTS: This paper considers diagnostic strategies for clinically significant prostate cancer; current national and international guidance; the impact of pre-biopsy mpMRI in detection of clinically significant and clinically insignificant neoplasms; the impact of pre-biopsy mpMRI on biopsy strategies and targeting; the notion of mpMRI within a wider risk evaluation on a patient by patient basis; the problems that beset mpMRI including inter-observer variability.

CONCLUSIONS: The paper concludes with a set of suggestions for using mpMRI to influence who to biopsy and who not to biopsy at diagnosis.

KEY POINTS: • Adopt mpMRI as the first, and primary, investigation in the workup of men with suspected prostate cancer. • PI-RADS assessment categories 1 and 2 have a high negative predictive value in excluding significant disease, and systematic biopsy may be postponed, especially in men with low-risk of disease following additional risk stratification. • PI-RADS assessment category lesions 4 and 5 should be targeted; PI-RADS assessment category lesion 3 may be biopsied as a target, as part of systematic biopsies or may be observed depending on risk stratification.

Original languageEnglish
JournalEuropean Radiology
Volume29
Issue number12
Pages (from-to)6940-6952
Number of pages13
ISSN0938-7994
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2019

    Research areas

  • Aged, Biopsy/methods, Humans, Image-Guided Biopsy, Male, Middle Aged, Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods, Observer Variation, Prostate-Specific Antigen, Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology, Risk Assessment/methods, Triage/methods

ID: 59375894