Urologic oncology · 2025
Utility of tumor diameter-to-prostate volume ratio for predicting the outcome of magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound fusion-targeted biopsy.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kohada Yuki, Miyamoto Shunsuke, Hayashi Tetsutaro, Tasaka Ryo, Honda Yukiko, Ishikawa Akira, Kobatake Kohei, Sekino Yohei, Kitano Hiroyuki, Goto Keisuke, Ikeda Kenichiro, Goriki Akihiro, Hieda Keisuke, Kitamura Naoyuki, Awai Kazuo, Hinata Nobuyuki
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of the tumor diameter-to-prostate volume ratio (TD/PV) on predicting prostate cancer (PCa) and clinically significant (cs) -PCa in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) /transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) fusion-targeted biopsy based on prostate imaging-reporting and data system (PI-RADS) findings in MRI.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent MRI/TRUS fusion-targeted biopsy for PI-RADS version 2.1 categories 3-5 lesions between 2017 and 2023 were retrospectively reviewed. TD/PV was calculated by dividing the tumor diameter by the total prostate volume. csPCa was defined as a Gleason score of ≥ 3 + 4. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to develop predictive nomograms for PCa and csPCa. A receiver operating characteristic curve was constructed to evaluate the predictive ability of the factors using the area under the curve (AUC).
RESULTS: A total of 565 patients were analyzed; the AUC of TD/PV was significantly superior to those of the prostate-specific antigen (PSA), tumor diameter, PSA density, and PI-RADS for predicting PCa (AUC: 0.840, P < 0.05) and csPCa (AUC: 0.819, P < 0.05). Multivariable analyses showed that TD/PV is a significant predictive factor for PCa and csPCa in MRI/TRUS fusion-targeted biopsy (P < 0.05). The predictive nomograms combining TD/PV and PI-RADS category were constructed and their AUCs for predicting PCa and csPCa were 0.861 and 0.845, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective analysis, prediction of PCa and csPCa on MRI/TRUS fusion-targeted biopsy was improved when TD/PV was combined with PI-RADS category.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent MRI/TRUS fusion-targeted biopsy for PI-RADS version 2.1 categories 3-5 lesions between 2017 and 2023 were retrospectively reviewed. TD/PV was calculated by dividing the tumor diameter by the total prostate volume. csPCa was defined as a Gleason score of ≥ 3 + 4. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to develop predictive nomograms for PCa and csPCa. A receiver operating characteristic curve was constructed to evaluate the predictive ability of the factors using the area under the curve (AUC).
RESULTS: A total of 565 patients were analyzed; the AUC of TD/PV was significantly superior to those of the prostate-specific antigen (PSA), tumor diameter, PSA density, and PI-RADS for predicting PCa (AUC: 0.840, P < 0.05) and csPCa (AUC: 0.819, P < 0.05). Multivariable analyses showed that TD/PV is a significant predictive factor for PCa and csPCa in MRI/TRUS fusion-targeted biopsy (P < 0.05). The predictive nomograms combining TD/PV and PI-RADS category were constructed and their AUCs for predicting PCa and csPCa were 0.861 and 0.845, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective analysis, prediction of PCa and csPCa on MRI/TRUS fusion-targeted biopsy was improved when TD/PV was combined with PI-RADS category.