• Citer

Role of the Prostate Imaging Quality PI-QUAL Score for Prostate Magnetic Resonance Image Quality in Pathological Upstaging After Radical Prostatectomy: A Multicentre European Study

par Windisch, Olivier;Benamran, Daniel;Dariane, Charles;Favre, Martina Martins;Djouhri, Mehdi;Chevalier, Maxime;Guillaume, Bénédicte;Oderda, Marco;Gatti, Marco;Faletti, Riccardo;Colinet, Valentin ;Lefebvre, Y.;Bodard, Sylvain;Diamand, Romain ;Fiard, Gaelle
Référence European Urology Open Science, 47, page (94-101)
Publication Publié, 2023-01

Article révisé par les pairs

• Accès en ligne
• Détails
• Contenu
• Statistiques

Résumé :

Background: Increasing use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has come with heterogeneity in image quality. The Prostate Imaging Quality (PI-QUAL) score is under scrutiny to assess its usefulness in predicting clinical outcomes. Objective: To compare upstaging of localized disease on mpMRI (mrT2) to locally invasive disease in radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens (≥pT3a) in relation to PI-QUAL. Design, setting, and participants: Patients treated with RP between 2015 and 2020 who underwent 1.5–3-T mpMRI within 6 mo before surgery and had systematic and mpMRI-US targeted biopsies were included. mpMRI scans were retrospectively assigned a PI-QUAL score, and prospectively acquired Prostate Imaging-Recording and Data System (PI-RADS) scores (version 2.0 or 2.1) were used. PI-QUAL scores were categorized as nondiagnostic (PI-QUAL <3), sufficient (PI-QUAL 3), or optimal (PI-QUAL >3). Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: We assessed the relationship between the PI-QUAL score and upstaging using multivariate logistic regression. mpMRI, clinical, and pathological findings were compared using χ2 tests and analysis of variance. Results and limitations: We identified 351 patients, of whom 40 (11.4%) had PI-QUAL <3, 57 (16.3%) had PI-QUAL 3, and 254 (72.3%) had PI-QUAL >3 scores. The distribution of PI-QUAL <3 (0–33.6%; p < 0.001) and PI-QUAL >3 (37.3–100%; p < 0.001) scores varied widely among centers. PI-QUAL ≥3 in comparison to PI-QUAL <3 was associated with a lower rate of upstaging (19% vs 35%; p = 0.02), greater detection of mrT3a and mrT3b prostate cancer (17.0% vs 2.5%; p = 0.016), a higher rate of PI-RADS 5 lesions (47% vs 27.5%; p = 0.002), a higher number of suspicious lesion (PI-RADS ≥3: 34.7% vs 15%; p = 0.012), and higher detection rates for aggregated (50.7% vs 22.5%; p = 0.001) and late (21.2% vs 0%; p < 0.001) extraprostatic extension. On multivariate analysis, PI-QUAL<3 was associated with more frequent upstaging in the RP specimen (odds ratio 3.4; p = 0.01). Conclusions: In comparison to PI-QUAL ≥3, PI-QUAL <3 was significantly associated with a higher rate of upstaging from organ-confined disease on mpMRI to locally advanced disease on pathology, lower detection rates for PI-RADS 5 lesions and extraprostatic extension, and a lower number of suspicious lesions. Patient summary: Poor image quality for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of the prostate is associated with underestimation of the stage of prostate cancer.