A multifaceted approach to quality in the MRI-directed biopsy pathway for prostate cancer diagnosis.

Szczegóły
Abstrakt

Tytuł:: A multifaceted approach to quality in the MRI-directed biopsy pathway for prostate cancer diagnosis.
Autorzy:: Padhani AR; Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Rickmansworth Road, Northwood, Middlesex, HA6 2RN, UK. .
Schoots IG; Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.; Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Turkbey B; Molecular Imaging Branch, NCI, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Giannarini G; Urology Unit, 'Santa Maria della Misericordia' Academic Medical Centre, Udine, Italy.
Barentsz JO; Department of Radiology, Nuclear Medicine & Anatomy, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Źródło:: European radiology [Eur Radiol] 2021 Jun; Vol. 31 (6), pp. 4386-4389. Date of Electronic Publication: 2020 Nov 25.
Typ publikacji:: Editorial
Język:: English
Imprint Name(s):: Original Publication: Berlin : Springer International, c1991-
MeSH Terms:: Prostatic Neoplasms*/diagnostic imaging
Biopsy ; Humans ; Image-Guided Biopsy ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging ; Male
References:: Drost F-JH, Osses D, Nieboer D et al (2020) Prostate magnetic resonance imaging, with or without magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy, and systematic biopsy for detecting prostate cancer: a Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 77:78–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2019.06.023. (PMID: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.06.02331326219)
van der Leest M, Cornel E, Israël B et al (2019) Head-to-head comparison of transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy versus multiparametric prostate resonance imaging with subsequent magnetic resonance-guided biopsy in biopsy-naïve men with elevated prostate-specific antigen: a large prospective multicenter clinical study. Eur Urol 75:570–578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2018.11.023. (PMID: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.11.02330477981)
Sokhi HK, Padhani AR, Patel S, Pope A (2020) Diagnostic yields in patients with suspected prostate cancer undergoing MRI as the first-line investigation in routine practice. Clin Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2020.08.011.
Boesen L, Nørgaard N, Løgager V et al (2018) Assessment of the diagnostic accuracy of biparametric magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer in biopsy-naive men. JAMA Netw Open 1:e180219. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2018.0219. (PMID: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2018.0219306460666324414)
Rouvière O, Puech P, Renard-Penna R et al (2019) Use of prostate systematic and targeted biopsy on the basis of multiparametric MRI in biopsy-naive patients (MRI-FIRST): a prospective, multicentre, paired diagnostic study. Lancet Oncol 20:100–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30569-2. (PMID: 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30569-230470502)
Kasivisvanathan V, Rannikko AS, Borghi M et al (2018) MRI-targeted or standard biopsy for prostate-cancer diagnosis. N Engl J Med 378:1767–1777. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1801993. (PMID: 10.1056/NEJMoa180199329552975)
Ahmed HU, El-Shater Bosaily A, Brown LC et al (2017) Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet 389:815–822. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32401-1. (PMID: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32401-128110982)
Zawaideh JP, Sala E, Shaida N et al (2020) Diagnostic accuracy of biparametric versus multiparametric prostate MRI: assessment of contrast benefit in clinical practice. Eur Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-06782-0.
US Preventive Services Task Force, Grossman DC, Curry SJ et al (2018) Screening for prostate cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. JAMA 319:1901–1913. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.3710. (PMID: 10.1001/jama.2018.3710)
Sathianathen NJ, Omer A, Harriss E et al (2020) Negative predictive value of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer in the prostate imaging reporting and data system era: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 78:402–414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2020.03.048. (PMID: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.03.04832444265)
Stonier T, Simson N, Shah T, et al (2020) The ‘Is mpMRI Enough’ or IMRIE study: a multicentre evaluation of prebiopsy multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging compared with biopsy. Eur Urol Focus 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2020.09.012.
Simmons LAM, Kanthabalan A, Arya M et al (2017) The PICTURE study: diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric MRI in men requiring a repeat prostate biopsy. Br J Cancer 116:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2017.57. (PMID: 10.1038/bjc.2017.57)
Mottet N, van den Bergh RC, Briers E et al (2019) 2019 EAU - EANM - ESTRO - ESUR - SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. EAU Guidelines Office, Arnhem.
NICE, NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH AND CARE (2019) National Institute for Heath and care Excellence. Prostate cancer : diagnosis and management (update) https://doi.org/10.5094/apr.2010.001.
Padhani AR, Barentsz J, Villeirs G et al (2019) PI-RADS Steering Committee: the PI-RADS multiparametric MRI and MRI-directed biopsy pathway. Radiology 292:464–474. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2019182946. (PMID: 10.1148/radiol.2019182946311845616677282)
Turkbey B, Rosenkrantz AB, Haider MA et al (2019) Prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2.1: 2019 update of prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2. Eur Urol 76:340–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2019.02.033. (PMID: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.02.03330898406)
de Rooij M, Israël B, Barrett T et al (2020) Focus on the quality of prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging: synopsis of the ESUR/ESUI recommendations on quality assessment and interpretation of images and radiologists’ training. Eur Urol 78:483–485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2020.06.023. (PMID: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.06.02332591100)
Giganti F, Allen C, Emberton M, Moore CM, Kasivisvanathan V, PRECISION study group (2020) Prostate imaging quality (PI-QUAL): a new quality control scoring system for multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate from the PRECISION trial. Eur Urol Oncol 3:615–619. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2020.06.007.
Schelb P, Kohl S, Radtke JP et al (2019) Classification of cancer at prostate MRI: deep learning versus clinical PI-RADS assessment. Radiology 190938. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2019190938.
Padhani AR, Barentsz JO, Weinreb J, Schoots I, Tempany C (2020) Re: variability of the positive predictive value of PI-RADS for prostate MRI across 26 centers: experience of the Society of Abdominal Radiology Prostate Cancer Disease-focused Panel. Eur Urol 296:633–636. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2020.06.015.
Park KJ, Choi SH, Lee JS, Kim JK, Kim MH, Jeong IG (2020) Risk stratification of prostate cancer according to PI-RADS version 2 categories: meta-analysis for prospective studies. J Urol. https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000001306.
Schoots IG, Padhani AR (2020) Risk-adapted biopsy decision based on prostate MRI and PSA-density for enhanced biopsy avoidance in first prostate cancer diagnostic work-up. Br J Urol Int. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.15277.
Goldberg H, Ahmad AE, Chandrasekar T et al (2020) Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and transrectal ultrasound informed prostate biopsy for prostate cancer diagnosis in biopsy naïve men: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Urol 203:1085–1093. https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000000595. (PMID: 10.1097/JU.000000000000059531609177)
Stabile A, Giganti F, Kasivisvanathan V et al (2020) Factors influencing variability in the performance of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer: a systematic literature review. Eur Urol Oncol 3:145–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2020.02.005. (PMID: 10.1016/j.euo.2020.02.00532192942)
Venderink W, Bomers JG, Overduin CG et al (2020) Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: what urologists need to know. Part 3: targeted biopsy. Eur Urol 77:481–490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2019.10.009. (PMID: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.10.00931791623)
Luzzago S, Petralia G, Musi G et al (2019) Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging second opinion may reduce the number of unnecessary prostate biopsies: time to improve radiologists’ training program? Clin Genitourin Cancer 17:88–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clgc.2018.10.006. (PMID: 10.1016/j.clgc.2018.10.00630527286)
Lamb BW, Jalil RT, Sevdalis N, Vincent C, Green JS (2014) Strategies to improve the efficiency and utility of multidisciplinary team meetings in urology cancer care: a survey study. BMC Health Serv Res 14:377. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-14-377.
Sciarra A, Gentile V, Panebianco V (2013) Multidisciplinary management of prostate cancer: how and why. Am J Clin Exp Urol 1:12–17. (PMID: 253748954219284)
Schoots IG, Padhani AR (2020) Personalizing prostate cancer diagnosis with multivariate risk prediction tools: how should prostate MRI be incorporated? World J Urol 38:531–545. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-019-02899-0. (PMID: 10.1007/s00345-019-02899-031399825)
Cuocolo R, Stanzione A, Ponsiglione A et al (2019) Prostate MRI technical parameters standardization: a systematic review on adherence to PI-RADSv2 acquisition protocol. Eur J Radiol 120:108662. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2019.108662. (PMID: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2019.10866231539790)
Park KJ, Choi SH, Lee JS, Kim JK, Kim MH (2020) Interreader agreement with prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 for prostate cancer detection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Urol 204:661–670. https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000001200.
Entry Date(s):: Date Created: 20201126 Date Completed: 20210520 Latest Revision: 20210520
Update Code:: 20240105
DOI:: 10.1007/s00330-020-07527-9
PMID:: 33241520
: Opinia redakcyjna

Full Text Finder

Key Points: • Identify, assure, and measure major sources of variability affecting the MRI-directed biopsy pathway for prostate cancer diagnosis.• Develop strategies to control and minimize variations that impair pathway effectiveness including the performance of main players and team working.• Assure end-to-end quality of the diagnostic chain with robust multidisciplinary team working.

Informacja