Contribution of Dynamic Contrast-enhanced and Diffusion MRI to PI-RADS for Detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer

Abstract

Background: Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2.0 requires multiparametric MRI of the prostate, including diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) imaging sequences; however, the contribution of DCE imaging remains unclear. Purpose: To assess whether DCE imaging in addition to apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and normalized T2 values improves PI-RADS version 2.0 for prediction of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, clinically reported PI-RADS lesions in consecutive men who underwent 3-T multiparametric MRI (T2-weighted, DWI, and DCE MRI) from May 2015 to September 2016 were analyzed quantitatively and compared with systematic and targeted MRI–transrectal US fusion biopsy. The normalized T2 signal (nT2), ADC measurement, mean early-phase DCE signal (mDCE), and heuristic DCE parameters were calculated. Logistic regression analysis indicated the most predictive DCE parameters for csPCa (Gleason grade group ≥2). Receiver operating characteristic parameter models were compared using the Obuchowski test. Recursive partitioning analysis determined ADC and mDCE value ranges for combined use with PI-RADS. Results: Overall, 260 men (median age, 64 years [IQR, 58–69 years]) with 432 lesions (csPCa [n = 152] and no csPCa [n = 280]) were included. The mDCE parameter was predictive of csPCa when accounting for the ADC and nT2 parameter in the peripheral zone (odds ratio [OR], 1.76; 95% CI: 1.30, 2.44; P =.001) but not the transition zone (OR, 1.17; 95% CI: 0.81, 1.69; P =.41). Recursive partitioning analysis selected an ADC cutoff of 0.897× 10−3 mm2/sec (P =.04) as a classifier for peripheral zone lesions with a PI-RADS score assessed on the ADC map (hereafter, ADC PI-RADS) of 3. The mDCE parameter did not differentiate ADC PI-RADS 3 lesions (P =.11), but classified lesions with ADC PI-RADS scores greater than 3 with low ADC values (less than 0.903 × 10−3 mm2/sec, P.05). Conclusion: Quantitative or qualitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI was not relevant for Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) 3 lesion risk stratification, while quantitative apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values were helpful in upgrading PI-RADS 3 and PI-RADS 4 lesions. Quantitative ADC measurement may be more important for risk stratification than current methods in future versions of PI-RADS.