Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Urology 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Research article

Five-point Likert scaling on MRI predicts clinically significant prostate carcinoma

Authors: Taisuke Harada, Takashige Abe, Fumi Kato, Ryuji Matsumoto, Hiromi Fujita, Sachiyo Murai, Naoto Miyajima, Kunihiko Tsuchiya, Satoru Maruyama, Kohsuke Kudo, Nobuo Shinohara

Published in: BMC Urology | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

To clarify the relationship between the probability of prostate cancer scaled using a 5-point Likert system and the biological characteristics of corresponding tumor foci.

Methods

The present study involved 44 patients undergoing 3.0-Tesla multiparametric MRI before laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Tracing based on pathological and MRI findings was performed. The relationship between the probability of cancer scaled using the 5-point Likert system and the biological characteristics of corresponding tumor foci was evaluated.

Results

A total of 102 tumor foci were identified histologically from the 44 specimens. Of the 102 tumors, 55 were assigned a score based on MRI findings (score 1: n = 3; score 2: n = 3; score 3: n = 16; score 4: n = 11 score 5: n = 22), while 47 were not pointed out on MRI. The tracing study revealed that the proportion of >0.5 cm3 tumors increased according to the upgrade of Likert scores (score 1 or 2: 33 %; score 3: 68.8 %; score 4 or 5: 90.9 %, χ2 test, p < 0.0001). The proportion with a Gleason score >7 also increased from scale 2 to scale 5 (scale 2: 0 %; scale 3: 56.3 %; scale 4: 72.7 %; 5: 90.9 %, χ2 test, p = 0.0001). On using score 3 or higher as the threshold of cancer detection on MRI, the detection rate markedly improved if the tumor volume exceeded 0.5 cm3 (<0.2 cm3: 10.3 %; 0.2-0.5 cm3: 25 %; 0.5-1.0 cm3: 66.7 %; 1.0 < cm3: 92.1 %).

Conclusions

Each Likert scale favobably reflected the corresponding tumor’s volume and Gleason score. Our observations show that “score 3 or higher” could be a useful threshold to predict clinically significant carcinoma when considering treatment options.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R, Choyke P, Verma S, Villeirs G, et al. European Society of Urogenital R: Esur prostate mr guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol. 2012;22:746–57.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R, Choyke P, Verma S, Villeirs G, et al. European Society of Urogenital R: Esur prostate mr guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol. 2012;22:746–57.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
go back to reference Dickinson L, Ahmed HU, Allen C, Barentsz JO, Carey B, Futterer JJ, et al. Scoring systems used for the interpretation and reporting of multiparametric mri for prostate cancer detection, localization, and characterization: Could standardization lead to improved utilization of imaging within the diagnostic pathway? J Magn Reson Imaging. 2013;37:48–58.CrossRefPubMed Dickinson L, Ahmed HU, Allen C, Barentsz JO, Carey B, Futterer JJ, et al. Scoring systems used for the interpretation and reporting of multiparametric mri for prostate cancer detection, localization, and characterization: Could standardization lead to improved utilization of imaging within the diagnostic pathway? J Magn Reson Imaging. 2013;37:48–58.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Katahira K, Takahara T, Kwee TC, Oda S, Suzuki Y, Morishita S, et al. Ultra-high-b-value diffusion-weighted mr imaging for the detection of prostate cancer: Evaluation in 201 cases with histopathological correlation. Eur Radiol. 2011;21:188–96.CrossRefPubMed Katahira K, Takahara T, Kwee TC, Oda S, Suzuki Y, Morishita S, et al. Ultra-high-b-value diffusion-weighted mr imaging for the detection of prostate cancer: Evaluation in 201 cases with histopathological correlation. Eur Radiol. 2011;21:188–96.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Kitajima K, Kaji Y, Fukabori Y, Yoshida K, Suganuma N, Sugimura K. Prostate cancer detection with 3 t mri: Comparison of diffusion-weighted imaging and dynamic contrast-enhanced mri in combination with t2-weighted imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2010;31:625–31.CrossRefPubMed Kitajima K, Kaji Y, Fukabori Y, Yoshida K, Suganuma N, Sugimura K. Prostate cancer detection with 3 t mri: Comparison of diffusion-weighted imaging and dynamic contrast-enhanced mri in combination with t2-weighted imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2010;31:625–31.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Vargas HA, Akin O, Franiel T, Mazaheri Y, Zheng J, Moskowitz C, et al. Diffusion-weighted endorectal mr imaging at 3 t for prostate cancer: Tumor detection and assessment of aggressiveness. Radiology. 2011;259:775–84.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Vargas HA, Akin O, Franiel T, Mazaheri Y, Zheng J, Moskowitz C, et al. Diffusion-weighted endorectal mr imaging at 3 t for prostate cancer: Tumor detection and assessment of aggressiveness. Radiology. 2011;259:775–84.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
go back to reference Jonmarker SVA, Lindberg A, Hellström M, Egevad L. Tissue shrinkage after fixation with formalin injection of prostatectomy specimens. Virchows Arch. 2006;449:297–301.CrossRefPubMed Jonmarker SVA, Lindberg A, Hellström M, Egevad L. Tissue shrinkage after fixation with formalin injection of prostatectomy specimens. Virchows Arch. 2006;449:297–301.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Turkbey B, Mani H, Shah V, Rastinehad AR, Bernardo M, Pohida T, et al. Multiparametric 3t prostate magnetic resonance imaging to detect cancer: Histopathological correlation using prostatectomy specimens processed in customized magnetic resonance imaging based molds. J Urol. 2011;186:1818–24.CrossRefPubMed Turkbey B, Mani H, Shah V, Rastinehad AR, Bernardo M, Pohida T, et al. Multiparametric 3t prostate magnetic resonance imaging to detect cancer: Histopathological correlation using prostatectomy specimens processed in customized magnetic resonance imaging based molds. J Urol. 2011;186:1818–24.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Renard-Penna R, Mozer P, Cornud F, Barry-Delongchamps N, Bruguiere E, Portalez D, et al. Prostate imaging reporting and data system and likert scoring system: Multiparametric mr imaging validation study to screen patients for initial biopsy. Radiology. 2015;275:458–68.CrossRefPubMed Renard-Penna R, Mozer P, Cornud F, Barry-Delongchamps N, Bruguiere E, Portalez D, et al. Prostate imaging reporting and data system and likert scoring system: Multiparametric mr imaging validation study to screen patients for initial biopsy. Radiology. 2015;275:458–68.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Rosenkrantz AB, Kim S, Lim RP, Hindman N, Deng FM, Babb JS, et al. Prostate cancer localization using multiparametric mr imaging: Comparison of prostate imaging reporting and data system (pi-rads) and likert scales. Radiology. 2013;269:482–92.CrossRefPubMed Rosenkrantz AB, Kim S, Lim RP, Hindman N, Deng FM, Babb JS, et al. Prostate cancer localization using multiparametric mr imaging: Comparison of prostate imaging reporting and data system (pi-rads) and likert scales. Radiology. 2013;269:482–92.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Ikonen S, Kärkkäinen P, Kivisaari L, Salo JO, Taari K, Vehmas T, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of clinically localized prostatic cancer. J Urol. 1998;159:915–9.CrossRefPubMed Ikonen S, Kärkkäinen P, Kivisaari L, Salo JO, Taari K, Vehmas T, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of clinically localized prostatic cancer. J Urol. 1998;159:915–9.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Roethke MC, Lichy MP, Jurgschat L, Hennenlotter J, Vogel U, Schilling D, et al. Tumorsize dependent detection rate of endorectal mri of prostate cancer--a histopathologic correlation with whole-mount sections in 70 patients with prostate cancer. Eur J Radiol. 2011;79:189–95.CrossRefPubMed Roethke MC, Lichy MP, Jurgschat L, Hennenlotter J, Vogel U, Schilling D, et al. Tumorsize dependent detection rate of endorectal mri of prostate cancer--a histopathologic correlation with whole-mount sections in 70 patients with prostate cancer. Eur J Radiol. 2011;79:189–95.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Villers A, Puech P, Mouton D, Leroy X, Ballereau C, Lemaitre L. Dynamic contrast enhanced, pelvic phased array magnetic resonance imaging of localized prostate cancer for predicting tumor volume: Correlation with radical prostatectomy findings. J Urol. 2006;176:2432–7.CrossRefPubMed Villers A, Puech P, Mouton D, Leroy X, Ballereau C, Lemaitre L. Dynamic contrast enhanced, pelvic phased array magnetic resonance imaging of localized prostate cancer for predicting tumor volume: Correlation with radical prostatectomy findings. J Urol. 2006;176:2432–7.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Park BKKB, Kim CK, Lee HM, Kwon GY. Comparison of phased-array 3.0-t and endorectal 1.5-t magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of local staging accuracy for prostate cancer. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2007;31:534–8.CrossRefPubMed Park BKKB, Kim CK, Lee HM, Kwon GY. Comparison of phased-array 3.0-t and endorectal 1.5-t magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of local staging accuracy for prostate cancer. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2007;31:534–8.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Sosna J, Pedrosa I, Dewolf WC, Mahallati H, Lenkinski RE, Rofsky NM. Mr imaging of the prostate at 3 tesla: Comparison of an external phased-array coil to imaging with an endorectal coil at 1.5 tesla. Acad Radiol. 2004;11:857–62.CrossRefPubMed Sosna J, Pedrosa I, Dewolf WC, Mahallati H, Lenkinski RE, Rofsky NM. Mr imaging of the prostate at 3 tesla: Comparison of an external phased-array coil to imaging with an endorectal coil at 1.5 tesla. Acad Radiol. 2004;11:857–62.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Kim BS, Kim TH, Kwon TG, Yoo ES. Comparison of pelvic phased-array versus endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging at 3 tesla for local staging of prostate cancer. Yonsei Med J. 2012;53:550–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Kim BS, Kim TH, Kwon TG, Yoo ES. Comparison of pelvic phased-array versus endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging at 3 tesla for local staging of prostate cancer. Yonsei Med J. 2012;53:550–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
go back to reference Turkbey B, Merino MJ, Gallardo EC, Shah V, Aras O, Bernardo M, et al. Comparison of endorectal coil and nonendorectal coil t2w and diffusion-weighted mri at 3 tesla for localizing prostate cancer: Correlation with whole-mount histopathology. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2014;39:1443–8.CrossRefPubMed Turkbey B, Merino MJ, Gallardo EC, Shah V, Aras O, Bernardo M, et al. Comparison of endorectal coil and nonendorectal coil t2w and diffusion-weighted mri at 3 tesla for localizing prostate cancer: Correlation with whole-mount histopathology. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2014;39:1443–8.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Qayyum ACF, Lu Y, Olpin JD, Wu L, Yeh BM, Carroll PR, et al. Organ-confined prostate cancer: Effect of prior transrectal biopsy on endorectal mri and mr spectroscopic imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2004;183:1079–83.CrossRefPubMed Qayyum ACF, Lu Y, Olpin JD, Wu L, Yeh BM, Carroll PR, et al. Organ-confined prostate cancer: Effect of prior transrectal biopsy on endorectal mri and mr spectroscopic imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2004;183:1079–83.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Junker D, Quentin M, Nagele U, Edlinger M, Richenberg J, Schaefer G, et al. Evaluation of the pi-rads scoring system for mpmri of the prostate: A whole-mount step-section analysis. World J Urol. 2014;33:1023–30.CrossRefPubMed Junker D, Quentin M, Nagele U, Edlinger M, Richenberg J, Schaefer G, et al. Evaluation of the pi-rads scoring system for mpmri of the prostate: A whole-mount step-section analysis. World J Urol. 2014;33:1023–30.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Rosenkrantz AB, Kim S, Campbell N, Gaing B, Deng FM, Taneja SS. Transition zone prostate cancer: Revisiting the role of multiparametric mri at 3 t. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;204:W266–272.CrossRefPubMed Rosenkrantz AB, Kim S, Campbell N, Gaing B, Deng FM, Taneja SS. Transition zone prostate cancer: Revisiting the role of multiparametric mri at 3 t. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;204:W266–272.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Five-point Likert scaling on MRI predicts clinically significant prostate carcinoma
Authors
Taisuke Harada
Takashige Abe
Fumi Kato
Ryuji Matsumoto
Hiromi Fujita
Sachiyo Murai
Naoto Miyajima
Kunihiko Tsuchiya
Satoru Maruyama
Kohsuke Kudo
Nobuo Shinohara
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Urology / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2490
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-015-0087-5

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

BMC Urology 1/2015 Go to the issue