Assessing the Role of Bi- and Multi-Parametric MRI in Prostate Cancer-A Regional Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.30683/1929-2279.2025.14.03Keywords:
Bi- Parametric, Multi-Parametric, MRI, Prostate Cancer-A, Regional StudyAbstract
Prostate MRI is a key diagnostic tool for prostate cancer (PCa), with current guidelines recommending multi-parametric MRI (mpMRI), which includes T2-weighted (T2W), diffusion-weighted (DWI), and dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) imaging. However, biparametric MRI (bpMRI), which omits DCE, is suggested to reduce scan time, cost, and potential contrast-related side effects. Limited research exists comparing bpMRI’s efficacy against mpMRI for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer (CsPCa) using the Prostate Imaging and Reporting Data System (PI-RADS v2.1).To compare the diagnostic performance of bpMRI and mpMRI for prostatic carcinoma and CsPCa detection. This study retrospectively evaluated 115 males over 40 years with elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels (≥15 ng/ml) who underwent mpMRI and had histopathological results. Two radiologists independently assessed suspected PCa lesions, assigning PI-RADS categories for bpMRI (report one) and mpMRI (report two). The reference standard was histopathological biopsy with Gleason scoring. Among 101 patients with suspected PCa, CsPCa was diagnosed in 45 cases using mpMRI, 39 with bpMRI, and 14 with DCE alone. The PI-RADS grading system showed strong agreement (kappa = 0.82) for bpMRI and near-perfect agreement (kappa = 0.912) for mpMRI. Sensitivity was slightly higher for mpMRI (98.4%) than bpMRI (96.7%) with (P < 0.001), while bpMRI demonstrated higher specificity (75.8% vs. 66.8%, P < 0.001) the detection rates of CsPCa for bpMRI and mpMRI were 51.50% and 53.40% respectively. The study concludes that bpMRI is non-inferior to mpMRI in CsPCa detection, making it a viable alternative while DCE remains valuable for PCa lesion detection.
References
Wang L, Lu B, He M, Wang Y, Wang Z, Du L. Prostate Cancer Incidence and Mortality: Global Status and Temporal Trends in 89 Countries From 2000 to 2019. Front Public Health 2022; 10: 811044. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.811044
Prostate cancer statistics | World Cancer Research Fund [Internet]. World Cancer Research Fund 2024. Available from: https://www.wcrf.org/preventing-cancer/cancer-statistics/prostate-cancer-statistics/
Global Cancer Facts & Figures [Internet]. www.cancer.org. Available from: https://www.cancer.org/research/cancer-facts-statistics/global-cancer-facts-and-figures.html
Nam R, Patel C, Milot L, Hird A, Wallis C, Macinnis P, Singh M, Emmenegger U, Sherman C, Haider MA. Prostate MRI versus PSA screening for prostate cancer detection (the MVP Study): a randomised clinical trial. BMJ Open 2022; 12(11): e059482. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-059482
Iacob R, Manolescu D, Stoicescu ER, Cerbu S, Bardan R, Ghenciu LA, Cumpănaș A. The Diagnostic Value of bpMRI in Prostate Cancer: Benefits and Limitations Compared to mpMRI. Bioengineering (Basel) 2024; 11(10): 1006.
Haider MA, Brown J, Chin JLK, Perlis N, Schieda N, Loblaw A. Evidence-based guideline recommendations on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer: A Cancer Care Ontario updated clinical practice guideline. Can Urol Assoc J 2022; 16(2): 16-23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.7425
Ghai S, Haider MA. Multiparametric-MRI in diagnosis of prostate cancer. Indian J Urol 2015; 31(3): 194-201. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-1591.159606
Jung M, Bogner B, Diallo TD, Kim S, Arnold P, Füllgraf H, Kurowski K, Bronsert P, Jungmann PM, Kiefer J, Kraus D, Rovedo P, Reisert M, Eisenhardt SU, Bamberg F, Benndorf M, Runkel A. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for radiation therapy response monitoring in soft tissue sarcomas: a histology and MRI co-registration algorithm. Theranostics 2023; 13(5): 1594-1606. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7150/thno.81938
Bergengren O, Pekala KR, Matsoukas K, Fainberg J, Mungovan SF, Bratt O, Bray F, Brawley O, Luckenbaugh AN, Mucci L, Morgan TM, Carlsson SV 2022 Update on Prostate Cancer Epidemiology and Risk Factors-A Systematic Review. Eur Urol 2023; 84(2): 191-206. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2023.04.021
Sanda MG, Cadeddu JA, Kirkby E, Chen RC, Crispino T, Fontanarosa J, Freedland SJ, Greene K, Klotz LH, Makarov DV, Nelson JB, Rodrigues G, Sandler HM, Taplin ME, Treadwell JR. Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO Guideline. Part I: Risk Stratification, Shared Decision Making, and Care Options. J Urol 2018; 199(3): 683-690. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.11.095
Dell'atti L. Biparametric MRI for Local Staging of Prostate Cancer: Current Status and Future Applications. Anticancer Res 2024; 44(2): 463-470. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21873/anticanres.16834
Scialpi M, D'Andrea A, Martorana E, Malaspina CM, Aisa MC, Napoletano M, Orlandi E, Rondoni V, Scialpi P, Pacchiarini D, Palladino D, Dragone M, Di Renzo G, Simeone A, Bianchi G, Brunese L. Biparametric MRI of the prostate. Turk J Urol 2017; 43(4): 401-409. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5152/tud.2017.06978
Twilt JJ, Saha A, Bosma JS, van Ginneken B, Bjartell A, Padhani AR, Bonekamp D, Villeirs G, Salomon G, Giannarini G, Kalpathy-Cramer J, Barentsz J, Maier-Hein KH, Rusu M, Rouvière O, van den Bergh R, Panebianco V, Kasivisvanathan V, Obuchowski NA, Yakar D, Elschot M, Veltman J, Fütterer JJ, Huisman H, de Rooij M; PI-CAI Consortium. Evaluating Biparametric Versus Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Diagnosing Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: An International, Paired, Noninferiority, Confirmatory Observer Study. Eur Urol 2024; S0302-2838(24)02640-X.
The Radiology Assistant: Prostate Cancer - PI-RADS v2.1 [Internet]. radiology assistant.nl. Available from: https://radiologyassistant.nl/abdomen/prostate/prostate-cancer-pi-rads-v2-1
de Rooij M, Allen C, Twilt JJ, Thijssen LCP, Asbach P, Barrett T, Brembilla G, Emberton M, Gupta RT, Haider MA, Kasivisvanathan V, Løgager V, Moore CM, Padhani AR, Panebianco V, Puech P, Purysko AS, Renard-Penna R, Richenberg J, Salomon G, Sanguedolce F, Schoots IG, Thöny HC, Turkbey B, Villeirs G, Walz J, Barentsz J, Giganti F. PI-QUAL version 2: an update of a standardised scoring system for the assessment of image quality of prostate MRI. Eur Radiol 2024; 34(11): 7068-7079. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-024-10795-4
Pesapane F, Acquasanta M, Meo RD, Agazzi GM, Tantrige P, Codari M, Schiaffino S, Patella F, Esseridou A, Sardanelli F. Comparison of Sensitivity and Specificity of Biparametric versus Multiparametric Prostate MRI in the Detection of Prostate Cancer in 431 Men with Elevated Prostate-Specific Antigen Levels. Diagnostics (Basel) 2021; 11(7): 1223. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11071223
Iacob R, Manolescu D, Stoicescu ER, Cerbu S, Bardan R, Ghenciu LA, Cumpănaș A. The Diagnostic Value of bpMRI in Prostate Cancer: Benefits and Limitations Compared to mpMRI. Bioengineering (Basel) 2024; 11(10): 1006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering11101006
Cho J, Ahn H, Hwang SI, Lee HJ, Choe G, Byun SS, Hong SK. Biparametric versus multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate: detection of clinically significant cancer in a perfect match group. Prostate Int 2020; 8(4): 146-151. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prnil.2019.12.004
Twilt JJ, Saha A, Bosma JS, van Ginneken B, Bjartell A, Padhani AR, Bonekamp D, Villeirs G, Salomon G, Giannarini G, Kalpathy-Cramer J, Barentsz J, Maier-Hein KH, Rusu M, Rouvière O, van den Bergh R, Panebianco V, Kasivisvanathan V, Obuchowski NA, Yakar D, Elschot M, Veltman J, Fütterer JJ, Huisman H, de Rooij M; PI-CAI Consortium. Evaluating Biparametric Versus Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Diagnosing Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: An International, Paired, Noninferiority, Confirmatory Observer Study. Eur Urol 2024 Oct 21: S0302-2838(24)02640-X.
Junker D, Steinkohl F, Fritz V, Bektic J, Tokas T, Aigner F, et al. Comparison of multiparametric and biparametric MRI of the prostate: are gadolinium-based contrast agents needed for routine examinations? World Journal of Urology [Internet] 2019; 37(4): 691–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-018-2428-y
Novrianto AAN, Octaviani AN. multiparametric or biparametric magnetic resonance imaging: does this affect the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer? [internet]. https://www.sciencedirect.com. Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences; 2023 [cited 2023 Oct 15]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmir.2023.06.083
Xu L, Zhang G, Shi B, Liu Y, Zou T, Yan W, Xiao Y, Xue H, Feng F, Lei J, Jin Z, Sun H. Comparison of biparametric and multiparametric MRI in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Cancer Imaging 2019; 19(1): 90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40644-019-0274-9
Tamada T, Kido A, Yamamoto A, Takeuchi M, Miyaji Y, Moriya T, Sone T. Comparison of Biparametric and Multiparametric MRI for Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Detection With PI-RADS Version 2.1. J Magn Reson Imaging 2021; 53(1): 283-291. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.27283
Görtz M, Radtke JP, Hatiboglu G, Schütz V, Tosev G, Güttlein M, Leichsenring J, Stenzinger A, Bonekamp D, Schlemmer HP, Hohenfellner M, Nyarangi-Dix JN. The Value of Prostate-specific Antigen Density for Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System 3 Lesions on Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Strategy to Avoid Unnecessary Prostate Biopsies. Eur Urol Focus 2021;7(2): 325-331. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2019.11.012
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
