Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Jan;121(1):77-83.
doi: 10.1111/bju.13972. Epub 2017 Aug 16.

Diagnostic accuracy of a five-point Likert scoring system for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) evaluated according to results of MRI/ultrasonography image-fusion targeted biopsy of the prostate

Toshitaka Shin  1   2 , Thomas B Smyth  3 , Osamu Ukimura  1   4 , Nariman Ahmadi  1 , Andre Luis de Castro Abreu  1 , Chisato Ohe  1 , Masakatsu Oishi  1 , Hiromitsu Mimata  2 , Inderbir S Gill  1
Affiliations

Diagnostic accuracy of a five-point Likert scoring system for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) evaluated according to results of MRI/ultrasonography image-fusion targeted biopsy of the prostate

Toshitaka Shin et al. BJU Int. 2018 Jan.

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the accuracy of a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based Likert scoring system in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (CSPC), using MRI/ultrasonography (US) image-fusion targeted biopsy (FTB) as a reference standard.

Patients and methods: We retrospectively reviewed 1218 MRI-detected lesions in 629 patients who underwent subsequent MRI/US FTB between October 2012 and August 2015. 3-Tesla MRI was independently reported by one of eight radiologists with varying levels of experience and scored on a five-point Likert scale. All lesions with Likert scores 1-5 were prospectively defined as targets for MRI/US FTB. CSPC was defined as Gleason score ≥7.

Results: The median patient age was 64 years, PSA level 6.97 ng/mL and estimated prostate volume 52.2 mL. Of 1218 lesions, 48% (n = 581) were rated as Likert 1-2, 35% (n = 428) were Likert 3 and 17% (n = 209) were Likert 4-5. For Likert scores 1-5, the overall cancer detection rates were 12%, 13%, 22%, 50% and 59%, respectively, and the CSPC detection rates were 4%, 4%, 12%, 33% and 48%, respectively. Grading using the five-point scale showed strong positive correlation with overall cancer detection rate (r = 0.949, P = 0.05) and CSPC detection rate (r = 0.944, P = 0.05). By comparison, in Likert 4-5 lesions, significant differences were noted in overall cancer detection rate (63% vs 35%; P = 0.001) and CSPC detection rate (47% vs 29%; P = 0.027) for the more experienced vs the less experienced radiologists.

Conclusions: The detection rates of overall cancer and CSPC strongly correlated with the five-point grading of the Likert scale. Among radiologists with different levels of experience, there were significant differences in these cancer detection rates.

Keywords: Likert scoring system; MRI/US image fusion; magnetic resonance imaging; prostate cancer; targeted biopsy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Schematic tree of study cohort.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Likert scores of 1218 lesions on MRI.
Figure 3 (A)
Figure 3 (A)
Overall cancer detection rate. Grading of a 5-point Likert scale on MRI showed strong positive correlation with overall cancer detection rate (r=0.949, p=0.05).
Figure 3 (B)
Figure 3 (B)
Clinically significant cancer detection rate. Grading of a 5-point Likert scale on MRI showed strong positive correlation with clinically significant cancer detection rate (r=0.944, p=0.05).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Fütterer JJ, Briganti A, De Visschere P et al. Can Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Be Detected with Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging? A Systematic Review of the Literature. Eur Urol 2015; 68: 1045–53. - PubMed
    1. Dickinson L,Ahmed HU,Allen C 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. - PubMed
    1. Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012 Eur Radiol 2012; 22: 746–57. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Dickinson L,Ahmed HU,Allen C et al. Magnetic resonance imaging for the detection, localisation, and characterisation of prostate cancer: recommendations from a European consensus meeting. Eur Urol 2011; 59: 477–94. - PubMed
    1. Siddiqui MM,Rais-Bahrami S,Turkbey B et al. Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. JAMA 2015; 313: 390–7. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types