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
. 2023 May 8;14(1):77.
doi: 10.1186/s13244-023-01422-9.

Imaging features of the PI-RADS for predicting extraprostatic extension of prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis

Moon Hyung Choi  1 , Dong Hwan Kim  2 , Young Joon Lee  1 , Sung Eun Rha  3 , Ji Youl Lee  4
Affiliations

Imaging features of the PI-RADS for predicting extraprostatic extension of prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis

Moon Hyung Choi et al. Insights Imaging. .

Abstract

Objectives: To systematically determine the diagnostic performance of each MRI feature of the PI-RADS for predicting extraprostatic extension (EPE) in prostate cancer.

Methods: A literature search in the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases was conducted to identify original studies reporting the accuracy of each feature on MRI for the dichotomous diagnosis of EPE. The meta-analytic pooled diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), sensitivity, specificity, and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were obtained using a bivariate random-effects model.

Results: After screening 1955 studies, 17 studies with a total of 3062 men were included. All six imaging features, i.e., bulging prostatic contour, irregular or spiculated margin, asymmetry or invasion of neurovascular bundle, obliteration of rectoprostatic angle, tumor-capsule interface > 10 mm, and breach of the capsule with evidence of direct tumor extension, were significantly associated with EPE. Breach of the capsule with direct tumor extension demonstrated the highest pooled DOR (15.6, 95% CI [7.7-31.5]) followed by tumor-capsule interface > 10 mm (10.5 [5.4-20.2]), asymmetry or invasion of neurovascular bundle (7.6 [3.8-15.2]), and obliteration of rectoprostatic angle (6.1 [3.8-9.8]). Irregular or spiculated margin showed the lowest pooled DOR (2.3 [1.3-4.2]). Breach of the capsule with direct tumor extension and tumor-capsule interface > 10 mm showed the highest pooled specificity (98.0% [96.2-99.0]) and sensitivity (86.3% [70.0-94.4]), respectively.

Conclusions: Among the six MRI features of prostate cancer, breach of the capsule with direct tumor extension and tumor-capsule interface > 10 mm were the most predictive of EPE with the highest specificity and sensitivity, respectively.

Keywords: Magnetic resonance imaging; Meta-analysis; Neoplasm staging; Prostatic neoplasms; Systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow diagram of the study selection process
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Forest plots of the diagnostic odds ratios of (a) bulging prostatic contour, (b) irregular or spiculated margin, (c) asymmetry or invasion of the neurovascular bundle, (d) obliteration of the rectoprostatic angle, (e) tumor-capsule interface > 10 mm, and (f) breach of the capsule with evidence of direct tumor extension for EPE of prostate cancer
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
QUADAS-2 assessment. The methodological quality distribution of the articles is presented as the proportions of articles (0–100%) regarding risk of bias and concerns of applicability (low, high, or unclear) for each domain
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71:209–249. doi: 10.3322/caac.21660. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Rawla P. Epidemiology of prostate cancer. World J Oncol. 2019;10:63–89. doi: 10.14740/wjon1191. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Epstein JI, Zelefsky MJ, Sjoberg DD, et al. A contemporary prostate cancer grading system: a validated alternative to the Gleason score. Eur Urol. 2016;69:428–435. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.046. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Leapman MS, Cowan JE, Simko J, et al. Application of a prognostic Gleason grade grouping system to assess distant prostate cancer outcomes. Eur Urol. 2017;71:750–759. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.11.032. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sandhu S, Moore CM, Chiong E, Beltran H, Bristow RG, Williams SG. Prostate cancer. Lancet. 2021;398:1075–1090. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00950-8. - DOI - PubMed