Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 19, 2025

Use of MRI-ultrasound Fusion to Achieve Targeted Prostate Biopsy
Published on: April 9, 2019
Prostagram magnetic resonance imaging in a screening population: Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System or
Nikhil Mayor1,2, David Eldred-Evans1,2, Henry Tam3
1Imperial Prostate, Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.
The Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADSv2) and Likert scale showed similar accuracy for detecting prostate cancer in screening MRI. However, the Likert scale led to more biopsies without detecting more significant cancers.
Area of Science:
- Radiology
- Oncology
- Medical Imaging
Background:
- Prostate cancer screening aims to detect malignancies early.
- Accurate interpretation of MRI scans is crucial for guiding biopsy decisions.
- The Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADSv2) and Likert scale are used for reporting prostate MRI findings.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the biopsy recommendation rates and diagnostic accuracy of PI-RADSv2 and the Likert scale for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer.
- To evaluate the performance of these scoring systems in a prostate cancer screening population.
Main Methods:
- 406 men aged 50-69 years underwent non-contrast-enhanced Prostagram MRI as part of a screening trial.
- Scans were reported using PI-RADSv2 (excluding dynamic contrast-enhanced sequence score) and a 5-point Likert scale.
- Biopsies were recommended for scores ≥3; detection rates for Grade Groups (GGs) 1 and ≥2 were compared.
- Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to assess accuracy.
Main Results:
- More patients were recommended for biopsy using the Likert scale (23%) compared to PI-RADSv2 (18%) at a score threshold of ≥3 (P=0.03).
- At a score threshold of ≥4, biopsy recommendations were similar (Likert 9% vs. PI-RADSv2 11%; P=0.40).
- Detection rates for significant cancer (GG ≥2) and insignificant cancer (GG1) were comparable between the two systems (P>0.50).
- The accuracy (area under ROC curve) was similar for both PI-RADSv2 (0.64) and Likert scale (0.65) (P=0.95).
Conclusions:
- PI-RADSv2 and the Likert scale demonstrate similar accuracy for non-contrast-enhanced Prostagram MRI in prostate cancer screening.
- The Likert scale resulted in a higher proportion of men being recommended for biopsy without a corresponding increase in significant cancer detection.
- Development of an improved scoring system, potentially a modified Likert or standalone system, is warranted for enhanced Prostagram MRI reporting.
More Related Videos
06:08A Cognitive Fusion-guided Prostate Biopsy Using Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Transrectal Ultrasound
Published on: March 21, 2025
05:49Use of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Biopsy Data to Guide Sampling Procedures for Prostate Cancer Biobanking
Published on: October 10, 2019
Related Concept Videos
Imaging Studies IV: Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Positron Emission Tomography
One of the main requirements of a PET scan is a positron-emitting radioisotope, which is produced in a cyclotron and then attached to a substance used by the part of the body...
Imaging Studies II: Positron Emission Tomography and Scintigraphy
Fundamental Principles of PET