摘要目的：探讨前列腺影像报告和数据系统第2版（Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2，PI-RADS v2）与调整前列腺特异性抗原密度（adjusted-Prostate-Specific Antigen Density，adjusted-PSAD）联合运用在前列腺高级别癌中的诊断价值。方法：回顾性分析2013年1月—2016年9月168例前列腺磁共振扫描的患者资料，其中高级别癌52例（Gleason评分≥7分）和非高级别癌116例（前列腺良性病变+低级别癌）。由两名观察者运用盲法分析对所有多参数磁共振图像进行PI-RADS v2评分，采用Kappa检验分析两名观察者独立对病灶PI-RADS v2评分的一致性，ROC曲线分析PI-RADS v2法（PR法）、PI-RADS v2联合前列腺特异性抗原密度（Prostate-Specific Antigen Density，PSAD）法（PP法）、PI-RADS v2联合adjusted-PSAD法（PA法）在前列腺高级别癌中的诊断价值，利用Spearman分析各参数与高级别癌Gleason评分的相关性。结果：两名观察者采用PI-RADS v2法对于高级别癌评分的一致性为中等（Kappa=0.633）；ROC曲线分析表明：三种方法中以PI-RADS v2联合adjusted-PSAD法的曲线下面积（Area under the curve，AUC）最大（P<0.05），AUC、敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值、阴性预测值分别为91%，85%、87%、75%、93%。PI-RADS v2评分与Gleason评分呈正相关（r=0.475，P=0.001）。结论：PI-RADS v2联合adjusted-PSAD法对于前列腺高级别癌的诊断价值较为理想，且PI-RADS v2评分可作为评价前列腺高级别癌侵袭性的指标。
Abstract：Objective: To evaluate the value of combing Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System(PI-RADS) scores with adjusted-Prostate Specific Antigen Density(adjusted-PSAD) in diagnosing high-grade prostate cancer(HGPCa). Methods: Magnetic resonance imaging data of 168 patients from January 2013 to August 2016 were analyzed retrospectively. According to the pathological results, the cases were divided into two groups, one was high-grade group(52 cases), the other was non-high-grade group. The concordance of PI-RADS v2 scores in two independent observers was tested by Kappa statistic. The performance of PI-RADS v2 alone and PI-RADS v2 combined with other parameters in the diagnosis of high-grade prostate cancer were assessed. Futhermore, Spearman correlation analysis was used to explore the relationship between each parameter with Gleason score. Results: The concordance of PI-RADS v2 scores in two independent observers was moderate(Kappa=0.478). The ROC curve analysis showed that the area under the curve(AUC) of PI-RADS v2 combined with adjusted-PSAD was larger(P<0.05), and AUC, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV were 91%, 85%, 87%, 75%, 93%, respectively. Furthermore, PI-RADS v2 score showed a significant positive correlation with Gleason scores of HGPCa(r=0.423, P=0.001). Conclusions: PI-RADS v2 combined with adjusted-PSAD demonstrated good accuracy in detecting HGPCa, and PI-RADS v2 score can be served for evaluating aggressiveness of HGPCa non-invasively.
李 林，牛翔科，陈志凡，蒲冰洁，彭 涛. PI-RADS v2与adjusted-PSAD联合运用对前列腺高级别癌的诊断价值分析[J]. 中国临床医学影像杂志, 2018, 29(1): 42-45.
LI Lin, NIU Xiang-ke, CHEN Zhi-fan, PU Bing-jie, PENG Tao. The value of combining PI-RADS v2 with adjusted-PSAD in diagnosis of high-grade prostate cancer. JOURNAL OF CHINA MEDICAL IMAGING, 2018, 29(1): 42-45.
[1]Hassanipour-Azgomi S, Mohammadian-Hafshejani A, Ghoncheh A, et al. Incidence and mortality of prostate cancer and their relationship with the Human Development Index worldwide[J]. Prostate Int, 2016, 4: 118-124.
[2]Woodhams S, Greenwell T. The clinical utility of measuring free-to-total prostate-specific antigen(PSA) ratio and PSA density in differentiating between benign prostatic hyperplasia and prostate cancer[J]. Br J Urol, 1998, 82: 933.
[3]Park SY, Jung DC, Oh YT, et al. Prostate Cancer: PI-RADS Version 2 Helps Preoperatively Predict Clinically Significant Cancers[J]. Radiology, 2016, 280(1): 108-116.
[4]Muller BG, Shih JH, Sankineni S, et al. Prostate Cancer: Interobserver Agreement and Accuracy with the Revised Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System at Multiparametric MR Imaging[J]. Radiology, 2015, 277(3): 741-750.
[5]Epstein JI, Egevad L, Amin MB, et al. The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology(ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma: Definition of Grading Patterns and Proposal for a New Grading System[J]. Am J Surg Pathol, 2016, 40(2): 244-252.
[6]Gordetsky J, Epstein J. Grading of prostatic adenocarcinoma: current state and prognostic implications[J]. Diagn Pathol, 2016, 11(1): 1-8.
[7]Muller BG, Shih JH, Sankineni S, et al. Prostate Cancer: Interobserver Agreement and Accuracy with the Revised Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System at Multiparametric MR Imaging[J]. Radiology, 2015, 277(3): 741-750.
[8]Partin AW, Carter HB, Chan DW, et al. Prostate specific antigen in the staging of localized prostate cancer: influence of tumor differentiation, tumor volume and benign hyperplasia[J]. J Urol, 1990, 143(4): 747-752.
[9]Benson ML, Whang IS, Pantuck A, et al. Prostate specific antigen density a means of distinguishing benign prostatic hypertrophy and prostate cancer[J]. J Urol, 1992, 147: 815.
[10]Paterson NR, Lavallée LT, Nguyen LN, et al. Prostate volume estimations using magnetic resonance imaging and transrectal ultrasound compared to radical prostatectomy specimens[J]. Can Urol Assoc J, 2016, 10(7-8): 264.
[11]Kasel-Seibert M, Lehmann T, Aschenbach R, et al. Assessment of PI-RADS v2 for the Detection of Prostate Cancer[J]. Eur J Radiol, 2016, 85(4): 726-731.
[12]Zhao C, Gao G, Fang D, et al. The efficiency of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging(mpMRI) using PI-RADS Version 2 in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer[J]. Clin Imaging, 2016, 40(5): 885-888.
[13]Lin WC, Westphalen AC, Silva GE, et al. Comparison of PI-RADS 2, ADC histogram-derived parameters, and their combination for the diagnosis of peripheral zone prostate cancer[J]. Abdom Radiol, 2016, 41(11): 1-9.
[14]Chung MP, Margolis D, Mesko S, et al. Correlation of quantitative diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI parameters with prognostic factors in prostate cancer[J]. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol, 2014, 58(5): 588.
[15]Inés BP, Lía BG, Javier SF. Association between gleason score, psa level, PSAD and prostate volume, in a series of patients with prostate adenocarcinoma[J]. Revista Ciencias Biomédicas, 2012, 3(1): 58-68.
2018, Vol. 29 
