The significance of PI-RADS v2.1 score combined with quantitative parameters of DWI and DCE-MRI in differentiating between benign prostatic hyperplasia and prostate cancer

This study investigates the efficacy of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2.1 (PI-RADS v2.1) score combined with quantitative metrics from Diffusion Weighted Imaging (DWI) and Dynamic Contrast Enhancement Magnetic Resonance Imaging (DCE-MRI) in differentiating between benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and prostate cancer (PCa). The data of 65 patients with prostate diseases were retrospectively analyzed, and they were divided into a BPH group (n = 34) and a PCa group (n = 31). All patients underwent a multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) examination, which included conventional MRI, DWI and DCE-MRI scans. Variables analyzed included the PI-RADS v2.1 score, apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), volume transfer constant (Ktrans), rate constant (Kep) and extravascular space volume ratio (Ve). The diagnostic performance of the PI-RADS v2.1 score, DWI, DCE-MRI and their combined metrics in differentiating BPH from PCa was assessed using Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. The results demonstrated that the PI-RADS v2.1 scores, Ktrans and Kep values of the PCa group were significantly higher than those of the BPH group (p < 0.001), while the ADC value of the PCa group was significantly lower than the BPH group (p < 0.001). No significant difference was observed in the Ve value between the two groups (p = 0.596). ROC analysis indicated that the area under the curve (AUC) values for the PI-RADS v2.1 score, ADC, Ktrans, Kep, Ve and their combination parameters were 0.824, 0.916, 0.903, 0.904, 0.625 and 0.990, respectively, with the combined parameters showing higher sensitivity and specificity than any single parameter. These findings suggest that the PI-RADS v2.1 score, along with DWI and DCE-MRI sequences, are valuable tools for differentiating BPH from PCa. The quantitative parameters, including ADC, Ktrans and Kep values, offer significant imaging references for clinical assessment, and the combination parameters can significantly enhance diagnostic accuracy.

Magnetic resonance imaging; Diffusion weighted imaging; Dynamic contrast enhancement; Benign prostatic hyperplasia; Prostate cancer

[1] Siegel RL, Giaquinto AN, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2024. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians. 2024; 74: 12–49.

[2] Xia C, Dong X, Li H, Cao M, Sun D, He S, et al. Cancer statistics in China and United States, 2022: profiles, trends, and determinants. Chinese Medical Journal. 2022; 135: 584–590.

[3] Chiong E, Saad M, Hamid ARAH, Ong-Cornel AB, Lojanapiwat B, Pripatnanont C, et al. Prostate cancer management in Southeast Asian countries: a survey of clinical practice patterns. Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology. 2024; 16: 17588359231216582.

[4] Padhani AR, Barentsz J, Villeirs G, Rosenkrantz AB, Margolis DJ, Turkbey B, et al. PI-RADS steering committee: the PI-RADS multiparametric MRI and MRI-directed biopsy pathway. Radiology. 2019; 292: 464–474.

[5] Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R, Choyke P, Verma S, Villeirs G, et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. European Radiology. 2012; 22: 746–757.

[6] Turkbey B, Rosenkrantz AB, Haider MA, Padhani AR, Villeirs G, Macura KJ, et al. Prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2.1: 2019 update of prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2. European Urology. 2019; 76: 340–351.

[7] Arita Y, Yoshida S, Waseda Y, Takahara T, Ishii C, Ueda R, et al. Diagnostic value of computed high b-value whole-body diffusion-weighted imaging for primary prostate cancer. European Journal of Radiology. 2021; 137: 109581.

[8] Meyer H, Wienke A, Surov A. Can dynamic contrast enhanced MRI predict Gleason score in prostate cancer? A systematic review and meta analysis. Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations. 2021; 39: 784.e17–784.e25.

[9] Karaca L, Özdemir ZM, Kahraman A, Çelik H, Kaya S. Assessment of quantitative zonal parameters of prostate gland in discrimination of normal, benign, and malignant conditions: are these the more reliable parameters in the diagnosis of prostate cancer? European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences. 2023; 27: 11122–11130.

[10] Oseni SO, Naar C, Pavlović M, Asghar W, Hartmann JX, Fields GB, et al. The molecular basis and clinical consequences of chronic inflammation in prostatic diseases: prostatitis, benign prostatic hyperplasia, and prostate cancer. Cancers. 2023; 15: 3110.

[11] Rebello RJ, Oing C, Knudsen KE, Loeb S, Johnson DC, Reiter RE, et al. Prostate cancer. Nature Reviews Disease Primers. 2021; 7: 9.

[12] Rouvière O, Puech P, Renard-Penna R, Claudon M, Roy C, Mège-Lechevallier F, et al. Use of prostate systematic and targeted biopsy on the basis of multiparametric MRI in biopsy-naive patients (MRI-FIRST): a prospective, multicentre, paired diagnostic study. The Lancet Oncology. 2019; 20: 100–109.

[13] Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL, Cornud F, Haider MA, Macura KJ, et al. PI-RADS prostate imaging—reporting and data system: 2015, version 2. European Urology. 2016; 69: 16–40.

[14] Li M, Yang L, Yue Y, Xu J, Huang C, Song B. Use of radiomics to improve diagnostic performance of PI-RADS v2.1 in prostate cancer. Frontiers in Oncology. 2020; 10: 631831.

[15] Duenweg SR, Bobholz SA, Barrett MJ, Lowman AK, Winiarz A, Nath B, et al. T2-weighted MRI radiomic features predict prostate cancer presence and eventual biochemical recurrence. Cancers. 2023; 15: 4437.

[16] Franco PN, Frade-Santos S, García-Baizán A, Paredes-Velázquez L, Aymerich M, Sironi S, et al. An MRI assessment of prostate cancer local recurrence using the PI-RR system: diagnostic accuracy, inter-observer reliability among readers with variable experience, and correlation with PSA values. European Radiology. 2024; 34: 1790–1803.

[17] Nicoletti G, Mazzetti S, Maimone G, Cignini V, Cuocolo R, Faletti R, et al. Development and validation of an explainable radiomics model to predict high-aggressive prostate cancer: a multicenter radiomics study based on biparametric MRI. Cancers. 2024; 16: 203.

[18] Guo Z, Qin X, Mu R, Lv J, Meng Z, Zheng W, et al. Amide proton transfer could provide more accurate lesion characterization in the transition zone of the prostate. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging. 2022; 56: 1311–1319.

[19] Tamada T, Kido A, Ueda Y, Takeuchi M, Fukunaga T, Sone T, et al. Clinical impact of ultra-high b-value (3000 s/mm2) diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer at 3T: comparison with b-value of 2000 s/mm2. The British Journal of Radiology. 2022; 95: 20210465.

[20] Brembilla G, Giganti F, Sidhu H, Imbriaco M, Mallett S, Stabile A, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of abbreviated bi-parametric MRI (a-bpMRI) for prostate cancer detection and screening: a multi-reader study. Diagnostics. 2022; 12: 231.

[21] Tsuruta C, Hirata K, Kudo K, Masumori N, Hatakenaka M. DWI-related texture analysis for prostate cancer: differences in correlation with histological aggressiveness and data repeatability between peripheral and transition zones. European Radiology Experimental. 2022; 6: 1.

[22] Messina E, Pecoraro M, Laschena L, Bicchetti M, Proietti F, Ciardi A, et al. Low cancer yield in PI-RADS 3 upgraded to 4 by dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: is it time to reconsider scoring categorization? European Radiology. 2023; 33: 5828–5839.

[23] Tavakoli AA, Hielscher T, Badura P, Görtz M, Kuder TA, Gnirs R, et al. Contribution of dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion MRI to PI-RADS for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer. Radiology. 2023; 306: 186–199.

[24] Iyama Y, Nakaura T, Katahira K, Iyama A, Nagayama Y, Oda S, et al. Development and validation of a logistic regression model to distinguish transition zone cancers from benign prostatic hyperplasia on multi-parametric prostate MRI. European Radiology. 2017; 27: 3600–3608.

[25] Dinis Fernandes C, van Houdt PJ, Heijmink SWTPJ, Walraven I, Keesman R, Smolic M, et al. Quantitative 3T multiparametric MRI of benign and malignant prostatic tissue in patients with and without local recurrent prostate cancer after external-beam radiation therapy. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging. 2019; 50: 269–278.

[26] Sun H, Du F, Liu Y, Li Q, Liu X, Wang T. DCE-MRI and DWI can differentiate benign from malignant prostate tumors when serum PSA is ≥10 ng/mL. Frontiers in Oncology. 2022; 12: 925186.

[27] Winkel DJ, Heye TJ, Benz MR, Glessgen CG, Wetterauer C, Bubendorf L, et al. Compressed sensing radial sampling MRI of prostate perfusion: utility for detection of prostate cancer. Radiology. 2019; 290: 702–708.

[28] Børretzen A, Reisæter LAR, Ringheim A, Gravdal K, Haukaas SA, Fasmer KE, et al. Microvascular proliferation is associated with high tumour blood flow by mpMRI and disease progression in primary prostate cancer. Scientific Reports. 2023; 13: 17949.

[29] Uysal A, Karaosmanoğlu AD, Karcaaltıncaba M, Akata D, Akdogan B, Baydar DE, et al. Prostatitis, the great mimicker of prostate cancer: can we differentiate them quantitatively with multiparametric MRI? American Journal of Roentgenology. 2020; 215: 1104–1112.

[30] Chen T, Zhang Z, Tan S, Zhang Y, Wei C, Wang S, et al. MRI based radiomics compared with the PI-RADS V2.1 in the prediction of clinically significant prostate cancer: biparametric vs multiparametric MRI. Frontiers in Oncology. 2021; 11: 792456.

[31] Rapisarda S, Bada M, Crocetto F, Barone B, Arcaniolo D, Polara A, et al. The role of multiparametric resonance and biopsy in prostate cancer detection: comparison with definitive histological report after laparoscopic/robotic radical prostatectomy. Abdominal Radiology. 2020; 45: 4178–4184.

[32] Gentile F, La Civita E, Della Ventura B, Ferro M, Cennamo M, Bruzzese D, et al. A combinatorial neural network analysis reveals a synergistic behaviour of multiparametric magnetic resonance and prostate health index in the identification of clinically significant prostate cancer. Clinical Genitourinary Cancer. 2022; 20: e406–e410.