User login
Key clinical point: No significant difference was noted in high b-value 3.0 T biparametric magnetic resonance with the Simplified Prostate Image Reporting and Data System (S-PI-RADS) compared with standard PI-RADS in biopsy-naïve men.
Major finding: The area under the curve values of these two methods for detecting prostate cancer were 0.905 and 0.892, respectively, and the AUC values for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer were 0.919 and 0.906, respectively.
Study details: The data come from a retrospective study of 224 adult men who underwent prostate cancer biopsy after imaging by two different radiologists, using the multi-parameter magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) with the prostate imaging report and data system version 2 (PI-RADS v2), and biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bp-MRI) with the simplified prostate image reporting and data system (S-PI-RADS).
Disclosures: The study was supported by Key R & D Project of Hainan Province. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.
Source: Wang G et al. Clin Imaging. 2021 Jun 29. doi: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2021.06.024.
Key clinical point: No significant difference was noted in high b-value 3.0 T biparametric magnetic resonance with the Simplified Prostate Image Reporting and Data System (S-PI-RADS) compared with standard PI-RADS in biopsy-naïve men.
Major finding: The area under the curve values of these two methods for detecting prostate cancer were 0.905 and 0.892, respectively, and the AUC values for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer were 0.919 and 0.906, respectively.
Study details: The data come from a retrospective study of 224 adult men who underwent prostate cancer biopsy after imaging by two different radiologists, using the multi-parameter magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) with the prostate imaging report and data system version 2 (PI-RADS v2), and biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bp-MRI) with the simplified prostate image reporting and data system (S-PI-RADS).
Disclosures: The study was supported by Key R & D Project of Hainan Province. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.
Source: Wang G et al. Clin Imaging. 2021 Jun 29. doi: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2021.06.024.
Key clinical point: No significant difference was noted in high b-value 3.0 T biparametric magnetic resonance with the Simplified Prostate Image Reporting and Data System (S-PI-RADS) compared with standard PI-RADS in biopsy-naïve men.
Major finding: The area under the curve values of these two methods for detecting prostate cancer were 0.905 and 0.892, respectively, and the AUC values for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer were 0.919 and 0.906, respectively.
Study details: The data come from a retrospective study of 224 adult men who underwent prostate cancer biopsy after imaging by two different radiologists, using the multi-parameter magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) with the prostate imaging report and data system version 2 (PI-RADS v2), and biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bp-MRI) with the simplified prostate image reporting and data system (S-PI-RADS).
Disclosures: The study was supported by Key R & D Project of Hainan Province. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.
Source: Wang G et al. Clin Imaging. 2021 Jun 29. doi: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2021.06.024.