REFERENCE LIST:
1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2019: {Cancer}
{Statistics}, 2019. CA Cancer J Clin . 2019;69(1):7-34.
doi:10.3322/caac.21551
2. Johnson LM, Turkbey B, Figg WD, Choyke PL. Multiparametric MRI in
prostate cancer management. Nat Rev Clin Oncol .
2014;11(6):346-353. doi:10.1038/nrclinonc.2014.69
3. Drost FJH, Rannikko A, Valdagni R, et al. Can active surveillance
really reduce the harms of overdiagnosing prostate cancer? A reflection
of real life clinical practice in the PRIAS study. Transl Androl
Urol . 2018;7(1):98-105. doi:10.21037/tau.2017.12.28
4. Dinh AH, Melodelima C, Souchon R, et al. Quantitative analysis of
prostate multiparametric MR images for detection of aggressive prostate
cancer in the peripheral zone: A multiple imager study.Radiology . 2016;280(1):117-127. doi:10.1148/radiol.2016151406
5. Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R, et al. ESUR prostate MR
guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol . 2012;22(4):746-757.
doi:10.1007/s00330-011-2377-y
6. Mottet N, Bergh RCN Van Den, Vice-chair PC, et al.
EAU-ESUR-ESTRO-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer/ Guias Europeas.Eur Assoc Urol 2018 . 2018:1-145.
http://uroweb.org/guidelines/compilations-of-all-guidelines/.
7. ACR. Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS). Am
Coll Radiol . 2015.
https://www.acr.org/-/media/ACR/Files/RADS/Pi-RADS/PIRADS-V2.pdf?la=en.
8. Richenberg JL. PI-RADS: Past, present and future. Clin Radiol .
2016;71(1):23-24. doi:10.1016/j.crad.2015.10.019
9. PI-RADS. PI-RADS v2.1 - ACR. 2019.
10. Epstein JI, Zelefsky MJ, Sjoberg DD, et al. A Contemporary Prostate
Cancer Grading System: A Validated Alternative to the Gleason Score.Eur Urol . 2016. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.046
11. Jue JS, Barboza MP, Prakash NS, et al. Re-examining
Prostate-specific Antigen (PSA) Density: Defining the Optimal PSA Range
and Patients for Using PSA Density to Predict Prostate Cancer Using
Extended Template Biopsy. Urology . 2017.
doi:10.1016/j.urology.2017.04.015
12. Al-Khalil S, Ibilibor C, Cammack JT, de Riese W. Association of
prostate volume with incidence and aggressiveness of prostate cancer.Res Reports Urol . 2016. doi:10.2147/RRU.S117963
13. Tang P, Jin XL, Uhlman M, et al. Prostate volume as an independent
predictor of prostate cancer in men with PSA of 10-50 ng ml -1.Asian J Androl . 2013. doi:10.1038/aja.2013.11
14. Haas GP, Delongchamps N, Brawley OW, Wang CY, de la Roza G. The
worldwide epidemiology of prostate cancer: perspectives from autopsy
studies. Can J Urol . 2008.
15. Droz JP, Balducci L, Bolla M, et al. Management of prostate cancer
in older men: Recommendations of a working group of the International
Society of Geriatric Oncology. BJU Int . 2010.
doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09334.x
16. Ahmed HU, El-Shater Bosaily A, Brown LC, et al. Diagnostic accuracy
of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a
paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet . 2017.
doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32401-1
17. Grey ADR, Chana MS, Popert R, Wolfe K, Liyanage SH, Acher PL.
Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) prostate imaging
reporting and data system (PI-RADS) scoring in a transperineal prostate
biopsy setting. BJU Int . 2015. doi:10.1111/bju.12862
18. Abd-Alazeez M, Kirkham A, Ahmed HU, et al. Performance of
multiparametric MRI in men at risk of prostate cancer before the first
biopsy: A paired validating cohort study using template prostate mapping
biopsies as the reference standard. Prostate Cancer Prostatic
Dis . 2014. doi:10.1038/pcan.2013.43
19. Thompson JE, Moses D, Shnier R, et al. Multiparametric magnetic
resonance imaging guided diagnostic biopsy detects significant prostate
cancer and could reduce unnecessary biopsies and over detection: A
prospective study. J Urol . 2014. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2014.01.014
20. Zhang L, Tang M, Chen S, Lei X, Zhang X, Huan Y. A meta-analysis of
use of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 (PI-RADS V2)
with multiparametric MR imaging for the detection of prostate cancer.Eur Radiol . 2017. doi:10.1007/s00330-017-4843-7
21. Woo S, Suh CH, Kim SY, Cho JY, Kim SH. Diagnostic Performance of
Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 for Detection of
Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Diagnostic Meta-analysis.Eur Urol . 2017. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2017.01.042
22. Venderink W, van Luijtelaar A, Bomers JGR, et al. Results of
Targeted Biopsy in Men with Magnetic Resonance Imaging Lesions
Classified Equivocal, Likely or Highly Likely to Be Clinically
Significant Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol . 2018.
doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2017.02.021
23. Mathur S, O’Malley ME, Ghai S, et al. Correlation of 3T
multiparametric prostate MRI using prostate imaging reporting and data
system (PIRADS) version 2 with biopsy as reference standard. Abdom
Radiol . 2019;44(1):252-258. doi:10.1007/s00261-018-1696-8
24. Mehralivand S, Bednarova S, Shih JH, et al. Prospective Evaluation
of PI-RADSTM Version 2 Using the International Society
of Urological Pathology Prostate Cancer Grade Group System. J
Urol . 2017;198(3):583-590. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2017.03.131
25. Yang S, Zhao W, Tan S, et al. Combining clinical and MRI data to
manage PI-RADS 3 lesions and reduce excessive biopsy. Transl
Androl Urol . 2020;9(3):1252-1261. doi:10.21037/tau-19-755
26. Walker SM, Mehralivand S, Harmon SA, et al. Prospective Evaluation
of PI-RADS Version 2.1 for Prostate Cancer Detection. Am J
Roentgenol . 2020;215(5):1098-1103. doi:10.2214/ajr.19.22679
27. Wysock JS, Mendhiratta N, Zattoni F, et al. Predictive value of
negative 3T multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate
on 12-core biopsy results. BJU Int . 2016. doi:10.1111/bju.13427
28. Pokorny MR, De Rooij M, Duncan E, et al. Prospective study of
diagnostic accuracy comparing prostate cancer detection by transrectal
ultrasound-guided biopsy versus magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with
subsequent mr-guided biopsy in men without previous prostate biopsies.Eur Urol . 2014. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2014.03.002
29. Itatani R, Namimoto T, Atsuji S, et al. Negative predictive value of
multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer detection: outcome of 5-year
follow-up in men with negative findings on initial MRI studies.Eur J Radiol . 2014. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.06.026
30. Chen Z, Zheng Y, Ji G, et al. Accuracy of dynamic contrast-enhanced
magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer:
Systematic review and meta-analysis. Oncotarget . 2017.
doi:10.18632/oncotarget.20316
31. Rudolph MM, Baur ADJ, Cash H, et al. Diagnostic performance of
PI-RADS version 2.1 compared to version 2.0 for detection of peripheral
and transition zone prostate cancer. Sci Rep . 2020;10(1):1-10.
doi:10.1038/s41598-020-72544-z
32. Benndorf M, Hahn F, Krönig M, et al. Diagnostic performance and
reproducibility of T2w based and diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) based
PI-RADSv2 lexicon descriptors for prostate MRI. Eur J Radiol .
2017. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2017.05.015
33. Greer MD, Shih JH, Barrett T, et al. All over the map: An
interobserver agreement study of tumor location based on the PI-RADSv2
sector map. J Magn Reson Imaging . 2018. doi:10.1002/jmri.25948
34. Sonn G, Fan R, Ghanouni P, et al. Prostate Magnetic Resonance
Imaging Interpretation Varies Substantially Across Radiologists.Eur Urol Focus . 2017;5. doi:10.1016/j.euf.2017.11.010
35. Popita C, Popita AR, Andrei A, et al. Interobserver agreement in
prostate cancer detection using multiparametric MRI. J BUON .
2018;23(4):1061-1069.
36. Purysko AS, Bittencourt LK, Bullen JA, Mostardeiro TR, Herts BR,
Klein EA. Accuracy and interobserver agreement for prostate imaging
reporting and data system, version 2, for the characterization of
lesions identified on multiparametric MRI of the prostate. Am J
Roentgenol . 2017;209(2):339-345. doi:10.2214/AJR.16.17289
37. Smith CP, Harmon SA, Barrett T, et al. Intra- and interreader
reproducibility of PI-RADSv2: A multireader study. J Magn Reson
Imaging . 2019. doi:10.1002/jmri.26555
38. Brown AM, Elbuluk O, Mertan F, et al. Recent advances in
image-guided targeted prostate biopsy. Abdom Imaging .
2015;40(6):1788-1799. doi:10.1007/s00261-015-0353-8