PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
June 4, 2026European Urology Oncology1 citationsOpen Access

MRI Quality and Reader Experience in Organized Prostate Cancer Screening: Insights from the PROBASE Trial

MBMatthias BoschheidgenRARouvier Al-MonajjedHSHeinz-Peter Schlemmer

Key Points

  • This study aims to assess how MRI quality and expert reading affect the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer.
  • Analyzed data from 516 participants who underwent multiparametric MRI and biopsies after PSA screening.
  • Compared local Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System scores with expert reference readings by uroradiologists.
  • Assessed MRI quality using Prostate Imaging Quality scoring and calculated detection rates, PPV, and NPV.
  • Reference reading improved NPV to 92% from 86% and PPV to 57% from 50%.
  • Local reading missed 17.1% of clinically significant PCa compared to 2.9% for expert reading.
  • Lower MRI quality correlated with reduced detections (46% vs 62%) and lower true negative rates (84% vs 95%).

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The diagnostic performance of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) critically depends on image quality and reader expertise. The PROBASE trial is a prospective population- and prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based prostate cancer (PCa) screening study enrolling men aged 45 yr. OBJECTIVE: In this predefined substudy, we evaluated the impact of MRI quality and expert reference reading on clinically significant PCa (csPCa; International Society of Urological Pathology grade ≥2) detection. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This analysis included 516 participants who underwent multiparametric MRI and combined MRI-targeted biopsy and systematic biopsy after screening with PSA ≥3 ng/ml. Local Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) scores were compared with reference readings by experienced uroradiologists. MRI quality was assessed using Prostate Imaging Quality (version 1; PI-QUAL v1). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Detection rates, positive predictive values (PPV), and negative predictive values (NPV) were calculated at an underlying biopsy threshold of PI-RADS score of ≥4. Image quality was compared between the study sites. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Reference reading yielded higher NPV (92% vs 86%), PPV (57% vs 50%), and sensitivity (83% vs 69%) than local reading. Local reading missed substantially more csPCa in PI-RADS 1-2 (17.1% vs 2.9%) and resulted in more false-positive MRI findings in PI-RADS 4-5 (n = 76 vs n = 59) than reference reading. Lower MRI quality (PI-QUAL 1-3/5) was associated with reduced csPCa detection (46% vs 62%) and true negative rate (84% vs 95%). PI-QUAL differed between the study sites. PI-RADS classification of reference reading missed small or diffusely infiltrative csPCa, often in lower quality scans. Limitations include using local interpretations to define biopsy targets, limiting retrospective comparison, and possibly underestimating reference-reader performance. CONCLUSIONS: Expert reference MRI reading substantially improves csPCa detection and can reduce unnecessary biopsies in a screening setting. High-quality imaging, standardized protocols, and experienced reading should be considered essential components of future MRI-based screening strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered with the ISRCTN (International Randomized Controlled Trial Number) registry, registration number ISRCTN37591328, and can be accessed at https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN37591328. The study protocol can be accessed at doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.05.022.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Boschheidgen et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a2115bdd499ed480b16ebaehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2026.05.003
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Results after Four Years of Screening for Prostate Cancer with PSA and MRI2024 · 114 citations
  2. 2Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Prostate Cancer Screening at the Age of 45 Years: Results from the First Screening Round of the PROBASE Trial2023 · 53 citations
  3. 3A Paradigm Shift Toward Population-Based MRI-Targeted Prostate Cancer Screening2025 · 8 citations
  4. 4MRI-Targeted or Standard Biopsy for Prostate-Cancer Diagnosis2018 · 3,086 citations
  5. 5Increase in Cancer Detection and Recall Rates with Independent Double Interpretation of Screening Mammography2003 · 102 citations