TY - JOUR
T1 - Standards of reporting for MRI-targeted biopsy studies (START) of the prostate
T2 - Recommendations from an international working group
AU - Moore, Caroline M.
AU - Kasivisvanathan, Veeru
AU - Eggener, Scott
AU - Emberton, Mark
AU - Fütterer, Jurgen J.
AU - Gill, Inderbir S.
AU - Grubb, Robert L.
AU - Hadaschik, Boris
AU - Klotz, Laurence
AU - Margolis, Daniel J.A.
AU - Marks, Leonard S.
AU - Melamed, Jonathan
AU - Oto, Aytekin
AU - Palmer, Suzanne L.
AU - Pinto, Peter
AU - Puech, Philippe
AU - Punwani, Shonit
AU - Rosenkrantz, Andrew B.
AU - Schoots, Ivo G.
AU - Simon, Richard
AU - Taneja, Samir S.
AU - Turkbey, Baris
AU - Ukimura, Osamu
AU - Van Der Meulen, Jan
AU - Villers, Arnauld
AU - Watanabe, Yuji
N1 - Funding Information:
Funding/Support and role of the sponsor: The Pelican Foundation (UK) and the Peter Michael Foundation (USA) supported the meeting, both in terms of administrative support and support of the costs of overnight accommodation and catering costs. Each participating institution covered the travel costs. The meeting was hosted by Samir Taneja at the New York University Langone Medical Centre, New York, USA on 25 October 2012. The work of Drs. Marks and Margolis was supported by Award Number R01CA158627 from the National Cancer Institute. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Cancer Institute or the National Institutes of Health.
Funding Information:
Financial disclosures: Caroline M. Moore certifies that all conflicts of interest, including specific financial interests and relationships and affiliations relevant to the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript (eg, employment/affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, or patents filed, received, or pending), are the following: Scott Eggener is a consultant for Genomic Health, Myriad Genetics, and Janssen; he received a research grant from Visualase and Myriad Genetics and honoraria from Janssen. Mark Emberton is a consultant to Steba Biotech, Sanofi Aventis, GSK, and USHIFU; he is medical director of Mediwatch. Veeru Kasivisvanathan received research grant support from the National Institute of Health Research UK and the Association of Surgeons in Training, UK. Inderbir Gill is a consultant for EDAP and has stock options in Hansen Medical. Daniel Margolis has a master research agreement with Siemens Medical Systems that includes salary support and a research agreement (in-kind contribution only) with iCAD. Caroline M. Moore is a consultant to Steba Biotech and receives research grants from GSK, the Bob Champion Trust, and the Prostate Cancer Charity. Aytekin Oto receives research grant support from Phillips Healthcare and Visualase. Andrew Rosenkrantz receives a research grant from the US Department of Defense. Samir Taneja is a consultant for Eigen.
PY - 2013/10
Y1 - 2013/10
N2 - Background A systematic literature review of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted prostate biopsy demonstrates poor adherence to the Standards for the Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) recommendations for the full and transparent reporting of diagnostic studies. Objective To define and recommend Standards of Reporting for MRI-targeted Biopsy Studies (START). Design, setting, and participants Each member of a panel of 23 experts in urology, radiology, histopathology, and methodology used the RAND/UCLA appropriateness methodology to score a 258-statement premeeting questionnaire. The collated responses were presented at a face-to-face meeting, and each statement was rescored after group discussion. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis Measures of agreement and consensus were calculated for each statement. The most important statements, based on group median score, the degree of group consensus, and the content of the group discussion, were used to create a checklist of reporting criteria (the START checklist). Results and limitations The strongest recommendations were to report histologic results of standard and targeted cores separately using Gleason score and maximum cancer core length. A table comparing detection rates of clinically significant and clinically insignificant disease by targeted and standard approaches should also be used. It was recommended to report the recruitment criteria for MRI-targeted biopsy, prior biopsy status of the population, a brief description of the MRI sequences, MRI reporting method, radiologist experience, and image registration technique. There was uncertainty about which histologic criteria constitute clinically significant cancer when the prostate is sampled using MRI-targeted biopsy, and it was agreed that a new definition of clinical significance in this setting needed to be derived in future studies. Conclusions Use of the START checklist would improve the quality of reporting in MRI-targeted biopsy studies and facilitate a comparison between standard and MRI-targeted approaches.
AB - Background A systematic literature review of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted prostate biopsy demonstrates poor adherence to the Standards for the Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) recommendations for the full and transparent reporting of diagnostic studies. Objective To define and recommend Standards of Reporting for MRI-targeted Biopsy Studies (START). Design, setting, and participants Each member of a panel of 23 experts in urology, radiology, histopathology, and methodology used the RAND/UCLA appropriateness methodology to score a 258-statement premeeting questionnaire. The collated responses were presented at a face-to-face meeting, and each statement was rescored after group discussion. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis Measures of agreement and consensus were calculated for each statement. The most important statements, based on group median score, the degree of group consensus, and the content of the group discussion, were used to create a checklist of reporting criteria (the START checklist). Results and limitations The strongest recommendations were to report histologic results of standard and targeted cores separately using Gleason score and maximum cancer core length. A table comparing detection rates of clinically significant and clinically insignificant disease by targeted and standard approaches should also be used. It was recommended to report the recruitment criteria for MRI-targeted biopsy, prior biopsy status of the population, a brief description of the MRI sequences, MRI reporting method, radiologist experience, and image registration technique. There was uncertainty about which histologic criteria constitute clinically significant cancer when the prostate is sampled using MRI-targeted biopsy, and it was agreed that a new definition of clinical significance in this setting needed to be derived in future studies. Conclusions Use of the START checklist would improve the quality of reporting in MRI-targeted biopsy studies and facilitate a comparison between standard and MRI-targeted approaches.
KW - Diagnosis
KW - Magnetic resonance imaging
KW - Prostate cancer
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84883763088&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84883763088&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.03.030
DO - 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.03.030
M3 - Article
C2 - 23537686
AN - SCOPUS:84883763088
SN - 0302-2838
VL - 64
SP - 544
EP - 552
JO - European Urology
JF - European Urology
IS - 4
ER -