Any thoughts on husband’s prostate MRI? On surveillance 12y

Posted by raljms @raljms, Aug 25 2:12pm

Posting copy of MRI
PI-RADS v2.1 score 5: clinically significant cancer is highly likely to be present. Lesion in the left anterolateral transition zone near the apex. Lesion saved in DynaCAD for biopsy localization purposes. 2. No lymphadenopathy. Note that MRI is relatively insensitive for low grade, low volume disease such as Gleason 3+3 or Gleason 3+4 disease. PI-RADS v2.1 Assessment Categories PIRADS 1: Very low (clinically significant cancer is highly unlikely to be present) PIRADS 2: Low (clinically significant cancer is unlikely to be present) PIRADS 3: Intermediate (the presence of clinically significant cancer is equivocal) PIRADS 4: High (clinically significant cancer is likely to be present) PIRADS 5: Very high (clinically significant cancer is highly likely to be present) I, as the teaching physician, have personally reviewed these images and concur with this interpretation. 

EXAMINATION: MRI PELVIS W/WO CONTRAST 7/15/2026 11:19 AM DEMOGRAPHICS: 69 years, Male INDICATION: Malignant neoplasm of prostate PSA trend: Uptrending, PSA 5.7 on 7/12/2024. Pathology results: Biopsy in 2014 showing group 1 prostatic adenocarcinoma on the right side. COMPARISON: MR pelvis 3/20/2023. TECHNIQUE: Multiplanar, multisequence MRI Pelvis performed on the 3.0 Tesla magnet utilizing phased array pelvic coil. Multiparametric Prostate MR consisting of diffusion weighted images as well as DCE images. IV contrast dose and type documented in the medical record. Image analysis was performed on a DynaCAD workstation. FINDINGS: Prostate volume: 68 mL, calculated from 3-D volume contour. The following lesion(s) are at least mildly suspicious: ----------------------------------------------------------- Target #1 / ROI # 1 (representative axial T2 series, image #21) Location: Left transition zone, anterior lateral prostate within the apex. Measurements: 1.6 x 0.9 (in-plane cm); 0.9 (extent in cm). Volume 0.8 mL. Capsular involvement: No evidence of macroscopic extraprostatic extension. T2: On T2-weighted MR imaging, the lesion is seen as a focus of low signal intensity (T2 score = 5/5). DWI: The lesion demonstrates marked restricted diffusion (DWI score = 5/5). DCE: The lesion is associated with early enhancement (DCE positive). PIRADS V2.1 suspicion level: 5/5 ----------------------------------------------------------- The peripheral zone T2 signal is heterogeneous with indistinct ADC, typically reflective of sequelae of inflammation and fibrosis. The remaining transition zone T2 signal is heterogeneous with hypertrophic changes demonstrating matched areas of restricted diffusion and focally increased perfusion that are not clearly suspicious on T2-weighted imaging. Neurovascular bundle: Unremarkable. Seminal vesicles: No evidence of seminal vesicle invasion. Lymph nodes: No pathologically enlarged lymph nodes. Urinary bladder: Partially distended without focal abnormality. Anorectum and bowel: Normal anorectal wall architecture. Visualized bowel is unremarkable. Vasculature: Regional vasculature is patent and normal in caliber. Soft tissues: Small fat-containing right inguinal hernia. Bones: No suspicious marrow signal.

Interested in more discussions like this? Go to the Prostate Cancer Support Group.

Profile picture for guybe @guybe

@climateguy Heartily agree regarding moving to a COE after initial diagnosis or strong suspicion (PSA reading), or even after an MRI that is done and interpreted by your community urologist. After decades of looking at satellite imagery professionally, I was a bit appalled at the rather poor resolution of MRI images relative to the "precision" and impact of judgments based on them. It takes an oncologist who is aware of that, and willing to say "I'm not sure what we're seeing here. Let's investigate further." In my opinion (and experience), such people are more likely to be at a COE than at a commercial urology outfit. Image interpretation is an art, and you need to be in the care of someone who has the humility to understand that.

Jump to this post

@guybe The words a lot of docs use when they describe what they've concluded after looking at various test results, like PSA, PET, MRI, Decipher, etc., can sound like they are very certain, even though they know that all they've got is a highly educated guess. Patients can easily misunderstand.

REPLY

I went to a center of excellence, but seem to get the wrong doctors! Kansas University Medical Center is suppose to be "Prostate Cancer Clinical Center of Excellence. Its prostate cancer program has been formally recognized by industry publications like Urology Times as one of only 13 Clinical Centers of Excellence in the United States.
When I had my Aquablation 2 years ago, my KUMC doctor didn't do it a resident did it. The procedure didn't work and when I went back they ran a camera up me and said junk was left and I needed a revision. I said no and just used Flowmax. I guess the resident wasn't watched? Also, they woke me up from anesthesia to sign an authorization for something. Never have been able to find out what I signed. Wondered if it wasn't something to allow the resident to do the surgery?
Then when I got cancer I went back to KUMC. The MRI, biopsy, PSMA-PET all went well- no issues. Then went to RO and she was great, if fact going back to her for a second opinion after pathology report from prostate being removed. Didn't really like what local RO said (in Topeka KS), it was nothing close to what the local Oncologist said 1 hour earlier and in same building. However, the KUMC surgeon (different than the one who was suppose to do the Aquabalation- and didn't) was not able to communicate, would take weeks to get answers. Then the answers you did get were not constant. What he said in office didn't match messages and I had a note taker with me while in the office visits.
Anyway whole point I saying is Centers of Excellence doesn't always mean they are great.
My wife had breast cancer and the folks at that department at KUMC were absolutely amazing, that is why I went there, but didn't have the amazing care that she got. Well except the folks in the RO depart were great at KUMC.

REPLY
Profile picture for front @front

@colleenyoung
Hi Colleen: how/where can I write a thank you message to those generous members responding to my message (prostate group). I tried the 'initiate a discussion' field) but my messages vanished in the process. Thank you..

Jump to this post

@front, the simplest and most efficient way to send a thank you to those members who answered your questions is to post a comment to the discussion(s) that you started. That way those specific members who helped answer your questions will see it.

Additionally, you can react to any post you particularly liked or found helpful. Simple click "Like" or "Helpful". Then that specific member sees that you found their post useful or helpful.

REPLY
Profile picture for Colleen Young, Connect Director @colleenyoung

Reminder of the Community Guidelines https://connect.mayoclinic.org/blog/about-connect/tab/community-guidelines/

See guideline number 3 regarding the use of AI.

Be human and don't post AI answers. Follow these guidelines:
- Share your real-life, first-hand experiences.
- If you use AI, use only short, specific quotes from AI along with your personal experience.
- Do not post long AI-only posts. They will be removed.

Jump to this post

@colleenyoung The AI post I replied with was sent to me from the Chief Urologist at a center of excellence when I asked him about my high PSA and cancer in the transition zone. I realize that AI can be misleading at times but more doctors are using it and will be used more and more in the future, especially when the information is true. No one on this forum should take any of these posts, personal experience or AI generated for granted and only use to form questions to ask their "own" doctors.

REPLY
Please sign in or register to post a reply.