Comparison of Transatlantic Recommendations for Prostate Gland Evaluation with MRI after Focal Therapy (TARGET) and Prostate Imaging after Focal Ablation (PI-FAB) for Detecting Recurrent Prostate Cancer at Prostate MRI.

Rationale and Objectives: The increasing use of focal therapy (FT) in localized prostate cancer (PCa) management requires a standardized MRI interpretation system to detect recurrent clinically significant PCa (csPCa). This pilot study evaluates the novel Transatlantic Recommendations for Prostate Gland Evaluation with MRI after Focal Therapy (TARGET) and compares its performance to that of the Prostate Imaging after Focal Ablation (PI-FAB) system.
Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 38 patients who underwent primary FT for localized PCa, with follow-up multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) and biopsy. Two radiologists assessed the mpMRIs using both PI-FAB and TARGET independently. Diagnostic performance metrics and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were calculated. Inter-reader and intrareader agreement were assessed using Cohen's κ and Kendall's τ.
Results: 14 patients had recurrent csPCa. PI-FAB showed high sensitivity (92.9% for both readers) and NPV (reader 1: 93.8%, reader 2: 92.9%) but moderate specificity (reader 1: 62.5%, reader 2: 54.2%). TARGET demonstrated lower sensitivity for one reader (reader 1: 78.6%, reader 2: 92.9%) but higher specificity (reader 1: 79.2%, reader 2: 62.5%) for both readers. Both systems displayed moderate inter-reader agreement (κ = 0.56 for PI-FAB, 0.57 for TARGET).
Conclusion: PI-FAB and TARGET exhibit similar performances in post-FT MRI. While PI-FAB had consistently high sensitivity, TARGET offered higher specificity for one reader. Moderate agreement levels demonstrate the viability of these systems in clinical settings and a promise for improvement.
Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: B. J. Wood receives support as part of a cooperative research and development agreement (CRADA) between NIH and Philips Healthcare, receives royalties from NIH related to a licensing agreement with Philips Healthcare, and is party to patents or potential patents related to this work. P. L. Choyke receives royalties for MRI/ultrasound fusion biopsy patents licensed to Philips Medical. P. A. Pinto receives royalties from NIH related to a Philips licensing agreement and support as part of a CRADA between NIH and Philips Healthcare. B. Turkbey receives support as part of a CRADA between NIH and NVDIA and between NIH and Philips Healthcare, receives royalties from NIH, and is party to patents or potential patents related to this work. The remaining authors declare that there are no other disclosures relevant to the subject matter of this article. The content of this publication does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Department of Health and Human Services, nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.
(Published by Elsevier Inc.)