This is one of the new screening test trials.
The screening uses a 15-minute non-contrast bi-parametric MRI, and two thresholds were evaluated for further action, either PIRADS >= 3 or PIRADS >= 4. These are compared with standard single PSA >= 3 test. It didn't say here, but I believe the key thing about the bi-parametric MRI is it's fast, and the results can be analysed in software. We have nowhere near the ability to do a screening program based on mpMRI which takes much longer, and can't be analysed in software (yet) - it's one of the most difficult radiological scans to analyse by eye with very few radiologists capable of doing so.
Of interest in this summary (I haven't read the report)...
Only 20% of the men in the ideal age range offered a prostate cancer screen took up the offer.
PIRADS >= 3 picked up 100% more clinically significant cancer than PSA >= 3, but also had a 33% false positive rate.
PIRADS >= 4 picked up 57% more clinically significant cancer than PSA >= 3, but also had a 31% false positive rate, and a 27% false negative rate compared with PIRADS >= 3.
PSA >= 3 had a 46% false positive rate, and a 50% false negative rate compared with PIRADS >= 3.
OK, we know a single PSA test is a poor test for PCa. PSA velocity (rate of change of PSA) is used quite a bit nowadays ("Let's check that again in 3 months"), but PSA velocity wasn't part of the trial which is a bit of a shame - would have been very interesting to see how that compared.