BackgroundUnderstanding the characteristics of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) in patients from different racial/ethnic backgrounds is important for reducing the observed gaps in clinical outcomes.PurposeTo investigate the diagnostic performance of mpMRI and quantitative MRI parameters of prostate cancer (PCa) in African American (AA) and matched White (W) men.Study TypeRetrospective.SubjectsOne hundred twenty‐nine patients (43 AA, 86 W) with histologically proven PCa who underwent mpMRI before radical prostatectomy.Field Strength/Sequence3.0 T, T2‐weighted turbo spin echo imaging, a single‐shot spin‐echo EPI sequence diffusion‐weighted imaging, and a gradient echo sequence dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI with an ultrafast 3D spoiled gradient‐echo sequence.AssessmentThe diagnostic performance of mpMRI in AA and W men was assessed using detection rates (DRs) and positive predictive values (PPVs) in zones defined by the PI‐RADS v2.1 prostate sector map. Quantitative MRI parameters, including K^trans and v_e of clinically significant (cs) PCa (Gleason score ≥ 7) tumors were compared between AA and W sub‐cohorts after matching age, prostate‐specific antigen (PSA), and prostate volume.Statistical TestsWeighted Pearson's chi‐square and Mann–Whitney U tests with a statistically significant level of 0.05 were used to examine differences in DR and PPV and to compare parameters between AA and matched W men, respectively.ResultsA total number of 264 PCa lesions were identified in the study cohort. The PPVs in the peripheral zone (PZ) and posterior prostate of mpMRI for csPCa lesions were significantly higher in AA men than in matched W men (87.8% vs. 68.1% in PZ, and 89.3% vs. 69.6% in posterior prostate). The K^trans of index csPCa lesions in AA men was significantly higher than in W men (0.25 ± 0.12 vs. 0.20 ± 0.08 min⁻¹; P < 0.01).Data ConclusionThis study demonstrated race‐related differences in the diagnostic performances and quantitative MRI measures of csPCa that were not reflected in age, PSA, and prostate volume.Evidence Level3Technical EfficacyStage 2