Literature DB >> 17220729

Standardized threshold approach using three-dimensional proton magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging in prostate cancer localization of the entire prostate.

Jurgen J Fütterer1, Tom W J Scheenen, Stijn W T P J Heijmink, Henkjan J Huisman, Christina A Hulsbergen-Van de Kaa, J Alfred Witjes, Arend Heerschap, Jelle O Barentsz.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine the localization accuracy using 3-dimensional (3D) proton magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging (MRSI) of the entire prostate with a standardized thresholds approach in prostate cancer patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a prospective study, 32 consecutive patients were examined. Mean age and prostate specific antigen level were 61 years and 7.8 ng/mL, respectively. Median biopsy Gleason score was 6. T2-weighted MRI and 3D MRSI of the entire prostate were performed. Three readers recorded the location of suspicious peripheral zone and central gland cancer nodules on a standardized division of the prostate (14 regions of interest [ROI]) using a standardized thresholds approach. The degree of diagnostic confidence for each ROI was recorded on a 5-point scale. Reconstructed whole-mount section histopathology was the standard of reference. The sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive value, overall accuracy and interobserver agreement were calculated. Areas under the ROI-based receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and diagnostic performance parameters were determined.
RESULTS: The standardized thresholds approach had an accuracy of 81% and an AUC of 0.85-0.86 for differentiation between benign and malignant ROIs in the peripheral zone and an accuracy of 87% and an AUC of 0.86-0.91 for this differentiation in the central gland, respectively. Specificities of 81% to 88% were achieved with accompanying sensitivities of 75% to 92% for both peripheral zone and central gland, respectively. Moderate to near-perfect interobserver agreement was demonstrated (kappa=0.42-0.91).
CONCLUSION: Our data indicate that a standardized zone-specific threshold approach in MRSI of the prostate is able to prospectively differentiate between benign and malignant tissues in the peripheral zone and the central gland with good accuracy and interobserver agreement.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17220729     DOI: 10.1097/01.rli.0000251541.03822.bb

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Invest Radiol        ISSN: 0020-9996            Impact factor:   6.016


  17 in total

Review 1.  Is it time to consider a role for MRI before prostate biopsy?

Authors:  Hashim U Ahmed; Alex Kirkham; Manit Arya; Rowland Illing; Alex Freeman; Clare Allen; Mark Emberton
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 66.675

2.  Inter-reader agreement of the ESUR score for prostate MRI using in-bore MRI-guided biopsies as the reference standard.

Authors:  L Schimmöller; M Quentin; C Arsov; R S Lanzman; A Hiester; R Rabenalt; G Antoch; P Albers; D Blondin
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-06-12       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  [Imaging diagnostics of the prostate].

Authors:  D J Dinter; A M Weidner; F Wenz; A E Pelzer; M S Michel; S O Schoenberg
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 4.  Prostate MRI and 3D MR spectroscopy: how we do it.

Authors:  Sadhna Verma; Arumugam Rajesh; Jurgen J Fütterer; Baris Turkbey; Tom W J Scheenen; Yuxi Pang; Peter L Choyke; John Kurhanewicz
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 3.959

5.  [Diagnose importance of multiparametric magnetic resonance tomography for prostate cancer].

Authors:  B J Fueger; T H Helbich; M Schernthaner; S Zbýn; H G Linhart; A Stiglbauer; A Doan; K Pinker; G Heinz; A R Padhani; P Brader
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 0.635

6.  The role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in focal therapy for prostate cancer: recommendations from a consensus panel.

Authors:  Berrend G Muller; Jurgen J Fütterer; Rajan T Gupta; Aaron Katz; Alexander Kirkham; John Kurhanewicz; Judd W Moul; Peter A Pinto; Ardeshir R Rastinehad; Cary Robertson; Jean de la Rosette; Rafael Sanchez-Salas; J Stephen Jones; Osamu Ukimura; Sadhna Verma; Hessel Wijkstra; Michael Marberger
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2013-11-13       Impact factor: 5.588

Review 7.  Combined magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance spectroscopy imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Martin Umbehr; Lucas M Bachmann; Ulrike Held; Thomas M Kessler; Tullio Sulser; Dominik Weishaupt; John Kurhanewicz; Johann Steurer
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2008-10-18       Impact factor: 20.096

8.  High resolution magic angle spinning NMR spectroscopy for metabolic assessment of cancer presence and Gleason score in human prostate needle biopsies.

Authors:  Jack J A van Asten; Vincent Cuijpers; Christina Hulsbergen-van de Kaa; Claudia Soede-Huijbregts; J Alfred Witjes; Albert Verhofstad; Arend Heerschap
Journal:  MAGMA       Date:  2008-11-25       Impact factor: 2.310

9.  Correlation of MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging findings with Ki-67, phospho-Akt, and androgen receptor expression in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Amita Shukla-Dave; Hedvig Hricak; Nicole M Ishill; Chaya S Moskowitz; Marija Drobnjak; Victor E Reuter; Kristen L Zakian; Peter T Scardino; Carlos Cordon-Cardo
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Spermine and citrate as metabolic biomarkers for assessing prostate cancer aggressiveness.

Authors:  Guro F Giskeødegård; Helena Bertilsson; Kirsten M Selnæs; Alan J Wright; Tone F Bathen; Trond Viset; Jostein Halgunset; Anders Angelsen; Ingrid S Gribbestad; May-Britt Tessem
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-04-23       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.