Literature DB >> 19864529

Clinical stage T1c prostate cancer: evaluation with endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging.

Jingbo Zhang1, Hedvig Hricak, Amita Shukla-Dave, Oguz Akin, Nicole M Ishill, Lauren J Carlino, Victor E Reuter, James A Eastham.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess the diagnostic accuracy of endorectal magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging for prediction of the pathologic stage of prostate cancer and the presence of clinically nonimportant disease in patients with clinical stage T1c prostate cancer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The institutional review board approved-and waived the informed patient consent requirement for-this HIPAA-compliant study involving 158 patients (median age, 58 years; age range, 40-76 years) who had clinical stage T1c prostate cancer, had not been treated preoperatively, and underwent combined 1.5-T endorectal MR imaging-MR spectroscopic imaging between January 2003 and March 2004 before undergoing radical prostatectomy. On the MR images and combined endorectal MR-MR spectroscopic images, two radiologists retrospectively and independently rated the likelihood of cancer in 12 prostate regions and the likelihoods of extracapsular extension (ECE), seminal vesicle invasion (SVI), and adjacent organ invasion by using a five-point scale, and they determined the probability of clinically nonimportant prostate cancer by using a four-point scale. Whole-mount step-section pathology maps were used for imaging-pathologic analysis correlation. Receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed and areas under the curves (AUCs) were estimated nonparametrically for assessment of reader accuracy.
RESULTS: At surgical-pathologic analysis, one (0.6%) patient had no cancer; 124 (78%) patients, organ-confined (stage pT2) disease; 29 (18%) patients, ECE (stage pT3a); two (1%) patients, SVI (stage pT3b); and two (1%) patients, bladder neck invasion (stage pT4). Forty-six (29%) patients had a total tumor volume of less than 0.5 cm(3). With combined MR imaging-MR spectroscopic imaging, the two readers achieved 80% accuracy in disease staging and AUCs of 0.62 and 0.71 for the prediction of clinically nonimportant cancer.
CONCLUSION: Clinical stage T1c prostate cancers are heterogeneous in pathologic stage and volume. MR imaging may help to stratify patients with clinical stage T1c disease for appropriate clinical management. (c) RSNA, 2009.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19864529      PMCID: PMC2770114          DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2532081390

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  38 in total

1.  Dualband spectral-spatial RF pulses for prostate MR spectroscopic imaging.

Authors:  A A Schricker; J M Pauly; J Kurhanewicz; M G Swanson; D B Vigneron
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 4.668

2.  Quantification of prostate MRSI data by model-based time domain fitting and frequency domain analysis.

Authors:  Pieter Pels; Esin Ozturk-Isik; Mark G Swanson; Leentje Vanhamme; John Kurhanewicz; Sarah J Nelson; Sabine Van Huffel
Journal:  NMR Biomed       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 4.044

3.  Cancer statistics, 2005.

Authors:  Ahmedin Jemal; Taylor Murray; Elizabeth Ward; Alicia Samuels; Ram C Tiwari; Asma Ghafoor; Eric J Feuer; Michael J Thun
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2005 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 508.702

4.  Prostate cancer: prediction of extracapsular extension with endorectal MR imaging and three-dimensional proton MR spectroscopic imaging.

Authors:  K K Yu; J Scheidler; H Hricak; D B Vigneron; C J Zaloudek; R G Males; S J Nelson; P R Carroll; J Kurhanewicz
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Sextant localization of prostate cancer: comparison of sextant biopsy, magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging with step section histology.

Authors:  A E Wefer; H Hricak; D B Vigneron; F V Coakley; Y Lu; J Wefer; U Mueller-Lisse; P R Carroll; J Kurhanewicz
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  Distinguishing clinically important from unimportant prostate cancers before treatment: value of systematic biopsies.

Authors:  Y Goto; M Ohori; A Arakawa; M W Kattan; T M Wheeler; P T Scardino
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 7.  Prostate specific antigen: a decade of discovery--what we have learned and where we are going.

Authors:  T J Polascik; J E Oesterling; A W Partin
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  A multi-institutional evaluation of active surveillance for low risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Scott E Eggener; Alex Mueller; Ryan K Berglund; Raj Ayyathurai; Cindy Soloway; Mark S Soloway; Robert Abouassaly; Eric A Klein; Steven J Jones; Chris Zappavigna; Larry Goldenberg; Peter T Scardino; James A Eastham; Bertrand Guillonneau
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2009-02-23       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Pathologic and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostate cancer.

Authors:  J I Epstein; P C Walsh; M Carmichael; C B Brendler
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1994-02-02       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  Cancer statistics, 2003.

Authors:  Ahmedin Jemal; Taylor Murray; Alicia Samuels; Asma Ghafoor; Elizabeth Ward; Michael J Thun
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2003 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 508.702

View more
  24 in total

1.  Preoperative nomograms incorporating magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy for prediction of insignificant prostate cancer.

Authors:  Amita Shukla-Dave; Hedvig Hricak; Oguz Akin; Changhong Yu; Kristen L Zakian; Kazuma Udo; Peter T Scardino; James Eastham; Michael W Kattan
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2011-09-20       Impact factor: 5.588

Review 2.  Technological advances in radiation therapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Mehee Choi; Arthur Y Hung
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 3.092

3.  Utility of preoperative 3 Tesla pelvic phased-array multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in prediction of extracapsular extension and seminal vesicle invasion of prostate cancer and its impact on surgical margin status: Experience at a Canadian academic tertiary care centre.

Authors:  Taehyoung Lee; Jen Hoogenes; Ian Wright; Edward D Matsumoto; Bobby Shayegan
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2017-05-09       Impact factor: 1.862

4.  Performance characteristics of MR imaging in the evaluation of clinically low-risk prostate cancer: a prospective study.

Authors:  Hebert Alberto Vargas; Oguz Akin; Amita Shukla-Dave; Jingbo Zhang; Kristen L Zakian; Junting Zheng; Kent Kanao; Debra A Goldman; Chaya S Moskowitz; Victor E Reuter; James A Eastham; Peter T Scardino; Hedvig Hricak
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2012-09-05       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Multiparametric 3T prostate magnetic resonance imaging to detect cancer: histopathological correlation using prostatectomy specimens processed in customized magnetic resonance imaging based molds.

Authors:  Baris Turkbey; Haresh Mani; Vijay Shah; Ardeshir R Rastinehad; Marcelino Bernardo; Thomas Pohida; Yuxi Pang; Dagane Daar; Compton Benjamin; Yolanda L McKinney; Hari Trivedi; Celene Chua; Gennady Bratslavsky; Joanna H Shih; W Marston Linehan; Maria J Merino; Peter L Choyke; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2011-09-25       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 6.  Multiparametric MRI in prostate cancer management.

Authors:  Linda M Johnson; Baris Turkbey; William D Figg; Peter L Choyke
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-05-20       Impact factor: 66.675

7.  Can 3T multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging accurately detect prostate cancer extracapsular extension?

Authors:  Yannick Cerantola; Massimo Valerio; Aida Kawkabani Marchini; Jean-Yves Meuwly; Patrice Jichlinski
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2013 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.862

8.  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

9.  Correlation of magnetic resonance imaging tumor volume with histopathology.

Authors:  Baris Turkbey; Haresh Mani; Omer Aras; Ardeshir R Rastinehad; Vijay Shah; Marcelino Bernardo; Thomas Pohida; Dagane Daar; Compton Benjamin; Yolanda L McKinney; W Marston Linehan; Bradford J Wood; Maria J Merino; Peter L Choyke; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-08-15       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  [Prostate cancer].

Authors:  T Franiel; N Eckardt; M Waginger; M Horstmann
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 0.635

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.