BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer (CaP) is one of the topmost diagnosed malignant diseases worldwide. In developed countries, early cancer detection methods have led to an increase of incidence rates over the last decades; however, with great variance of the prognosis. There is no diagnostic tool for an exact prediction of tumor aggressiveness, thus there is a lack of adequate and optimal treatment planning. METHODS: Electronic databases (Medline, PubMed) were scanned for scientific literature. Basic concepts of magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS), important results and its clinical applications were extracted and reviewed in this article. CONCLUSIONS: MRS provides crucial information about the metabolic status of human prostate samples while preserving the specimens for further investigations. Single metabolites and metabolomic profiles can be quantified to distinguish benign from malignant tissue and to predict aggressiveness, such as the recurrence rates of CaP. Studies are also anticipating that MRS might be beneficially applicable for in vivo investigations in the future.
BACKGROUND:Prostate cancer (CaP) is one of the topmost diagnosed malignant diseases worldwide. In developed countries, early cancer detection methods have led to an increase of incidence rates over the last decades; however, with great variance of the prognosis. There is no diagnostic tool for an exact prediction of tumor aggressiveness, thus there is a lack of adequate and optimal treatment planning. METHODS: Electronic databases (Medline, PubMed) were scanned for scientific literature. Basic concepts of magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS), important results and its clinical applications were extracted and reviewed in this article. CONCLUSIONS:MRS provides crucial information about the metabolic status of human prostate samples while preserving the specimens for further investigations. Single metabolites and metabolomic profiles can be quantified to distinguish benign from malignant tissue and to predict aggressiveness, such as the recurrence rates of CaP. Studies are also anticipating that MRS might be beneficially applicable for in vivo investigations in the future.
Authors: Mark G Swanson; Andrew S Zektzer; Z Laura Tabatabai; Jeffry Simko; Samson Jarso; Kayvan R Keshari; Lars Schmitt; Peter R Carroll; Katsuto Shinohara; Daniel B Vigneron; John Kurhanewicz Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2006-06 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Katarina Stenman; Jón B Hauksson; Gerhard Gröbner; Pär Stattin; Anders Bergh; Katrine Riklund Journal: MAGMA Date: 2009-11-17 Impact factor: 2.310
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
Authors: Leslie R Schover; Rachel T Fouladi; Carla L Warneke; Leah Neese; Eric A Klein; Craig Zippe; Patrick A Kupelian Journal: Cancer Date: 2002-10-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Jeffrey C Weinreb; Jeffrey D Blume; Fergus V Coakley; Thomas M Wheeler; Jean B Cormack; Christopher K Sotto; Haesun Cho; Akira Kawashima; Clare M Tempany-Afdhal; Katarzyna J Macura; Mark Rosen; Scott R Gerst; John Kurhanewicz Journal: Radiology Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Mia Djulbegovic; Rebecca J Beyth; Molly M Neuberger; Taryn L Stoffs; Johannes Vieweg; Benjamin Djulbegovic; Philipp Dahm Journal: BMJ Date: 2010-09-14
Authors: Annabel Steiner; Stefan Andreas Schmidt; Cara Sophie Fellmann; Johannes Nowak; Chin-Lee Wu; Adam Scott Feldman; Meinrad Beer; Leo L Cheng Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-04-26 Impact factor: 6.575
Authors: B Zeinali-Rafsanjani; R Faghihi; M A Mosleh-Shirazi; Saeedi-M Moghadam; M Lotfi; R Jalli; S Sina; L Mina Journal: J Biomed Phys Eng Date: 2018-09-01
Authors: Bart R Steensma; Mariska Luttje; Ingmar J Voogt; Dennis W J Klomp; Peter R Luijten; Cornelis A T van den Berg; Alexander J E Raaijmakers Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2018-10-22 Impact factor: 4.813