Literature DB >> 22109293

Diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of prostate cancer: correlation of quantitative MR parameters with Gleason score and tumor angiogenesis.

Aytekin Oto1, Cheng Yang, Arda Kayhan, Maria Tretiakova, Tatjana Antic, Christine Schmid-Tannwald, Scott Eggener, Gregory S Karczmar, Walter M Stadler.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to investigate whether quantitative parameters derived from diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) correlate with Gleason score and angiogenesis of prostate cancer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-three patients who underwent preoperative MRI and radical prostatectomy were included in our study. A radiologist and pathologist located the dominant tumor on the MR images based on histopathologic correlation. For each dominant tumor, the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value and quantitative DCE-MRI parameters (i.e., contrast agent transfer rate between blood and tissue [K(trans)], extravascular extracellular fractional volume [v(e)], contrast agent backflux rate constant [k(ep)], and blood plasma fractional volume on a voxel-by-voxel basis [v(p)]) were calculated and the Gleason score was recorded. The mean blood vessel count, mean vessel area fraction, and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) expression of the dominant tumor were determined using CD31, CD34, and VEGF antibody stains. Spearman correlation analysis between MR and histopathologic parameters was conducted.
RESULTS: The mean tumor diameter was 15.2 mm (range, 5-28 mm). Of the 73 prostate cancer tumors, five (6.8%) had a Gleason score of 6, 46 (63%) had a Gleason score of 7, and 22 (30.1%) had a Gleason score of greater than 7. ADC values showed a moderate negative correlation with Gleason score (r = -0.376, p = 0.001) but did not correlate with tumor angiogenesis parameters. Quantitative DCE-MRI parameters did not show a significant correlation with Gleason score or VEGF expression (p > 0.05). Mean blood vessel count and mean vessel area fraction parameters estimated from prostate cancer positively correlated with k(ep) (r = 0.440 and 0.453, respectively; p = 0.001 for both).
CONCLUSION: There is a moderate correlation between ADC values and Gleason score and between k(ep) and microvessel density of prostate cancer. Although the strength of the correlations is insufficient for immediate diagnostic utility, these results warrant further investigation on the potential of multiparametric MRI to facilitate noninvasive assessment of prostate cancer aggressiveness and angiogenesis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22109293     DOI: 10.2214/AJR.11.6861

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol        ISSN: 0361-803X            Impact factor:   3.959


  85 in total

Review 1.  [Multiparametric MRI, elastography, contrastenhanced TRUS. Are there indications with reliable diagnostic advantages before prostate biopsy?].

Authors:  A Hegele; L Skrobek; R Hofmann; P Olbert
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 0.639

2.  Apparent diffusion coefficient value as a biomarker reflecting morphological and biological features of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Hyeyeol Bae; Soichiro Yoshida; Yoh Matsuoka; Hiroshi Nakajima; Eisaku Ito; Hiroshi Tanaka; Miyako Oya; Takayuki Nakayama; Hideki Takeshita; Toshiki Kijima; Junichiro Ishioka; Noboru Numao; Fumitaka Koga; Kazutaka Saito; Takumi Akashi; Yasuhisa Fujii; Kazunori Kihara
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 2.370

3.  Assessment of prostate cancer with integrated CT-perfusion using a sector-wise approach.

Authors:  Matteo Ferrari; Martin Huellner; Chantal Pauli; Burkhardt Seifert; Hansjörg Danuser; Patrick Veit-Haibach; Agostino Mattei
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2017-05-03

Review 4.  Current use of PSMA-PET in prostate cancer management.

Authors:  Tobias Maurer; Matthias Eiber; Markus Schwaiger; Jürgen E Gschwend
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2016-02-23       Impact factor: 14.432

5.  Assessment of Prostate Cancer Aggressiveness by Use of the Combination of Quantitative DWI and Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI.

Authors:  Andreas M Hötker; Yousef Mazaheri; Ömer Aras; Junting Zheng; Chaya S Moskowitz; Tatsuo Gondo; Kazuhiro Matsumoto; Hedvig Hricak; Oguz Akin
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2016-02-22       Impact factor: 3.959

6.  Parameters of prostate cancer at contrast-enhanced ultrasound: correlation with prostate cancer risk.

Authors:  Guang Xu; Jian Wu; Ming-Hua Yao; Xu-Dong Yao; Bo Peng; Qing Wei; Hui-Xiong Xu; Rong Wu
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-02-15

7.  Demonstration of DCE-MRI as an early pharmacodynamic biomarker of response to VEGF Trap in glioblastoma.

Authors:  Allison F O'Neill; Lei Qin; Patrick Y Wen; John F de Groot; Annick D Van den Abbeele; Jeffrey T Yap
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2016-08-30       Impact factor: 4.130

8.  Influence of imaging and histological factors on prostate cancer detection and localisation on multiparametric MRI: a prospective study.

Authors:  Flavie Bratan; Emilie Niaf; Christelle Melodelima; Anne Laure Chesnais; Rémi Souchon; Florence Mège-Lechevallier; Marc Colombel; Olivier Rouvière
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-03-15       Impact factor: 5.315

9.  Automatic classification of prostate cancer Gleason scores from multiparametric magnetic resonance images.

Authors:  Duc Fehr; Harini Veeraraghavan; Andreas Wibmer; Tatsuo Gondo; Kazuhiro Matsumoto; Herbert Alberto Vargas; Evis Sala; Hedvig Hricak; Joseph O Deasy
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-11-02       Impact factor: 11.205

10.  Multiparametric prostate MR imaging with T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted, and dynamic contrast-enhanced sequences: are all pulse sequences necessary to detect locally recurrent prostate cancer after radiation therapy?

Authors:  Olivio F Donati; Sung Il Jung; Hebert Alberto Vargas; David H Gultekin; Junting Zheng; Chaya S Moskowitz; Hedvig Hricak; Michael J Zelefsky; Oguz Akin
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2013-03-12       Impact factor: 11.105

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.