UNLABELLED: We assessed the performance of parametric fusion PET/MRI based on (11)C-choline PET/CT and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps derived from diffusion-weighted MRI for the identification of primary prostate cancer. METHODS: (11)C-choline PET/CT and MRI were performed in 17 patients with untreated primary prostate cancer, followed by prostatectomy. Registration of in vivo imaging with histology was achieved using a mutual-information objective function and by performing ex vivo MRI of the prostatectomy specimen (obtained at 3 T) and whole-mount sectioning with block-face photography as intermediate steps. Data analysis included volumetrically registered whole-mount histology with Gleason scoring, (11)C-choline, and ADC data (obtained at 1.5 T). Volumes of interest were defined on the basis of histologically proven tumor tissue to calculate tumor-to-benign prostate background ratios (TBRs) for (11)C-choline, ADC, and a derived fusion PET/MRI parameter calculating the quotient of (11)C-choline over ADC (P(CHOL/ADC)). RESULTS: Fifty-one tumor nodules were identified at pathology. The TBRs for (11)C-choline (P < 0.05) and P(CHOL/ADC) (P < 0.005) were significantly higher in prostate cancers with a Gleason score of ≥3 + 4 than with a Gleason score of ≤3 + 3 disease and controls. For Gleason ≥ 3 + 4, the ADC TBRs were significantly lower than controls and Gleason ≤ 3 + 3 disease (P < 0.05). The absolute value of TBRs obtained from Gleason ≥ 3 + 4 cancers increased from ADC to (11)C-choline PET/CT and from (11)C-choline PET/CT to P(CHOL/ADC), with each step being statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Our data indicate that parametric PET/MRI using P(CHOL/ADC) improves lesion-to-background contrast (TBRs) of Gleason ≥ 3 + 4 disease, compared with (11)C-choline PET/CT or diffusion-weighted MRI, and thus hold promise that parametric imaging performed on hybrid PET/MRI may further improve identification and localization of significant primary prostate cancer.
UNLABELLED: We assessed the performance of parametric fusion PET/MRI based on (11)C-choline PET/CT and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps derived from diffusion-weighted MRI for the identification of primary prostate cancer. METHODS: (11)C-choline PET/CT and MRI were performed in 17 patients with untreated primary prostate cancer, followed by prostatectomy. Registration of in vivo imaging with histology was achieved using a mutual-information objective function and by performing ex vivo MRI of the prostatectomy specimen (obtained at 3 T) and whole-mount sectioning with block-face photography as intermediate steps. Data analysis included volumetrically registered whole-mount histology with Gleason scoring, (11)C-choline, and ADC data (obtained at 1.5 T). Volumes of interest were defined on the basis of histologically proven tumor tissue to calculate tumor-to-benign prostate background ratios (TBRs) for (11)C-choline, ADC, and a derived fusion PET/MRI parameter calculating the quotient of (11)C-choline over ADC (P(CHOL/ADC)). RESULTS: Fifty-one tumor nodules were identified at pathology. The TBRs for (11)C-choline (P < 0.05) and P(CHOL/ADC) (P < 0.005) were significantly higher in prostate cancers with a Gleason score of ≥3 + 4 than with a Gleason score of ≤3 + 3 disease and controls. For Gleason ≥ 3 + 4, the ADCTBRs were significantly lower than controls and Gleason ≤ 3 + 3 disease (P < 0.05). The absolute value of TBRs obtained from Gleason ≥ 3 + 4 cancers increased from ADC to (11)C-choline PET/CT and from (11)C-choline PET/CT to P(CHOL/ADC), with each step being statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Our data indicate that parametric PET/MRI using P(CHOL/ADC) improves lesion-to-background contrast (TBRs) of Gleason ≥ 3 + 4 disease, compared with (11)C-choline PET/CT or diffusion-weighted MRI, and thus hold promise that parametric imaging performed on hybrid PET/MRI may further improve identification and localization of significant primary prostate cancer.
Authors: C R Meyer; J L Boes; B Kim; P H Bland; K R Zasadny; P V Kison; K Koral; K A Frey; R L Wahl Journal: Med Image Anal Date: 1997-04 Impact factor: 8.545
Authors: Bernhard Scher; Michael Seitz; Wolfram Albinger; Reinhold Tiling; Michael Scherr; Hans-Christoph Becker; Michael Souvatzogluou; Franz-Josef Gildehaus; Hans-Jürgen Wester; Stefan Dresel Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2006-08-24 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Baris Turkbey; Vijay P Shah; Yuxi Pang; Marcelino Bernardo; Sheng Xu; Jochen Kruecker; Julia Locklin; Angelo A Baccala; Ardeshir R Rastinehad; Maria J Merino; Joanna H Shih; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto; Peter L Choyke Journal: Radiology Date: 2010-12-21 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: J Ruf; E Lopez Hänninen; M Böhmig; I Koch; T Denecke; M Plotkin; J Langrehr; B Wiedenmann; R Felix; H Amthauer Journal: Pancreatology Date: 2006-11-13 Impact factor: 3.996
Authors: Courtney A Woodfield; Glenn A Tung; David J Grand; John A Pezzullo; Jason T Machan; Joseph F Renzulli Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Anna Bill-Axelson; Lars Holmberg; Frej Filén; Mirja Ruutu; Hans Garmo; Christer Busch; Stig Nordling; Michael Häggman; Swen-Olof Andersson; Stefan Bratell; Anders Spångberg; Juni Palmgren; Hans-Olov Adami; Jan-Erik Johansson Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2008-08-11 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Michael Souvatzoglou; Matthias Eiber; Axel Martinez-Moeller; Sebastian Fürst; Konstantin Holzapfel; Tobias Maurer; Sibylle Ziegler; Stephan Nekolla; Markus Schwaiger; Ambros J Beer Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2013-05-24 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Patrick Veit-Haibach; Felix Pierre Kuhn; Florian Wiesinger; Gaspar Delso; Gustav von Schulthess Journal: MAGMA Date: 2012-10-09 Impact factor: 2.310
Authors: Thomas de Perrot; Olivier Rager; Max Scheffler; Martin Lord; Marc Pusztaszeri; Christophe Iselin; Osman Ratib; Jean-Paul Vallee Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2014-05-20 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: A Afshar-Oromieh; U Haberkorn; H P Schlemmer; M Fenchel; M Eder; M Eisenhut; B A Hadaschik; A Kopp-Schneider; M Röthke Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2013-12-19 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Joe H Chang; Daryl Lim Joon; Sze Ting Lee; Chee-Yan Hiew; Stephen Esler; Sylvia J Gong; Morikatsu Wada; David Clouston; Richard O'Sullivan; Yin P Goh; Henri Tochon-Danguy; J Gordon Chan; Damien Bolton; Andrew M Scott; Vincent Khoo; Ian D Davis Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2013-11-06 Impact factor: 5.315