Literature DB >> 23138386

Simulated required accuracy of image registration tools for targeting high-grade cancer components with prostate biopsies.

Wendy J M van de Ven1, Christina A Hulsbergen-van de Kaa, Thomas Hambrock, Jelle O Barentsz, Henkjan J Huisman.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the required spatial alignment accuracy for correctly grading 95 % of peripheral zone (PZ) prostate cancers using a system for multiparametric magnetic resonance (MR)-guided ultrasound (US) biopsies.
METHODS: PZ prostate tumours were retrospectively annotated on multiparametric MR series using prostatectomy specimens as reference standard. Tumours were grouped based on homogeneous and heterogeneous apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values using an automated ADC texture analysis method. The proportion of heterogeneous tumours containing a distinct, high Gleason grade tumour focus yielding low ADC values was determined. Both overall tumour and high-grade focal volumes were calculated. All high-grade target volumes were then used in a simulated US biopsy system with adjustable accuracy to determine the hit rate.
RESULTS: An ADC-determined high-grade tumour focus was found in 63 % of the PZ prostate tumours. The focal volumes were significantly smaller than the total tumour volumes (median volume of 0.3 ml and 1.1 ml respectively). To correctly grade 95 % of the aggressive tumour components the target registration error (TRE) should be smaller than 1.9 mm.
CONCLUSIONS: To enable finding the high Gleason grade component in 95 % of PZ prostate tumours with MR-guided US biopsies, a technical registration accuracy of 1.9 mm is required. KEY POINTS: • MRI can identify foci of prostatic cancer with reduced apparent diffusion coefficients • Sixty-three per cent of prostatic peripheral zone tumours contain high-grade tumour low ADC foci • The median volume of such foci is 0.3 ml • Biopsy targets are significantly smaller than whole tumour volumes • Simulated registration accuracy is 1.9 mm for correctly grading 95 % of tumours.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23138386     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-012-2701-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   5.315


  25 in total

1.  Clinical utility of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values in patients with prostate cancer: can ADC values contribute to assess the aggressiveness of prostate cancer?

Authors:  Yasushi Itou; Katsuyuki Nakanishi; Yoshifumi Narumi; Yasuko Nishizawa; Hideaki Tsukuma
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 4.813

2.  Assessment of image registration accuracy in three-dimensional transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy.

Authors:  V V Karnik; A Fenster; J Bax; D W Cool; L Gardi; I Gyacskov; C Romagnoli; A D Ward
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Differentiation of noncancerous tissue and cancer lesions by apparent diffusion coefficient values in transition and peripheral zones of the prostate.

Authors:  Chiho Sato; Shinji Naganawa; Tatsuya Nakamura; Hisashi Kumada; Shunichi Miura; Osamu Takizawa; Takeo Ishigaki
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 4.813

4.  Relationship between apparent diffusion coefficients at 3.0-T MR imaging and Gleason grade in peripheral zone prostate cancer.

Authors:  Thomas Hambrock; Diederik M Somford; Henkjan J Huisman; Inge M van Oort; J Alfred Witjes; Christina A Hulsbergen-van de Kaa; Thomas Scheenen; Jelle O Barentsz
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Real-time Virtual Sonography for navigation during targeted prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance imaging data.

Authors:  Tomoaki Miyagawa; Satoru Ishikawa; Tomokazu Kimura; Takahiro Suetomi; Masakazu Tsutsumi; Toshiyuki Irie; Masanao Kondoh; Tsuyoshi Mitake
Journal:  Int J Urol       Date:  2010-08-27       Impact factor: 3.369

6.  Histological grade heterogeneity in multifocal prostate cancer. Biological and clinical implications.

Authors:  E T Ruijter; C A van de Kaa; J A Schalken; F M Debruyne; D J Ruiter
Journal:  J Pathol       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 7.996

7.  Trends in Gleason score: concordance between biopsy and prostatectomy over 15 years.

Authors:  Ayyathurai Rajinikanth; Murugesan Manoharan; Cynthia T Soloway; Francisco J Civantos; Mark S Soloway
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2008-02-15       Impact factor: 2.649

8.  Initial clinical experience with real-time transrectal ultrasonography-magnetic resonance imaging fusion-guided prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Anurag K Singh; Jochen Kruecker; Sheng Xu; Neil Glossop; Peter Guion; Karen Ullman; Peter L Choyke; Bradford J Wood
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2007-12-05       Impact factor: 5.588

9.  Heterogeneity of prostate cancer in radical prostatectomy specimens.

Authors:  M Aihara; T M Wheeler; M Ohori; P T Scardino
Journal:  Urology       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 2.649

10.  Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging: a potential non-invasive marker of tumour aggressiveness in localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  N M deSouza; S F Riches; N J Vanas; V A Morgan; S A Ashley; C Fisher; G S Payne; C Parker
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  2008-04-18       Impact factor: 2.350

View more
  10 in total

1.  Preliminary experience with a novel method of three-dimensional co-registration of prostate cancer digital histology and in vivo multiparametric MRI.

Authors:  C Orczyk; H Rusinek; A B Rosenkrantz; A Mikheev; F-M Deng; J Melamed; S S Taneja
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  2013-08-28       Impact factor: 2.350

2.  Open Source Platform for Transperineal In-Bore MRI-Guided Targeted Prostate Biopsy.

Authors:  Christian Herz; Kyle MacNeil; Peter A Behringer; Junichi Tokuda; Alireza Mehrtash; Parvin Mousavi; Ron Kikinis; Fiona M Fennessy; Clare M Tempany; Kemal Tuncali; Andriy Fedorov
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2019-05-23       Impact factor: 4.538

3.  Prostate cancer: MRI/US-guided biopsy--a viable alternative to TRUS-guidance.

Authors:  Wendy J M van de Ven; Jelle O Barentsz
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2013-08-13       Impact factor: 14.432

4.  3D Registration of mpMRI for Assessment of Prostate Cancer Focal Therapy.

Authors:  Clément Orczyk; Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Artem Mikheev; Arnauld Villers; Myriam Bernaudin; Samir S Taneja; Samuel Valable; Henry Rusinek
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2017-11-06       Impact factor: 3.173

Review 5.  Prostate cancer detection and diagnosis: the role of MR and its comparison with other diagnostic modalities--a radiologist's perspective.

Authors:  Tobias Penzkofer; Clare M Tempany-Afdhal
Journal:  NMR Biomed       Date:  2013-09-03       Impact factor: 4.044

Review 6.  More than Meets the Eye: Using Textural Analysis and Artificial Intelligence as Decision Support Tools in Prostate Cancer Diagnosis-A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Teodora Telecan; Iulia Andras; Nicolae Crisan; Lorin Giurgiu; Emanuel Darius Căta; Cosmin Caraiani; Andrei Lebovici; Bianca Boca; Zoltan Balint; Laura Diosan; Monica Lupsor-Platon
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2022-06-16

7.  How to implement magnetic resonance imaging before prostate biopsy in clinical practice: nomograms for saving biopsies.

Authors:  Ángel Borque-Fernando; Luis Mariano Esteban; Ana Celma; Sarai Roche; Jacques Planas; Lucas Regis; Inés de Torres; Maria Eugenia Semidey; Enrique Trilla; Juan Morote
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2019-09-10       Impact factor: 4.226

8.  The concordance between the volume hotspot and the grade hotspot: a 3-D reconstructive model using the pathology outputs from the PROMIS trial.

Authors:  A El-Shater Bosaily; M Valerio; Y Hu; A Freeman; C Jameson; L Brown; R Kaplan; R G Hindley; D Barratt; M Emberton; H U Ahmed
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2016-07-12       Impact factor: 5.554

9.  Automatic segmentation of prostate MRI using convolutional neural networks: Investigating the impact of network architecture on the accuracy of volume measurement and MRI-ultrasound registration.

Authors:  Nooshin Ghavami; Yipeng Hu; Eli Gibson; Ester Bonmati; Mark Emberton; Caroline M Moore; Dean C Barratt
Journal:  Med Image Anal       Date:  2019-09-11       Impact factor: 8.545

10.  MR-targeted TRUS prostate biopsy using local reference augmentation: initial experience.

Authors:  Wendy J M van de Ven; Wulphert Venderink; J P Michiel Sedelaar; Jeroen Veltman; Jelle O Barentsz; Jurgen J Fütterer; Erik B Cornel; Henkjan J Huisman
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2016-04-11       Impact factor: 2.370

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.