PURPOSE: To determine whether multiparametric magnetic resonance (MR) imaging can help identify patients with prostate cancer who would most appropriately be candidates for active surveillance (AS) according to current guidelines and to compare the results with those of conventional clinical assessment scoring systems, including the D'Amico, Epstein, and Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) systems, on the basis of findings at prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This institutional review board-approved HIPAA-compliant retrospectively designed study included 133 patients (mean age, 59.3 years) with a mean prostate-specific antigen level of 6.73 ng/mL (median, 4.39 ng/mL) who underwent multiparametric MR imaging at 3.0 T before radical prostatectomy. Informed consent was obtained from all patients. Patients were then retrospectively classified as to whether they would have met AS eligibility criteria or were better served by surgery. AS eligibility criteria for prostatectomy specimens were a dominant tumor smaller than 0.5 mL without Gleason 4 or 5 patterns or extracapsular or seminal vesicle invasion. Conventional clinical assessment scores (the D'Amico, Epstein, and CAPRA scoring systems) were compared with multiparametric MR imaging findings for predicting AS candidates. The level of significance of difference between scoring systems was determined by using the χ(2) test for categoric variables with the level of significance set at P < .05. RESULTS: Among 133 patients, 14 were eligible for AS on the basis of prostatectomy results. The sensitivity, positive predictive value (PPV), and overall accuracy, respectively, were 93%, 25%, and 70% for the D'Amico system, 64%, 45%, and 88% for the Epstein criteria, and 93%, 20%, and 59% for the CAPRA scoring system for predicting AS candidates (P < .005 for all, χ(2) test), while multiparametric MR imaging had a sensitivity of 93%, a PPV of 57%, and an overall accuracy of 92% (P < .005). CONCLUSION: Multiparametric MR imaging provides useful additional information to existing clinicopathologic scoring systems of prostate cancer and improves the assignment of treatment (eg, AS or active treatment).
PURPOSE: To determine whether multiparametric magnetic resonance (MR) imaging can help identify patients with prostate cancer who would most appropriately be candidates for active surveillance (AS) according to current guidelines and to compare the results with those of conventional clinical assessment scoring systems, including the D'Amico, Epstein, and Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) systems, on the basis of findings at prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This institutional review board-approved HIPAA-compliant retrospectively designed study included 133 patients (mean age, 59.3 years) with a mean prostate-specific antigen level of 6.73 ng/mL (median, 4.39 ng/mL) who underwent multiparametric MR imaging at 3.0 T before radical prostatectomy. Informed consent was obtained from all patients. Patients were then retrospectively classified as to whether they would have met AS eligibility criteria or were better served by surgery. AS eligibility criteria for prostatectomy specimens were a dominant tumor smaller than 0.5 mL without Gleason 4 or 5 patterns or extracapsular or seminal vesicle invasion. Conventional clinical assessment scores (the D'Amico, Epstein, and CAPRA scoring systems) were compared with multiparametric MR imaging findings for predicting AS candidates. The level of significance of difference between scoring systems was determined by using the χ(2) test for categoric variables with the level of significance set at P < .05. RESULTS: Among 133 patients, 14 were eligible for AS on the basis of prostatectomy results. The sensitivity, positive predictive value (PPV), and overall accuracy, respectively, were 93%, 25%, and 70% for the D'Amico system, 64%, 45%, and 88% for the Epstein criteria, and 93%, 20%, and 59% for the CAPRA scoring system for predicting AS candidates (P < .005 for all, χ(2) test), while multiparametric MR imaging had a sensitivity of 93%, a PPV of 57%, and an overall accuracy of 92% (P < .005). CONCLUSION: Multiparametric MR imaging provides useful additional information to existing clinicopathologic scoring systems of prostate cancer and improves the assignment of treatment (eg, AS or active treatment).
Authors: Roderick C N van den Bergh; Stijn Roemeling; Monique J Roobol; Gunnar Aus; Jonas Hugosson; Antti S Rannikko; Teuvo L Tammela; Chris H Bangma; Fritz H Schröder Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2008-09-17 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Kevin R Rice; Monica L Colombo; Jonathan Wingate; Yongmei Chen; Jennifer Cullen; David G McLeod; Stephen A Brassell Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2011-08-26 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: Fritz H Schröder; Jonas Hugosson; Monique J Roobol; Teuvo L J Tammela; Stefano Ciatto; Vera Nelen; Maciej Kwiatkowski; Marcos Lujan; Hans Lilja; Marco Zappa; Louis J Denis; Franz Recker; Antonio Berenguer; Liisa Määttänen; Chris H Bangma; Gunnar Aus; Arnauld Villers; Xavier Rebillard; Theodorus van der Kwast; Bert G Blijenberg; Sue M Moss; Harry J de Koning; Anssi Auvinen Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2009-03-18 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Patrick J Bastian; Ballentine H Carter; Anders Bjartell; Michael Seitz; Peter Stanislaus; Francesco Montorsi; Christian G Stief; Fritz Schröder Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2009-03-06 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Ruth Etzioni; David F Penson; Julie M Legler; Dante di Tommaso; Rob Boer; Peter H Gann; Eric J Feuer Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2002-07-03 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Nazareno Suardi; Umberto Capitanio; Felix K H Chun; Markus Graefen; Paul Perrotte; Thorsten Schlomm; Alexander Haese; Hartwig Huland; Andreas Erbersdobler; Francesco Montorsi; Pierre I Karakiewicz Journal: Cancer Date: 2008-10-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: H Ballentine Carter; Anna Kettermann; Christopher Warlick; E Jeffrey Metter; Patricia Landis; Patrick C Walsh; Jonathan I Epstein Journal: J Urol Date: 2007-10-22 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Dima Raskolnikov; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Arvin K George; Baris Turkbey; Nabeel A Shakir; Chinonyerem Okoro; Jason T Rothwax; Annerleim Walton-Diaz; M Minhaj Siddiqui; Daniel Su; Lambros Stamatakis; Pingkun Yan; Jochen Kruecker; Sheng Xu; Maria J Merino; Peter L Choyke; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto Journal: J Urol Date: 2014-08-20 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Shekoofeh Azizi; Sharareh Bayat; Pingkun Yan; Amir Tahmasebi; Guy Nir; Jin Tae Kwak; Sheng Xu; Storey Wilson; Kenneth A Iczkowski; M Scott Lucia; Larry Goldenberg; Septimiu E Salcudean; Peter A Pinto; Bradford Wood; Purang Abolmaesumi; Parvin Mousavi Journal: Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg Date: 2017-06-20 Impact factor: 2.924
Authors: Sonia Gaur; Stephanie Harmon; Lauren Rosenblum; Matthew D Greer; Sherif Mehralivand; Mehmet Coskun; Maria J Merino; Bradford J Wood; Joanna H Shih; Peter A Pinto; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2018-05-07 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Barış Türkbey; Ardeshir R Rastinehad; Annerleim Walton-Diaz; Anthony N Hoang; M Minhaj Siddiqui; Lambros Stamatakis; Hong Truong; Jeffrey W Nix; Srinivas Vourganti; Kinzya B Grant; Maria J Merino; Peter L Choyke; Peter A Pinto Journal: Diagn Interv Radiol Date: 2014 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.630
Authors: Karim Chamie; Geoffrey A Sonn; David S Finley; Nelly Tan; Daniel J A Margolis; Steven S Raman; Shyam Natarajan; Jiaoti Huang; Robert E Reiter Journal: Urology Date: 2014-02 Impact factor: 2.649