Literature DB >> 23751135

Assessment of prostate cancer aggressiveness using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging at 3 T.

Eline K Vos1, Geert J S Litjens, Thiele Kobus, Thomas Hambrock, Christina A Hulsbergen-van de Kaa, Jelle O Barentsz, Henkjan J Huisman, Tom W J Scheenen.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A challenge in the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa) is the accurate assessment of aggressiveness.
OBJECTIVE: To validate the performance of dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the prostate at 3 tesla (T) for the assessment of PCa aggressiveness, with prostatectomy specimens as the reference standard. DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 45 patients with PCa scheduled for prostatectomy were included. This study was approved by the institutional review board; the need for informed consent was waived. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Subjects underwent a clinical MRI protocol including DCE-MRI. Blinded to DCE-images, PCa was indicated on T2-weighted images based on histopathology results from prostatectomy specimens with the use of anatomical landmarks for the precise localization of the tumor. PCa was classified as low-, intermediate-, or high-grade, according to Gleason score. DCE-images were used as an overlay on T2-weighted images; mean and quartile values from semi-quantitative and pharmacokinetic model parameters were extracted per tumor region. Statistical analysis included Spearman's ρ, the Kruskal-Wallis test, and a receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Significant differences were seen for the mean and 75th percentile (p75) values of wash-in (p = 0.024 and p = 0.017, respectively), mean wash-out (p = 0.044), and p75 of transfer constant (K(trans)) (p = 0.035), all between low-grade and high-grade PCa in the peripheral zone. ROC analysis revealed the best discriminating performance between low-grade versus intermediate-grade plus high-grade PCa in the peripheral zone for p75 of wash-in, K(trans), and rate constant (Kep) (area under the curve: 0.72). Due to a limited number of tumors in the transition zone, a definitive conclusion for this region of the prostate could not be drawn.
CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative parameters (K(trans) and Kep) and semi-quantitative parameters (wash-in and wash-out) derived from DCE-MRI at 3 T have the potential to assess the aggressiveness of PCa in the peripheral zone. P75 of wash-in, K(trans), and Kep offer the best possibility to discriminate low-grade from intermediate-grade plus high-grade PCa.
Copyright © 2013 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI; Pharmacokinetic modeling; Prostate cancer; Prostate cancer aggressiveness; Validation study

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23751135     DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.05.045

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol        ISSN: 0302-2838            Impact factor:   20.096


  51 in total

1.  Prostate cancer: aggressiveness--MRI can tell.

Authors:  Mina Razzak
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2013-06-18       Impact factor: 14.432

2.  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

Review 3.  Multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer diagnosis: current status and future directions.

Authors:  Armando Stabile; Francesco Giganti; Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Samir S Taneja; Geert Villeirs; Inderbir S Gill; Clare Allen; Mark Emberton; Caroline M Moore; Veeru Kasivisvanathan
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2019-07-17       Impact factor: 14.432

4.  Quantitative effects of acquisition duration and temporal resolution on the measurement accuracy of prostate dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI data: a phantom study.

Authors:  Silvin Paul Knight; Jacinta Elizabeth Browne; James Frances Mary Meaney; Andrew John Fagan
Journal:  MAGMA       Date:  2017-04-10       Impact factor: 2.310

5.  IV Administered Gadodiamide Enters the Lumen of the Prostatic Glands: X-Ray Fluorescence Microscopy Examination of a Mouse Model.

Authors:  Devkumar Mustafi; Sophie-Charlotte Gleber; Jesse Ward; Urszula Dougherty; Marta Zamora; Erica Markiewicz; David C Binder; Tatjana Antic; Stefan Vogt; Gregory S Karczmar; Aytekin Oto
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 3.959

Review 6.  Multiparametric MRI in prostate cancer management.

Authors:  Linda M Johnson; Baris Turkbey; William D Figg; Peter L Choyke
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-05-20       Impact factor: 66.675

7.  Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer clinical trials: potential roles and possible pitfalls.

Authors:  Fiona M Fennessy; Rana R McKay; Clair J Beard; Mary-Ellen Taplin; Clare M Tempany
Journal:  Transl Oncol       Date:  2014-02-01       Impact factor: 4.243

8.  Prostate Cancer: assessing the effects of androgen-deprivation therapy using quantitative diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI.

Authors:  Andreas M Hötker; Yousef Mazaheri; Junting Zheng; Chaya S Moskowitz; Joshua Berkowitz; Joshua E Lantos; Xin Pei; Michael J Zelefsky; Hedvig Hricak; Oguz Akin
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-03-29       Impact factor: 5.315

9.  T2-weighted MRI-derived textural features reflect prostate cancer aggressiveness: preliminary results.

Authors:  Gabriel Nketiah; Mattijs Elschot; Eugene Kim; Jose R Teruel; Tom W Scheenen; Tone F Bathen; Kirsten M Selnæs
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-12-14       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  A novel anthropomorphic flow phantom for the quantitative evaluation of prostate DCE-MRI acquisition techniques.

Authors:  Silvin P Knight; Jacinta E Browne; James F Meaney; David S Smith; Andrew J Fagan
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2016-10-03       Impact factor: 3.609

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.