Literature DB >> 23863537

Prostate volumetric assessment by magnetic resonance imaging and transrectal ultrasound: impact of variation in calculated prostate-specific antigen density on patient eligibility for active surveillance program.

Seyed Saeid Dianat1, Ramiro M Rancier Ruiz, David Bonekamp, H Ballentine Carter, Katarzyna J Macura.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate impact of prostate volume variations on prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) and patient eligibility for active surveillance (AS).
METHODS: Prostate volume and PSAD were calculated for 46 patients with prostate cancer in AS who underwent prostate magnetic resonance imaging and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS). Manual method and 2 semiautomated methods for prostate segmentation (3D-SLICER and OsiriX) were used for MR volumetry.
RESULTS: Magnetic resonance volumetric methods showed very good agreement (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.98). The concordance correlation coefficient was higher among MR volumetry methods (0.971-0.998) than between TRUS and MR volumetry (0.849-0.863). The variation in PSAD estimated by TRUS versus magnetic resonance imaging was higher in large prostates (r = 0.327, P = 0.027). Transrectal ultrasonography volumetry may improperly classify 20% of patients as eligible for AS with PSAD greater than 0.15 threshold.
CONCLUSIONS: Although clinically used TRUS reliably estimates PSAD, it may misclassify some patients who are not eligible for AS based on PSAD criteria. Magnetic resonance-based volumetry should be considered for a more reliable PSAD calculation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23863537     DOI: 10.1097/RCT.0b013e318296af5f

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr        ISSN: 0363-8715            Impact factor:   1.826


  8 in total

1.  Additional value of PCA3 density to predict initial prostate biopsy outcome.

Authors:  A Ruffion; P Perrin; M Devonec; D Champetier; M Decaussin; P Paparel; V Vlaeminck-Guillem
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-02-06       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Comparative Analysis of PSA Density and an MRI-Based Predictive Model to Improve the Selection of Candidates for Prostate Biopsy.

Authors:  Juan Morote; Angel Borque-Fernando; Marina Triquell; Anna Celma; Lucas Regis; Richard Mast; Inés M de Torres; María E Semidey; José M Abascal; Pol Servian; Anna Santamaría; Jacques Planas; Luis M Esteban; Enrique Trilla
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-11       Impact factor: 6.575

3.  Comparison of Proclarix, PSA Density and MRI-ERSPC Risk Calculator to Select Patients for Prostate Biopsy after mpMRI.

Authors:  Miriam Campistol; Juan Morote; Marina Triquell; Lucas Regis; Ana Celma; Inés de Torres; María E Semidey; Richard Mast; Anna Santamaría; Jacques Planas; Enrique Trilla
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-30       Impact factor: 6.575

4.  Peripheral zone volume ratio (PZ-ratio) is relevant with biopsy results and can increase the accuracy of current diagnostic modality.

Authors:  Yifan Chang; Rui Chen; Qingsong Yang; Xu Gao; Chuanliang Xu; Jianping Lu; Yinghao Sun
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2017-05-23

Review 5.  Applications of Artificial Intelligence to Prostate Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI): Current and Emerging Trends.

Authors:  Michelle D Bardis; Roozbeh Houshyar; Peter D Chang; Alexander Ushinsky; Justin Glavis-Bloom; Chantal Chahine; Thanh-Lan Bui; Mark Rupasinghe; Christopher G Filippi; Daniel S Chow
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2020-05-11       Impact factor: 6.639

6.  The Efficacy of Proclarix to Select Appropriate Candidates for Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Derived Prostate Biopsies in Men with Suspected Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Juan Morote; Miriam Campistol; Anna Celma; Lucas Regis; Inés de Torres; María E Semidey; Sarai Roche; Richard Mast; Anna Santamaría; Jacques Planas; Enrique Trilla
Journal:  World J Mens Health       Date:  2021-12-27       Impact factor: 5.400

7.  Variability in MRI vs. ultrasound measures of prostate volume and its impact on treatment recommendations for favorable-risk prostate cancer patients: a case series.

Authors:  Yonina R Murciano-Goroff; Luciant D Wolfsberger; Arti Parekh; Fiona M Fennessy; Kemal Tuncali; Peter F Orio; Thomas R Niedermayr; W Warren Suh; Phillip M Devlin; Clare Mary C Tempany; Emily H Neubauer Sugar; Desmond A O'Farrell; Graeme Steele; Michael O'Leary; Ivan Buzurovic; Antonio L Damato; Robert A Cormack; Andriy Y Fedorov; Paul L Nguyen
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2014-09-09       Impact factor: 3.481

8.  The Barcelona Predictive Model of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Juan Morote; Angel Borque-Fernando; Marina Triquell; Anna Celma; Lucas Regis; Manel Escobar; Richard Mast; Inés M de Torres; María E Semidey; José M Abascal; Carles Sola; Pol Servian; Daniel Salvador; Anna Santamaría; Jacques Planas; Luis M Esteban; Enrique Trilla
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-21       Impact factor: 6.639

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.