PURPOSE: This study evaluated the accuracy of MR sequences [T2-, diffusion-weighted, and dynamic contrast-enhanced (T2WI, DWI, and DCE) imaging] at 3T, based on the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) scoring system [Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS)] using MR-guided in-bore prostate biopsies as reference standard. METHODS: In 235 consecutive patients [aged 65.7 ± 7.9 years; median prostate-specific antigen (PSA) 8 ng/ml] with multiparametric prostate MRI (mp-MRI), 566 lesions were scored according to PI-RADS. Histology of all lesions was obtained by targeted MR-guided in-bore biopsy. RESULTS: In 200 lesions, biopsy revealed prostate cancer (PCa). The area under the curve (AUC) for cancer detection was 0.70 (T2WI), 0.80 (DWI), and 0.74 (DCE). A combination of T2WI + DWI, T2WI + DCE, and DWI + DCE achieved an AUC of 0.81, 0.78, and 0.79. A summed PI-RADS score of T2WI + DWI + DCE achieved an AUC of 0.81. For higher grade PCa (primary Gleason pattern ≥ 4), the AUC was 0.85 for T2WI + DWI, 0.84 for T2WI + DCE, 0.86 for DWI + DCE, and 0.87 for T2WI + DWI + DCE. The AUC for T2WI + DWI + DCE for transitional-zone PCa was 0.73, and for the peripheral zone 0.88. Regarding higher-grade PCa, AUC for transitional-zone PCa was 0.88, and for peripheral zone 0.96. CONCLUSION: The combination of T2WI + DWI + DCE achieved the highest test accuracy, especially in patients with higher-grade PCa. The use of ≤2 MR sequences led to lower AUC in higher-grade and peripheral-zone cancers. KEY POINTS: • T2WI + DWI + DCE achieved the highest accuracy in patients with higher grade PCa • T2WI + DWI + DCE was more accurate for peripheral- than for transitional-zone PCa • DCE increased PCa detection accuracy in the peripheral zone • DWI was the leading sequence in the transitional zone.
PURPOSE: This study evaluated the accuracy of MR sequences [T2-, diffusion-weighted, and dynamic contrast-enhanced (T2WI, DWI, and DCE) imaging] at 3T, based on the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) scoring system [Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS)] using MR-guided in-bore prostate biopsies as reference standard. METHODS: In 235 consecutive patients [aged 65.7 ± 7.9 years; median prostate-specific antigen (PSA) 8 ng/ml] with multiparametric prostate MRI (mp-MRI), 566 lesions were scored according to PI-RADS. Histology of all lesions was obtained by targeted MR-guided in-bore biopsy. RESULTS: In 200 lesions, biopsy revealed prostate cancer (PCa). The area under the curve (AUC) for cancer detection was 0.70 (T2WI), 0.80 (DWI), and 0.74 (DCE). A combination of T2WI + DWI, T2WI + DCE, and DWI + DCE achieved an AUC of 0.81, 0.78, and 0.79. A summed PI-RADS score of T2WI + DWI + DCE achieved an AUC of 0.81. For higher grade PCa (primary Gleason pattern ≥ 4), the AUC was 0.85 for T2WI + DWI, 0.84 for T2WI + DCE, 0.86 for DWI + DCE, and 0.87 for T2WI + DWI + DCE. The AUC for T2WI + DWI + DCE for transitional-zone PCa was 0.73, and for the peripheral zone 0.88. Regarding higher-grade PCa, AUC for transitional-zone PCa was 0.88, and for peripheral zone 0.96. CONCLUSION: The combination of T2WI + DWI + DCE achieved the highest test accuracy, especially in patients with higher-grade PCa. The use of ≤2 MR sequences led to lower AUC in higher-grade and peripheral-zone cancers. KEY POINTS: • T2WI + DWI + DCE achieved the highest accuracy in patients with higher grade PCa • T2WI + DWI + DCE was more accurate for peripheral- than for transitional-zone PCa • DCE increased PCa detection accuracy in the peripheral zone • DWI was the leading sequence in the transitional zone.
Authors: Michael Quentin; Lars Schimmöller; Christian Arsov; Robert Rabenalt; Gerald Antoch; Peter Albers; Dirk Blondin Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2013-08-31 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: L Schimmöller; M Quentin; C Arsov; R S Lanzman; A Hiester; R Rabenalt; G Antoch; P Albers; D Blondin Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2013-06-12 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Klaas N A Nagel; Martijn G Schouten; Thomas Hambrock; Geert J S Litjens; Caroline M A Hoeks; Bennie ten Haken; Jelle O Barentsz; Jurgen J Fütterer Journal: Radiology Date: 2013-01-17 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Caroline M A Hoeks; Eline K Vos; Joyce G R Bomers; Jelle O Barentsz; Christina A Hulsbergen-van de Kaa; Tom W Scheenen Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2013-10 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Timur H Kuru; Matthias C Roethke; Philip Rieker; Wilfried Roth; Michael Fenchel; Markus Hohenfellner; Heinz-Peter Schlemmer; Boris A Hadaschik Journal: BJU Int Date: 2013-08-13 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Sofie Isebaert; Laura Van den Bergh; Karin Haustermans; Steven Joniau; Evelyne Lerut; Liesbeth De Wever; Frederik De Keyzer; Tom Budiharto; Pieter Slagmolen; Hendrik Van Poppel; Raymond Oyen Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2012-11-21 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Amy Sabach; James S Babb; Brent W Matza; Samir S Taneja; Fang-Ming Deng Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2013-09 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Stephan H Polanec; Katja Pinker-Domenig; Peter Brader; Dietmar Georg; Shahrokh Shariat; Claudio Spick; Martin Susani; Thomas H Helbich; Pascal A Baltzer Journal: World J Urol Date: 2015-09-25 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Michael Meier-Schroers; Christian Marx; Frederic Carsten Schmeel; Karsten Wolter; Jürgen Gieseke; Wolfgang Block; Alois Martin Sprinkart; Frank Traeber; Winfried Willinek; Hans Heinz Schild; Guido Matthias Kukuk Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-07-07 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: L Schimmöller; M Quentin; D Blondin; F Dietzel; A Hiester; C Schleich; C Thomas; R Rabenalt; H E Gabbert; P Albers; G Antoch; C Arsov Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2016-02-26 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Borna K Barth; Pieter J L De Visschere; Alexander Cornelius; Carlos Nicolau; Hebert Alberto Vargas; Daniel Eberli; Olivio F Donati Journal: Radiology Date: 2017-03-27 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Justin M Ream; Ankur M Doshi; Diane Dunst; Nainesh Parikh; Max X Kong; James S Babb; Samir S Taneja; Andrew B Rosenkrantz Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2016-09-20 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: J P Radtke; S Boxler; T H Kuru; M B Wolf; C D Alt; I V Popeneciu; S Steinemann; C Huettenbrink; C Bergstraesser-Gasch; T Klein; C Kesch; M Roethke; N Becker; W Roth; H-P Schlemmer; M Hohenfellner; B A Hadaschik Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2015-06-16 Impact factor: 5.554
Authors: Shoshana B Ginsburg; Ahmad Algohary; Shivani Pahwa; Vikas Gulani; Lee Ponsky; Hannu J Aronen; Peter J Boström; Maret Böhm; Anne-Maree Haynes; Phillip Brenner; Warick Delprado; James Thompson; Marley Pulbrock; Pekka Taimen; Robert Villani; Phillip Stricker; Ardeshir R Rastinehad; Ivan Jambor; Anant Madabhushi Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2016-12-19 Impact factor: 4.813