PURPOSE: To evaluate the role of a 3T biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI), T2 -weighted imaging, and three separate diffusion-weighted imaging acquisitions combined with targeted biopsy (TB) for improving risk stratification of men with elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between March 2013 and February 2015, 175 men with a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa) were offered bpMRI (NCT01864135) based on a suspicion of PCa (two repeated PSA measurements in the range 2.5-20.0 ng/ml and/or abnormal digital rectal examination). Men with an equivocal to high suspicion of PCa had two TBs of the dominant lesion using cognitive ultrasound guidance, followed by systematic biopsy (SB). Men with a low to very low suspicion had only SB. In total, 161 (161/175, 92%) prospectively enrolled men completed the trial and were included in the final analyses. The primary endpoint of the trial was the cancer detection rate (CDR) of TB and SB. Clinically significant cancer (SPCa) was defined as Gleason score ≥3 + 4. RESULTS: TB compared with SB had higher CDR for SPCa (45%, 72/161 vs. 39%, 63/161, respectively; P > 0.05) and a lower CDR for Gleason score 3 + 3 (8%, 15/161 vs. 16%, 30/161; P < 0.05). Restricting biopsy to men with equivocal to highly suspicious bpMRI findings would have resulted in a 24% (38/161) reduction in the number of men undergoing biopsy, while missing 4 (2%) with SPCa. All anonymized datasets, including bpMRI reports and follow up information, are freely available on the trial server. CONCLUSION: Prebiopsy bpMRI and TB in men with a clinical suspicion of PCa improved risk stratification. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 Technical Efficacy: Stage 5 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2017;46:1089-1095.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the role of a 3T biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI), T2 -weighted imaging, and three separate diffusion-weighted imaging acquisitions combined with targeted biopsy (TB) for improving risk stratification of men with elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between March 2013 and February 2015, 175 men with a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa) were offered bpMRI (NCT01864135) based on a suspicion of PCa (two repeated PSA measurements in the range 2.5-20.0 ng/ml and/or abnormal digital rectal examination). Men with an equivocal to high suspicion of PCa had two TBs of the dominant lesion using cognitive ultrasound guidance, followed by systematic biopsy (SB). Men with a low to very low suspicion had only SB. In total, 161 (161/175, 92%) prospectively enrolled men completed the trial and were included in the final analyses. The primary endpoint of the trial was the cancer detection rate (CDR) of TB and SB. Clinically significant cancer (SPCa) was defined as Gleason score ≥3 + 4. RESULTS:TB compared with SB had higher CDR for SPCa (45%, 72/161 vs. 39%, 63/161, respectively; P > 0.05) and a lower CDR for Gleason score 3 + 3 (8%, 15/161 vs. 16%, 30/161; P < 0.05). Restricting biopsy to men with equivocal to highly suspicious bpMRI findings would have resulted in a 24% (38/161) reduction in the number of men undergoing biopsy, while missing 4 (2%) with SPCa. All anonymized datasets, including bpMRI reports and follow up information, are freely available on the trial server. CONCLUSION: Prebiopsy bpMRI and TB in men with a clinical suspicion of PCa improved risk stratification. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 Technical Efficacy: Stage 5 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2017;46:1089-1095.
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
Authors: Ivan Jambor; Anna Kuisma; Esa Kähkönen; Jukka Kemppainen; Harri Merisaari; Olli Eskola; Jarmo Teuho; Ileana Montoya Perez; Marko Pesola; Hannu J Aronen; Peter J Boström; Pekka Taimen; Heikki Minn Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2017-11-16 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Elmira Hassanzadeh; Francesco Alessandrino; Olutayo I Olubiyi; Daniel I Glazer; Robert V Mulkern; Andriy Fedorov; Clare M Tempany; Fiona M Fennessy Journal: Abdom Radiol (NY) Date: 2018-05
Authors: Anwar R Padhani; Jelle Barentsz; Geert Villeirs; Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Daniel J Margolis; Baris Turkbey; Harriet C Thoeny; François Cornud; Masoom A Haider; Katarzyna J Macura; Clare M Tempany; Sadhna Verma; Jeffrey C Weinreb Journal: Radiology Date: 2019-06-11 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Frank-Jan H Drost; Daniël F Osses; Daan Nieboer; Ewout W Steyerberg; Chris H Bangma; Monique J Roobol; Ivo G Schoots Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2019-04-25
Authors: Edwin J R van Beek; Christiane Kuhl; Yoshimi Anzai; Patricia Desmond; Richard L Ehman; Qiyong Gong; Garry Gold; Vikas Gulani; Margaret Hall-Craggs; Tim Leiner; C C Tschoyoson Lim; James G Pipe; Scott Reeder; Caroline Reinhold; Marion Smits; Daniel K Sodickson; Clare Tempany; H Alberto Vargas; Meiyun Wang Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2018-08-25 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Verena C Obmann; Shivani Pahwa; William Tabayayong; Yun Jiang; Gregory O'Connor; Sara Dastmalchian; John Lu; Soham Shah; Karin A Herrmann; Raj Paspulati; Gregory MacLennan; Lee Ponsky; Robert Abouassaly; Vikas Gulani Journal: Urology Date: 2018-09-07 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Armando Stabile; Francesco Giganti; Veeru Kasivisvanathan; Gianluca Giannarini; Caroline M Moore; Anwar R Padhani; Valeria Panebianco; Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Georg Salomon; Baris Turkbey; Geert Villeirs; Jelle O Barentsz Journal: Eur Urol Oncol Date: 2020-03-17