Literature DB >> 30413806

Comparison of biparametric MRI to full multiparametric MRI for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer.

Rachael L Sherrer1, Zachary A Glaser1, Jennifer B Gordetsky1,2, Jeffrey W Nix1, Kristin K Porter3, Soroush Rais-Bahrami4,5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MP-MRI) and MRI/ultrasound (US) fusion-guided biopsy are becoming more widely used techniques for prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis and management. However, their widespread adoption and use, where available, are limited by cost and added time. These limitations could be minimized if a biparametric MRI (BP-MRI) focusing on T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted imaging is performed. Herein we report the cancer detection rate of BP-MRI compared with full MP-MRI.
METHODS: Biopsy-naive and prior negative biopsy patients with clinical suspicion for PCa underwent MP-MRI with an imaging protocol incorporating narrow field-of-view T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted, and DCE pelvic MRI. Then patients underwent MRI/US fusion-guided biopsy of target lesions between November 2013 and October 2017. The pathology results were compared to the positivity of the DCE sequence compared to the BP-MRI findings alone.
RESULTS: There were 648 targeted lesions biopsied in 344 patients. We defined biparametric screen filter positivity as both T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted imaging positivity for the same lesion. The majority of target lesions (552/648, 85%) were screen filter positive. For those that were screen filter negative, a minority (14/96, 15%) had DCE-positive findings. Of these, 2/3 (67%) cancer-positive cases were seen on T2-weighted imaging. For those 82 that were screen filter negative and DCE negative, the DCE phase would not have added imaging suspicion. Only 3/82 (3.7%) were cancer positive; 2 with low risk, grade group 1 cancer and 1 with intraductal carcinoma, all identified on targeted T2-weighted MRI positivity.
CONCLUSIONS: BP-MRI for the evaluation of PCa and for guiding MRI/US fusion-targeted biopsy has the advantages of reducing cost, time, and contrast exposure of MP-MRI by eliminating the DCE phase. These benefits are realized without forfeiting valuable diagnostic information, as shown by similar cancer detection rates of BP-MRI and MP-MRI in this study, particularly for clinically significant cases of PCa.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30413806      PMCID: PMC8983101          DOI: 10.1038/s41391-018-0107-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis        ISSN: 1365-7852            Impact factor:   5.554


  26 in total

1.  Cancer statistics, 2018.

Authors:  Rebecca L Siegel; Kimberly D Miller; Ahmedin Jemal
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2018-01-04       Impact factor: 508.702

Review 2.  MR/US Fusion Technology: What Makes It Tick?

Authors:  Srinivas Vourganti; Norman Starkweather; Andrij Wojtowycz
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 3.092

3.  Magnetic Resonance Imaging Prior to First Prostate Biopsy-Are we there yet?

Authors:  Michael A Gorin; Patrick C Walsh
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2018-06-14       Impact factor: 20.096

4.  PI-RADS Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System: 2015, Version 2.

Authors:  Jeffrey C Weinreb; Jelle O Barentsz; Peter L Choyke; Francois Cornud; Masoom A Haider; Katarzyna J Macura; Daniel Margolis; Mitchell D Schnall; Faina Shtern; Clare M Tempany; Harriet C Thoeny; Sadna Verma
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2015-10-01       Impact factor: 20.096

5.  Immediate hypersensitivity reaction to gadolinium-based MR contrast media.

Authors:  Jae-Woo Jung; Hye-Ryun Kang; Min-Hye Kim; Whal Lee; Kyung-Up Min; Moon-Hee Han; Sang-Heon Cho
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2012-05-01       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 6.  Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy may enhance the diagnostic accuracy of significant prostate cancer detection compared to standard transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ivo G Schoots; Monique J Roobol; Daan Nieboer; Chris H Bangma; Ewout W Steyerberg; M G Myriam Hunink
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2014-12-03       Impact factor: 20.096

7.  MRI/US fusion-guided prostate biopsy allows for equivalent cancer detection with significantly fewer needle cores in biopsy-naive men.

Authors:  Vidhush K Yarlagadda; Win Shun Lai; Jennifer B Gordetsky; Kristin K Porter; Jeffrey W Nix; John V Thomas; Soroush Rais-Bahrami
Journal:  Diagn Interv Radiol       Date:  2018 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.630

Review 8.  National Institutes of Health Perspective on Reports of Gadolinium Deposition in the Brain.

Authors:  Ashkan A Malayeri; Kristina M Brooks; L Henry Bryant; Robert Evers; Parag Kumar; Daniel S Reich; David A Bluemke
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2016-01-23       Impact factor: 5.532

9.  Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study.

Authors:  Hashim U Ahmed; Ahmed El-Shater Bosaily; Louise C Brown; Rhian Gabe; Richard Kaplan; Mahesh K Parmar; Yolanda Collaco-Moraes; Katie Ward; Richard G Hindley; Alex Freeman; Alex P Kirkham; Robert Oldroyd; Chris Parker; Mark Emberton
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2017-01-20       Impact factor: 79.321

10.  Combined Biparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Prostate-specific Antigen in the Detection of Prostate Cancer: A Validation Study in a Biopsy-naive Patient Population.

Authors:  Michele Fascelli; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Sandeep Sankineni; Anna M Brown; Arvin K George; Richard Ho; Thomas Frye; Amichai Kilchevsky; Raju Chelluri; Steven Abboud; M Minhaj Siddiqui; Maria J Merino; Bradford J Wood; Peter L Choyke; Peter A Pinto; Baris Turkbey
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2015-12-08       Impact factor: 2.633

View more
  15 in total

Review 1.  A narrative review of MRI acquisition for MR-guided-radiotherapy in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Jing Yuan; Darren M C Poon; Gladys Lo; Oi Lei Wong; Kin Yin Cheung; Siu Ki Yu
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2022-02

2.  Diagnostic Ability of Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Cancer and Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in Equivocal Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Jing Zeng; Qingqing Cheng; Dong Zhang; Meng Fan; Changzheng Shi; Liangping Luo
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-02-19       Impact factor: 6.244

3.  Biparametric versus multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate: detection of clinically significant cancer in a perfect match group.

Authors:  Jungheum Cho; Hyungwoo Ahn; Sung Il Hwang; Hak Jong Lee; Gheeyoung Choe; Seok-Soo Byun; Sung Kyu Hong
Journal:  Prostate Int       Date:  2020-02-26

4.  Modified Predictive Model and Nomogram by Incorporating Prebiopsy Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging With Clinical Indicators for Prostate Biopsy Decision Making.

Authors:  Jin-Feng Pan; Rui Su; Jian-Zhou Cao; Zhen-Ya Zhao; Da-Wei Ren; Sha-Zhou Ye; Rui-da Huang; Zhu-Lei Tao; Cheng-Ling Yu; Jun-Hui Jiang; Qi Ma
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-09-13       Impact factor: 6.244

5.  A risk model for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer based on bi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging in a Japanese cohort.

Authors:  Kazushige Sakaguchi; Michikata Hayashida; Naoto Tanaka; Suguru Oka; Shinji Urakami
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-09-22       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Factors Influencing Variability in the Performance of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Literature Review.

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

7.  The role of gadolinium in magnetic resonance imaging for early prostate cancer diagnosis: A diagnostic accuracy study.

Authors:  Ilinca Cosma; Cornelia Tennstedt-Schenk; Sven Winzler; Marios Nikos Psychogios; Alexander Pfeil; Ulf Teichgraeber; Ansgar Malich; Ismini Papageorgiou
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-12-23       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  A Predictive Model Based on Bi-parametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Clinical Parameters for Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in the Korean Population.

Authors:  Tae Il Noh; Chang Wan Hyun; Ha Eun Kang; Hyun Jung Jin; Jong Hyun Tae; Ji Sung Shim; Sung Gu Kang; Deuk Jae Sung; Jun Cheon; Jeong Gu Lee; Seok Ho Kang
Journal:  Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2020-12-31       Impact factor: 4.679

9.  Cancer-specific outcomes for prostate cancer patients who had prebiopsy prostate MRI.

Authors:  Jonathan Li; Dattatraya Patil; Martin G Sanda; Christopher P Filson
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2021-08-02       Impact factor: 3.498

10.  Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)-Targeted Biopsy in Patients with Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) Levels <20 ng/mL: A Single-Center Study in Northeastern China.

Authors:  Zhihong Dai; Yangyang Liu; Zhao Huangfu; Liang Wang; Zhiyu Liu
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2021-08-08
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.