Literature DB >> 32224036

Portable Perfusion Phantom Offers Quantitative Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Accurate Prostate Cancer Grade Stratification: A Pilot Study.

Harrison Kim1, John V Thomas2, Jeffrey W Nix3, Jennifer B Gordetsky4, Yufeng Li5, Soroush Rais-Bahrami6.   

Abstract

RATIONALE AND
OBJECTIVES: The study goal was to test whether the improved accuracy in quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging measurement using a point-of-care portable perfusion phantom (P4) leads to better stratification of prostate cancer grade.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective clinical study was conducted recruiting 44 patients scheduled for multi-parameter MRI prostate exams. All participants were imaged with the P4 placed under their pelvic regions. Tissue sampling was carried out for 25 patients at 22 ± 18 (mean ± SD) days after multi-parameter MRI. On histologic examination, a total of 31 lesions were confirmed as prostate cancer. Tumors were classified into low grade (n = 14), intermediate grade (n = 10), and high grade (n = 7). Tumor perfusion was assessed by volume transfer constant, Ktrans, before and after P4-based error correction, and the Ktrans of low, intermediate and high-grade tumors were statistically compared.
RESULTS: After P4-based error correction, the Ktrans of low, intermediate, and high-grade tumors were 0.109 ± 0.026 min-1 (95% CI: 0.0094 to 0.124 min-1), 0.163 ± 0.049 min-1 (95% CI: 0.129 to 0.198 min-1) and 0.356 ± 0.156 min-1 (95% CI: 0.215 to 0.495 min-1), respectively, with statistically significant difference among the groups (low vs intermediate: p = 0.002; intermediate vs high: p = 0.002; low vs high: p < 0.001). The sensitivity and specificity of Ktrans value, 0.14 min-1, to detect the clinically significant prostate cancer were 88% and 93%, respectively, after P4 based error correction, but those before error correction were 88% and 86%, respectively.
CONCLUSION: The P4 allows to reduce errors in quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging measurement, enhancing accuracy in stratification of prostate cancer grade.
Copyright © 2020 The Association of University Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  DCE-MRI; Grade stratification; Perfusion phantom; Prostate cancer

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32224036      PMCID: PMC7529802          DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2020.02.027

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Radiol        ISSN: 1076-6332            Impact factor:   3.173


  29 in total

Review 1.  Modeling tracer kinetics in dynamic Gd-DTPA MR imaging.

Authors:  P S Tofts
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  1997 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.813

2.  T₁ mapping using variable flip angle SPGR data with flip angle correction.

Authors:  Gilad Liberman; Yoram Louzoun; Dafna Ben Bashat
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2013-11-25       Impact factor: 4.813

3.  Variability in Quantitative DCE-MRI: Sources and Solutions.

Authors:  Harrison Kim
Journal:  J Nat Sci       Date:  2018

4.  Rapid B1+ mapping using a preconditioning RF pulse with TurboFLASH readout.

Authors:  Sohae Chung; Daniel Kim; Elodie Breton; Leon Axel
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 4.668

5.  Antivascular effects of neoadjuvant androgen deprivation for prostate cancer: an in vivo human study using susceptibility and relaxivity dynamic MRI.

Authors:  Roberto Alonzi; Anwar R Padhani; N Jane Taylor; David J Collins; James A D'Arcy; J James Stirling; Michele I Saunders; Peter J Hoskin
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2010-07-12       Impact factor: 7.038

6.  Free-breathing contrast-enhanced multiphase MRI of the liver using a combination of compressed sensing, parallel imaging, and golden-angle radial sampling.

Authors:  Hersh Chandarana; Li Feng; Tobias K Block; Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Ruth P Lim; James S Babb; Daniel K Sodickson; Ricardo Otazo
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 6.016

Review 7.  Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2.1: 2019 Update of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2.

Authors:  Baris Turkbey; Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Masoom A Haider; Anwar R Padhani; Geert Villeirs; Katarzyna J Macura; Clare M Tempany; Peter L Choyke; Francois Cornud; Daniel J Margolis; Harriet C Thoeny; Sadhna Verma; Jelle Barentsz; Jeffrey C Weinreb
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2019-03-18       Impact factor: 20.096

8.  Quantitative parameters in dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for the detection and characterization of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Cheng Wei; Bowen Jin; Magdalena Szewczyk-Bieda; Stephen Gandy; Stephen Lang; Yilong Zhang; Zhihong Huang; Ghulam Nabi
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2018-03-23

9.  Accurate Therapeutic Response Assessment of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Using Quantitative Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging With a Point-of-Care Perfusion Phantom: A Pilot Study.

Authors:  Harrison Kim; Desiree E Morgan; Patrick Schexnailder; Rudolph M Navari; Grant R Williams; J Bart Rose; Yufeng Li; Ravikumar Paluri
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 6.016

Review 10.  Grading of prostatic adenocarcinoma: current state and prognostic implications.

Authors:  Jennifer Gordetsky; Jonathan Epstein
Journal:  Diagn Pathol       Date:  2016-03-09       Impact factor: 2.644

View more
  1 in total

1.  Disposable point-of-care portable perfusion phantom for quantitative DCE-MRI.

Authors:  Martin D Holland; Andres Morales; Sean Simmons; Brandon Smith; Samuel R Misko; Xiaoyu Jiang; David A Hormuth; Chase Christenson; Roy P Koomullil; Desiree E Morgan; Yufeng Li; Junzhong Xu; Thomas E Yankeelov; Harrison Kim
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2021-12-10       Impact factor: 4.506

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.