Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MR Imaging in the Evaluation of Patients with Prostate Cancer

Magnetic Resonance Imaging Clinics of North America

Volumn 17, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 363-383

  McMahon, Colm J ^a   Bloch, B Nicolas ^a   Lenkinski, Robert E ^a   Rofsky, Neil M ^a  

^a BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Contrast media; Gadolinium DTPA; Kinetics; MR imaging; Neoplasm staging; Prostatic neoplasm

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST MEDIUM; GADOLINIUM; GADOLINIUM PENTETATE MEGLUMINE; PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; VASCULOTROPIN ANTIBODY;

ANGIOGENESIS; BRACHYTHERAPY; CANCER LOCALIZATION; CANCER RECURRENCE; CANCER STAGING; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CRYOTHERAPY; DIGITAL RECTAL EXAMINATION; DISEASE MARKER; DRUG PENETRATION; EXTERNAL BEAM RADIOTHERAPY; EXTRACELLULAR SPACE; GOLD STANDARD; HUMAN; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

CONTRAST MEDIA; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; TUMOR MARKERS, BIOLOGICAL;

EID: 65249093663     PISSN: 10649689     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.mric.2009.01.013     Document Type: Review

References (115)

1. American Cancer Society. Cancer facts and figures 2008. Atlanta (GA): American Cancer Society (2008)
2. National Cancer Institute. SEER cancer statistics review, 1975-2005. Available at:. http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2005/ Accessed 2008
3. Bock J.L., and Klee G.G. How sensitive is a prostate-specific antigen measurement? How sensitive does it need to be?. Arch Pathol Lab Med 128 3 (2004) 341-343
4. Hernandez J., and Thompson I.M. Prostate-specific antigen: a review of the validation of the most commonly used cancer biomarker. Cancer 101 5 (2004) 894-904
5. Schwartz M.J., Hwang D.H., Hung A.J., et al. Negative influence of changing biopsy practice patterns on the predictive value of prostate-specific antigen for cancer detection on prostate biopsy. Cancer 112 8 (2008) 1718-1725
6. Gosselaar C., Kranse R., Roobol M.J., et al. The interobserver variability of digital rectal examination in a large randomized trial for the screening of prostate cancer. Prostate 68 9 (2008) 985-993
7. Albertsen P.C., Hanley J.A., and Fine J. 20-year outcomes following conservative management of clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 293 17 (2005) 2095-2101
8. National Cancer Institute. National Cancer Institute Physician Data Query (PDQ), 2008. Available at:. http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/treatment/prostate
9. Carlani M., Mancino S., Bonanno E., et al. Combined morphological, [1H]-MR spectroscopic and contrast-enhanced imaging of human prostate cancer with a 3-Tesla scanner: preliminary experience. Radiol Med 113 5 (2008) 670-688
10. Gosselaar C., Roobol M.J., Roemeling S., et al. The value of an additional hypoechoic lesion-directed biopsy core for detecting prostate cancer. BJU Int 101 6 (2008) 685-690
11. Cookson M.S. Update on transrectal ultrasound-guided needle biopsy of the prostate. Mol Urol 4 3 (2000) 93-97 [discussion: 99]
12. Mettlin C., Lee F., Drago J., et al. The American Cancer Society National Prostate Cancer Detection Project. Findings on the detection of early prostate cancer in 2425 men. Cancer 67 12 (1991) 2949-2958
13. San Francisco I.F., Regan M.M., Olumi A.F., et al. Percent of cores positive for cancer is a better preoperative predictor of cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy than prostate specific antigen. J Urol 171 4 (2004) 1492-1499
14. Sved P.D., Gomez P., Manoharan M., et al. Limitations of biopsy Gleason grade: implications for counseling patients with biopsy Gleason score 6 prostate cancer. J Urol 172 1 (2004) 98-102
15. Partin A.W., Kattan M.W., Subong E.N., et al. Combination of prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage, and Gleason score to predict pathological stage of localized prostate cancer. A multi-institutional update. JAMA 277 18 (1997) 1445-1451
16. Steuber T., Karakiewicz P.I., Augustin H., et al. Transition zone cancers undermine the predictive accuracy of Partin table stage predictions. J Urol 173 3 (2005) 737-741
17. Aprikian A.G. Risk stratification in clinically localized prostate cancer. Can J Urol 9 Suppl 1 (2002) 18-20
18. Zorn K.C., Capitanio U., Jeldres C., et al. Multi-institutional external validation of seminal vesicle invasion nomograms: head-to-head comparison of Gallina nomogram versus 2007 Partin tables. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys (2008) submitted for publication
19. Padhani A.R., Gapinski C.J., Macvicar D.A., et al. Dynamic contrast enhanced MRI of prostate cancer: correlation with morphology and tumour stage, histological grade and PSA. Clin Radiol 55 2 (2000) 99-109
20. Zakian K.L., Sircar K., Hricak H., et al. Correlation of proton MR spectroscopic imaging with Gleason score based on step-section pathologic analysis after radical prostatectomy. Radiology 234 3 (2005) 804-814
21. Cooperberg M.R., Lubeck D.P., Meng M.V., et al. The changing face of low-risk prostate cancer: trends in clinical presentation and primary management. J Clin Oncol 22 11 (2004) 2141-2149
22. Stamey T.A., Caldwell M., McNeal J.E., et al. The prostate specific antigen era in the United States is over for prostate cancer: what happened in the last 20 years?. J Urol 172 4 Pt 1 (2004) 1297-1301
23. Eggener S.E., Scardino P.T., Carroll P.R., et al. Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer: a critical appraisal of rationale and modalities. J Urol 178 6 (2007) 2260-2267
24. Schiebler M.L., Tomaszewski J.E., Bezzi M., et al. Prostatic carcinoma and benign prostatic hyperplasia: correlation of high-resolution MR and histopathologic findings. Radiology 172 1 (1989) 131-137
25. Outwater E., Schiebler M.L., Tomaszewski J.E., et al. Mucinous carcinomas involving the prostate: atypical findings at MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2 5 (1992) 597-600
26. Beyersdorff D., Taymoorian K., Knosel T., et al. MRI of prostate cancer at 1.5 and 3.0 T: comparison of image quality in tumor detection and staging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 185 5 (2005) 1214-1220
27. Yu K.K., Hricak H., Alagappan R., et al. Detection of extracapsular extension of prostate carcinoma with endorectal and phased-array coil MR imaging: multivariate feature analysis. Radiology 202 3 (1997) 697-702
28. Hricak H., Dooms G.C., Jeffrey R.B., et al. Prostatic carcinoma: staging by clinical assessment, CT, and MR imaging. Radiology 162 2 (1987) 331-336
29. Quinn S.F., Franzini D.A., Demlow T.A., et al. MR imaging of prostate cancer with an endorectal surface coil technique: correlation with whole-mount specimens. Radiology 190 2 (1994) 323-327
30. Jager G.J., Ruijter E.T., van de Kaa C.A., et al. Local staging of prostate cancer with endorectal MR imaging: correlation with histopathology. AJR Am J Roentgenol 166 4 (1996) 845-852
31. Tempany C.M., Zhou X., Zerhouni E.A., et al. Staging of prostate cancer: results of Radiology Diagnostic Oncology Group project comparison of three MR imaging techniques. Radiology 192 1 (1994) 47-54
32. Presti Jr. J.C., Hricak H., Narayan P.A., et al. Local staging of prostatic carcinoma: comparison of transrectal sonography and endorectal MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 166 1 (1996) 103-108
33. Huch Boni R.A., Boner J.A., Debatin J.F., et al. Optimization of prostate carcinoma staging: comparison of imaging and clinical methods. Clin Radiol 50 9 (1995) 593-600
34. Bezzi M., Kressel H.Y., Allen K.S., et al. Prostatic carcinoma: staging with MR imaging at 1.5 T. Radiology 169 2 (1988) 339-346
35. Biondetti P.R., Lee J.K., Ling D., et al. Clinical stage B prostate carcinoma: staging with MR imaging. Radiology 162 2 (1987) 325-329
36. Bartolozzi C., Menchi I., Lencioni R., et al. Local staging of prostate carcinoma with endorectal coil MRI: correlation with whole-mount radical prostatectomy specimens. Eur Radiol 6 3 (1996) 339-345
37. Perrotti M., Kaufman Jr. R.P., Jennings T.A., et al. Endo-rectal coil magnetic resonance imaging in clinically localized prostate cancer: is it accurate?. J Urol 156 1 (1996) 106-109
38. Jager G.J., Severens J.L., Thornbury J.R., et al. Prostate cancer staging: should MR imaging be used?-A decision analytic approach. Radiology 215 2 (2000) 445-451
39. Futterer J.J., Engelbrecht M.R., Huisman H.J., et al. Staging prostate cancer with dynamic contrast-enhanced endorectal MR imaging prior to radical prostatectomy: experienced versus less experienced readers. Radiology 237 2 (2005) 541-549
40. Bloch B.N., Furman-Haran E., Helbich T.H., et al. Prostate cancer: accurate determination of extracapsular extension with high-spatial-resolution dynamic contrast-enhanced and T2-weighted MR imaging-initial results. Radiology 245 1 (2007) 176-185
41. Mirowitz S.A., Brown J.J., and Heiken J.P. Evaluation of the prostate and prostatic carcinoma with gadolinium-enhanced endorectal coil MR imaging. Radiology 186 1 (1993) 153-157
42. Folkman J., and Beckner K. Angiogenesis imaging. Acad Radiol 7 10 (2000) 783-785
43. Folkman J. Angiogenesis in cancer, vascular, rheumatoid and other disease. Nat Med 1 1 (1995) 27-31
44. Li W.W. Tumor angiogenesis: molecular pathology, therapeutic targeting, and imaging. Acad Radiol 7 10 (2000) 800-811
45. Vartanian R.K., and Weidner N. Endothelial cell proliferation in prostatic carcinoma and prostatic hyperplasia: correlation with Gleason's score, microvessel density, and epithelial cell proliferation. Lab Invest 73 6 (1995) 844-850
46. Strohmeyer D., Rossing C., Strauss F., et al. Tumor angiogenesis is associated with progression after radical prostatectomy in pT2/pT3 prostate cancer. Prostate 42 1 (2000) 26-33
47. Weidner N., Moore II D.H., Ljung B.M., et al. Correlation of bromodeoxyuridine (BRDU) labeling of breast carcinoma cells with mitotic figure content and tumor grade. Am J Surg Pathol 17 10 (1993) 987-994
48. van Moorselaar R.J., and Voest E.E. Angiogenesis in prostate cancer: its role in disease progression and possible therapeutic approaches. Mol Cell Endocrinol 197 1-2 (2002) 239-250
49. Taylor J.S., Tofts P.S., Port R., et al. MR imaging of tumor microcirculation: promise for the new millennium. J Magn Reson Imaging 10 6 (1999) 903-907
50. Dewhirst M.W., Tso C.Y., Oliver R., et al. Morphologic and hemodynamic comparison of tumor and healing normal tissue microvasculature. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 17 1 (1989) 91-99
51. Leu A.J., Berk D.A., Lymboussaki A., et al. Absence of functional lymphatics within a murine sarcoma: a molecular and functional evaluation. Cancer Res 60 16 (2000) 4324-4327
52. Alonzi R., Padhani A.R., and Allen C. Dynamic contrast enhanced MRI in prostate cancer. Eur J Radiol 63 3 (2007) 335-350
53. Tofts P.S., Brix G., Buckley D.L., et al. Estimating kinetic parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced T(1)-weighted MRI of a diffusible tracer: standardized quantities and symbols. J Magn Reson Imaging 10 3 (1999) 223-232
54. Choyke P.L., Dwyer A.J., and Knopp M.V. Functional tumor imaging with dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 17 5 (2003) 509-520
55. Tofts P.S., and Kermode A.G. Measurement of the blood-brain barrier permeability and leakage space using dynamic MR imaging. 1. Fundamental concepts. Magn Reson Med 17 2 (1991) 357-367
56. Larsson H.B., Stubgaard M., Frederiksen J.L., et al. Quantitation of blood-brain barrier defect by magnetic resonance imaging and gadolinium-DTPA in patients with multiple sclerosis and brain tumors. Magn Reson Med 16 1 (1990) 117-131
57. Brix G., Semmler W., Port R., et al. Pharmacokinetic parameters in CNS Gd-DTPA enhanced MR imaging. J Comput Assist Tomogr 15 4 (1991) 621-628
58. Tofts P.S. Modeling tracer kinetics in dynamic Gd-DTPA MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 7 1 (1997) 91-101
59. Huisman H.J., Engelbrecht M.R., and Barentsz J.O. Accurate estimation of pharmacokinetic contrast-enhanced dynamic MRI parameters of the prostate. J Magn Reson Imaging 13 4 (2001) 607-614
60. Kety S. Theory of blood-tissue exchange and its application to measurement of blood flow. Methods Med Res 8 (1960) 223-227
61. Rijpkema M., Kaanders J.H., Joosten F.B., et al. Method for quantitative mapping of dynamic MRI contrast agent uptake in human tumors. J Magn Reson Imaging 14 4 (2001) 457-463
62. * and T1 measurements for improved perfusion and permeability studies in high field using dynamic contrast enhancement. Eur Radiol 16 9 (2006) 2083-2091
63. van Dorsten F.A., van der Graaf M., Engelbrecht M.R., et al. Combined quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging and (1)H MR spectroscopic imaging of human prostate cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 20 2 (2004) 279-287
64. Futterer J.J., Heijmink S.W., Scheenen T.W., et al. Prostate cancer localization with dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging and proton MR spectroscopic imaging. Radiology 241 2 (2006) 449-458
65. Ocak I., Bernardo M., Metzger G., et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of prostate cancer at 3 T: a study of pharmacokinetic parameters. AJR Am J Roentgenol 189 4 (2007) 849
66. Storaas T., Gjesdal K.I., Svindland A., et al. Dynamic first pass 3D EPI of the prostate: accuracy in tumor location. Acta Radiol 45 5 (2004) 584-590
67. Schlemmer H.P., Merkle J., Grobholz R., et al. Can pre-operative contrast-enhanced dynamic MR imaging for prostate cancer predict microvessel density in prostatectomy specimens?. Eur Radiol 14 2 (2004) 309-317
68. Kiessling F., Lichy M., Grobholz R., et al. Simple models improve the discrimination of prostate cancers from the peripheral gland by T1-weighted dynamic MRI. Eur Radiol 14 10 (2004) 1793-1801
69. Bettencourt M.C., Bauer J.J., Sesterhenn I.A., et al. CD34 immunohistochemical assessment of angiogenesis as a prognostic marker for prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 160 2 (1998) 459-465
70. Silberman M.A., Partin A.W., Veltri R.W., et al. Tumor angiogenesis correlates with progression after radical prostatectomy but not with pathologic stage in Gleason sum 5 to 7 adenocarcinoma of the prostate. Cancer 79 4 (1997) 772-779
71. Rubin M.A., Buyyounouski M., Bagiella E., et al. Microvessel density in prostate cancer: lack of correlation with tumor grade, pathologic stage, and clinical outcome. Urology 53 3 (1999) 542-547
72. Weidner N., Carroll P.R., Flax J., et al. Tumor angiogenesis correlates with metastasis in invasive prostate carcinoma. Am J Pathol 143 2 (1993) 401-409
73. Jesberger J.A., Rafie N., Duerk J.L., et al. Model-free parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced-MRI: sensitivity to EES volume fraction and bolus timing. J Magn Reson Imaging 24 3 (2006) 586-594
74. Tanaka N., Samma S., Joko M., et al. Diagnostic usefulness of endorectal magnetic resonance imaging with dynamic contrast-enhancement in patients with localized prostate cancer: mapping studies with biopsy specimens. Int J Urol 6 12 (1999) 593-599
75. Preziosi P., Orlacchio A., Di Giambattista G., et al. Enhancement patterns of prostate cancer in dynamic MRI. Eur Radiol 13 5 (2003) 925-930
76. Noworolski S.M., Henry R.G., Vigneron D.B., et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in normal and abnormal prostate tissues as defined by biopsy, MRI, and 3D MRSI. Magn Reson Med 53 2 (2005) 249-255
77. Engelbrecht M.R., Huisman H.J., Laheij R.J., et al. Discrimination of prostate cancer from normal peripheral zone and central gland tissue by using dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 229 1 (2003) 248-254
78. Kim J.K., Hong S.S., Choi Y.J., et al. Wash-in rate on the basis of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: usefulness for prostate cancer detection and localization. J Magn Reson Imaging 22 5 (2005) 639-646
79. Kuhl C.K., Mielcareck P., Klaschik S., et al. Dynamic breast MR imaging: are signal intensity time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions?. Radiology 211 1 (1999) 101-110
80. Brown G., Macvicar D.A., Ayton V., et al. The role of intravenous contrast enhancement in magnetic resonance imaging of prostatic carcinoma. Clin Radiol 50 9 (1995) 601-606
81. Girouin N., Mege-Lechevallier F., Tonina Senes A., et al. Prostate dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI with simple visual diagnostic criteria: is it reasonable?. Eur Radiol 17 6 (2007) 1498-1509
82. Ogura K., Maekawa S., Okubo K., et al. Dynamic endorectal magnetic resonance imaging for local staging and detection of neurovascular bundle involvement of prostate cancer: correlation with histopathologic results. Urology 57 4 (2001) 721-726
83. Jager G.J., Ruijter E.T., van de Kaa C.A., et al. Dynamic TurboFLASH subtraction technique for contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the prostate: correlation with histopathologic results. Radiology 203 3 (1997) 645-652
84. Namimoto T., Morishita S., Saitoh R., et al. The value of dynamic MR imaging for hypointensity lesions of the peripheral zone of the prostate. Comput Med Imaging Graph 22 3 (1998) 239-245
85. Liney G.P., Turnbull L.W., and Knowles A.J. In vivo magnetic resonance spectroscopy and dynamic contrast enhanced imaging of the prostate gland. NMR Biomed 12 1 (1999) 39-44
86. Turnbull L.W., Buckley D.L., Turnbull L.S., et al. Differentiation of prostatic carcinoma and benign prostatic hyperplasia: correlation between dynamic Gd-DTPA-enhanced MR imaging and histopathology. J Magn Reson Imaging 9 2 (1999) 311-316
87. Ito H., Kamoi K., Yokoyama K., et al. Visualization of prostate cancer using dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: comparison with transrectal power Doppler ultrasound. Br J Radiol 76 909 (2003) 617-624
88. Rouviere O., Raudrant A., Ecochard R., et al. Characterization of time-enhancement curves of benign and malignant prostate tissue at dynamic MR imaging. Eur Radiol 13 5 (2003) 931-942
89. Buckley D.L., Roberts C., Parker G.J., et al. Prostate cancer: evaluation of vascular characteristics with dynamic contrast-enhanced T1-weighted MR imaging-initial experience. Radiology 233 3 (2004) 709-715
90. Hara N., Okuizumi M., Koike H., et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) is a useful modality for the precise detection and staging of early prostate cancer. Prostate 62 2 (2005) 140-147
91. Degani H., Gusis V., Weinstein D., et al. Mapping pathophysiological features of breast tumors by MRI at high spatial resolution. Nat Med 3 7 (1997) 780-782
92. Montironi R., Mazzuccheli R., Scarpelli M., et al. Gleason grading of prostate cancer in needle biopsies or radical prostatectomy specimens: contemporary approach, current clinical significance and sources of pathology discrepancies. BJU Int 95 8 (2005) 1146-1152
93. Evans A.J., Henry P.C., Van der Kwast T.H., et al. Interobserver variability between expert urologic pathologists for extraprostatic extension and surgical margin status in radical prostatectomy specimens. Am J Surg Pathol 32 10 (2008) 1503-1512
94. Nico B., Benagiano V., Mangieri D., et al. Evaluation of microvascular density in tumors: pro and contra. Histol Histopathol 23 5 (2008) 601-607
95. Rehman S., and Jayson G.C. Molecular imaging of antiangiogenic agents. Oncologist 10 2 (2005) 92-103
96. Oehr P. 'Omics'-based imaging in cancer detection and therapy. Per Med 3 1 (2006) 19-32
97. Folkman J. Angiogenesis. Annu Rev Med 57 (2006) 1-18
98. Dome B., Hendrix M.J., Paku S., et al. Alternative vascularization mechanisms in cancer: pathology and therapeutic implications. Am J Pathol 170 1 (2007) 1-15
99. Chaib H., Cockrell E.K., Rubin M.A., et al. Profiling and verification of gene expression patterns in normal and malignant human prostate tissues by cDNA microarray analysis. Neoplasia 3 1 (2001) 43-52
100. El-Gohary Y.M., Silverman J.F., Olson P.R., et al. Endoglin (CD105) and vascular endothelial growth factor as prognostic markers in prostatic adenocarcinoma. Am J Clin Pathol 127 4 (2007) 572-579
101. Soulitzis N., Karyotis I., Delakas D., et al. Expression analysis of peptide growth factors VEGF, FGF2, TGFB1, EGF and IGF1 in prostate cancer and benign prostatic hyperplasia. Int J Oncol 29 2 (2006) 305-314
102. Walsh K., Sriprasad S., Hopster D., et al. Distribution of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) in prostate disease. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 5 2 (2002) 119-122
103. Lenkinski R.E., Bloch B.N., Liu F., et al. An illustration of the potential for mapping MRI/MRS parameters with genetic over-expression profiles in human prostate cancer. MAGMA 21 6 (2008) 411-421
104. Rasiah K.K., Kench J.G., Gardiner-Garden M., et al. Aberrant neuropeptide Y and macrophage inhibitory cytokine-1 expression are early events in prostate cancer development and are associated with poor prognosis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 15 4 (2006) 711-716
105. Ruscica M., Dozio E., Motta M., et al. Modulatory actions of neuropeptide Y on prostate cancer growth: role of MAP kinase/ERK 1/2 activation. Adv Exp Med Biol 604 (2007) 96-100
106. Ekstrand A.J., Cao R., Bjorndahl M., et al. Deletion of neuropeptide Y (NPY) 2 receptor in mice results in blockage of NPY-induced angiogenesis and delayed wound healing. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 100 10 (2003) 6033-6038
107. Kitlinska J., Abe K., Kuo L., et al. Differential effects of neuropeptide Y on the growth and vascularization of neural crest-derived tumors. Cancer Res 65 5 (2005) 1719-1728
108. Leach M.O., Brindle K.M., Evelhoch J.L., et al. Assessment of antiangiogenic and antivascular therapeutics using MRI: recommendations for appropriate methodology for clinical trials. Br J Radiol 76 (2003) S87-S91
109. Bloch B.N., Rofsky N.M., Baroni R.H., et al. 3 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate with combined pelvic phased-array and endorectal coils; initial experience(1). Acad Radiol 11 8 (2004) 863-867
110. Bloch B.N., Lenkinski R.E., Helbich T.H., et al. Prostate postbrachytherapy seed distribution: comparison of high-resolution, contrast-enhanced, T1- and T2-weighted endorectal magnetic resonance imaging versus computed tomography: Initial experience. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 69 1 (2007) 70-78
111. Rosen Y., Bloch B.N., Lenkinski R.E., et al. 3T MR of the prostate: reducing susceptibility gradients by inflating the endorectal coil with a barium sulfate suspension. Magn Reson Med 57 5 (2007) 898-904
112. Chon C.H., Lai F.C., McNeal J.E., et al. Use of extended systematic sampling in patients with a prior negative prostate needle biopsy. J Urol 167 6 (2002) 2457-2460
113. Lopez-Corona E., Ohori M., Scardino P.T., et al. A nomogram for predicting a positive repeat prostate biopsy in patients with a previous negative biopsy session. J Urol 170 4 Pt 1 (2003) 1184-1188 [discussion: 1188]
114. Hong Y.M., Lai F.C., Chon C.H., et al. Impact of prior biopsy scheme on pathologic features of cancers detected on repeat biopsies. Urol Oncol 22 1 (2004) 7-10
115. Lenkinski RE, Bloch BN, Liu F, et al. An illustration of the potential for mapping MRI/MRS parameters with genetic over-expression profiles in human prostate cancer. MAGMA 2008;21(6)411-21.