Performance characteristics of MR imaging in the evaluation of clinically low-risk prostate cancer: A prospective study

Radiology

Volumn 265, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 478-487

  Vargas, HebertAlberto ^a   Akin, Oguz ^a   Shukla Dave, Amita ^a   Zhang, Jingbo ^a   Zakian, Kristen L ^a   Zheng, Junting ^a   Kanao, Kent ^a   Goldman, Debra A ^a   Moskowitz, Chaya S ^a   Reuter, Victor E ^a   Eastham, James A ^a   Scardino, Peter T ^a   Hricak, Hedvig ^a  

^a MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER RISK; CANCER SIZE; CHILD; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPY; PERFORMANCE; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; RATING SCALE; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; SCHOOL CHILD; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TISSUE METABOLISM;

ADULT; AGED; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PREOPERATIVE CARE; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RISK FACTORS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 84867911571     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.12120041     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Polascik TJ, Oesterling JE, Partin AW. Prostate specific antigen: a decade of discovery - what we have learned and where we are going. J Urol 1999;162(2):293-306. (Pubitemid 29434327)
2. .Cooperberg MR, Lubeck DP, Meng MV, Mehta SS, Carroll PR. The changing face of low-risk prostate cancer: trends in clinical presentation and primary management. J Clin Oncol 2004;22(11):2141-2149. (Pubitemid 41095147)
3. Harnden P, Naylor B, Shelley MD, Clements H, Coles B, Mason MD. The clinical management of patients with a small volume of prostatic cancer on biopsy: what are the risks of progression? a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer 2008;112(5):971-981. (Pubitemid 351304580)
4. Zhang J, Hricak H, Shukla-Dave A, et al. Clinical stage T1c prostate cancer: evaluation with endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging. Radiology 2009;253(2):425-434.
5. .Epstein JI, Walsh PC, Carmichael M, Brendler CB. Pathologic and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostate cancer. JAMA 1994;271(5):368-374. (Pubitemid 24037911)
6. Stamey TA, Caldwell M, McNeal JE, Nolley R, Hemenez M, Downs J. The prostate specific antigen era in the United States is over for prostate cancer: what happened in the last 20 years? J Urol 2004;172(4 pt 1):1297-1301. (Pubitemid 39249701)
7. Shariat SF, Kattan MW, Vickers AJ, Karakiewicz PI, Scardino PT. Critical review of prostate cancer predictive tools. Future Oncol 2009;5(10):1555-1584.
8. Ahmed HU, Akin O, Coleman JA, et al. Transatlantic Consensus Group on active surveillance and focal therapy for prostate cancer. BJU Int 2012;109(11):1636-1647.
9. Wise AM, Stamey TA, McNeal JE, Clayton JL. Morphologic and clinical significance of multifocal prostate cancers in radical prostatectomy specimens. Urology 2002;60(2):264-269. (Pubitemid 34831770)
10. Ahmed HU, Pendse D, Illing R, Allen C, van der Meulen JH, Emberton M. Will focal therapy become a standard of care for men with localized prostate cancer? Nat Clin Pract Oncol 2007;4(11):632-642. (Pubitemid 350020378)
11. Akin O, Hricak H. Imaging of prostate cancer. Radiol Clin North Am 2007;45(1):207-222. (Pubitemid 44854046)
12. Kirkham AP, Emberton M, Allen C. How good is MRI at detecting and characterising cancer within the prostate? Eur Urol 2006;50(6):1163-1174; discussion 1175.
13. Nogueira L, Wang L, Fine SW, et al. Focal treatment or observation of prostate cancer: pretreatment accuracy of transrectal ultrasound biopsy and T2-weighted MRI. Urology 2010;75(2):472-477.
14. .Raz O, Haider M, Trachtenberg J, Leibovici D, Lawrentschuk N. MRI for men undergoing active surveillance or with rising PSA and negative biopsies. Nat Rev Urol 2010;7(10):543-551.
15. Shukla-Dave A, Hricak H, Kattan MW, et al. The utility of magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy for predicting insignificant prostate cancer: an initial analysis. BJU Int 2007;99(4):786-793. (Pubitemid 46439567)
16. Vargas HA, Akin O, Franiel T, et al. Diffusion-weighted endorectal MR imaging at 3 T for prostate cancer: tumor detection and assessment of aggressiveness. Radiology 2011;259(3):775-784.
17. .Wang L, Mullerad M, Chen HN, et al. Prostate cancer: incremental value of endorectal MR imaging findings for prediction extracapsular extension. Radiology 2004;232(1):133-139. (Pubitemid 38787828)
18. .Wang L, Hricak H, Kattan MW, Chen HN, Scardino PT, Kuroiwa K. Prediction of or-gan- confined prostate cancer: incremental value of MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging to staging nomograms. Radiology 2006;238(2):597-603. (Pubitemid 43134372)
19. Hricak H, Choyke PL, Eberhardt SC, Leibel SA, Scardino PT. Imaging prostate cancer: a multidisciplinary perspective. Radiology 2007;243(1):28-53. (Pubitemid 46579693)
20. Akin O, Sala E, Moskowitz CS, et al. Transition zone prostate cancers: features, detection, localization, and staging at endorectal MR imaging. Radiology 2006;239(3):784-792. (Pubitemid 43830614)
21. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33(1):159-174. (Pubitemid 8054849)
22. Fleiss JL, Cohen J, Everitt BS. Large-sample standard errors of kappa and weighted kappa. Psychol Bull 1969;72(5):323-327.
23. Cooperberg MR, Broering JM, Kantoff PW, Carroll PR. Contemporary trends in low risk prostate cancer: risk assessment and treatment. J Urol 2007;178(3 Pt 2):S14-S19. (Pubitemid 47224952)
24. Turkbey B, Shah VP, Pang Y, et al. Is apparent diffusion coefficient associated with clinical risk scores for prostate cancers that are visible on 3-T MR images? Radiology 2011;258(2):488-495.
25. Zakian KL, 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 2005;234(3):804-814. (Pubitemid 40250824)
26. Villers A, Puech P, Leroy X, Biserte J, Fantoni JC, Lemaitre L. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for preoperative identification of localised prostate cancer. Eur Urol Suppl 2007;6(8):525-532. (Pubitemid 46216954)
27. Delongchamps NB, Beuvon F, Eiss D, et al. Multiparametric MRI is helpful to predict tumor focality, stage, and size in patients diagnosed with unilateral low-risk prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2011;14(3):232-237.
28. Ploussard G, Xylinas E, Durand X, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging does not improve the prediction of misclassification of prostate cancer patients eligible for active surveillance when the most stringent selection criteria are based on the saturation biopsy scheme. BJU Int 2011;108(4):513-517.
29. Guzzo TJ, Resnick MJ, Canter DJ, et al. Endorectal T2-weighted MRI does not differentiate between favorable and adverse pathologic features in men with prostate cancer who would qualify for active surveillance. Urol Oncol 2012;30(3):301-305.
30. Shukla-Dave A, Hricak H, Akin O, et al. Preoperative nomograms incorporating magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy for prediction of insignificant prostate cancer. BJU Int 2012;109(9):1315-1322.
31. .Weinreb JC, Blume JD, Coakley FV, et al. Prostate cancer: sextant localization at MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging before prostatectomy-results of ACRIN prospective multi-institutional clinicopathologic study. Radiology 2009;251(1):122-133.
32. Schiebler ML, Yankaskas BC, Tempany C, et al. MR imaging in adenocarcinoma of the prostate: interobserver variation and efficacy for determining stage C disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1992;158(3):559-562; discussion 563-564.
33. Rifkin MD, Zerhouni EA, Gatsonis CA, et al. Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography in staging early prostate cancer. Results of a multi-institutional cooperative trial. N Engl J Med 1990;323(10):621-626. (Pubitemid 20280191)
34. Dall'Era MA, Konety BR, Cowan JE, et al. Active surveillance for the management of prostate cancer in a contemporary cohort. Cancer 2008;112(12):2664-2670. (Pubitemid 351969209)
35. Klotz L, Zhang L, Lam A, Nam R, Mamedov A, Loblaw A. Clinical results of long-term follow-up of a large, active surveillance cohort with localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010;28(1):126-131.
36. Roemeling S, Roobol MJ, de Vries SH, et al. Active surveillance for prostate cancers detected in three subsequent rounds of a screening trial: characteristics, PSA doubling times, and outcome. Eur Urol 2007;51(5):1244-1250; discussion 1251.
37. Soloway MS, Soloway CT, Eldefrawy A, Acosta K, Kava B, Manoharan M. Careful selection and close monitoring of low-risk prostate cancer patients on active surveillance minimizes the need for treatment. Eur Urol 2010;58(6):831-835.
38. van den Bergh RC, Roemeling S, Roobol MJ, et al. Outcomes of men with screen-detected prostate cancer eligible for active surveillance who were managed expectantly. Eur Urol 2009;55(1):1-8.
39. Cookson MS, Fleshner NE, Soloway SM, Fair WR. Correlation between Gleason score of needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimen: accuracy and clinical implications. J Urol 1997;157(2):559-562. (Pubitemid 27026838)
40. Steinberg DM, Sauvageot J, Piantadosi S, Epstein JI. Correlation of prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy Gleason grade in academic and community settings. Am J Surg Pathol 1997;21(5):566-576. (Pubitemid 27213072)
41. Lindner U, Lawrentschuk N, Schatloff O, Trachtenberg J, Lindner A. Evolution from active surveillance to focal therapy in the management of prostate cancer. Future Oncol 2011;7(6):775-787.
42. International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH). ICH Harmonised tripartite guideline. Guideline for good clinical practice E6(R1). Step 4 version, June 10, 1996. http://www.ich.org/products/guidelines/efficacy/article/efficacy- guidelines.html. Accessed March 20, 2012.
43. IMV Medical Information Division. 2010 MR Market Outlook Report; March 31, 2011. Des Plaines, Ill: IMV Medical Information Division, 2011.
44. Akin O, Riedl CC, Ishill NM, Moskowitz CS, Zhang J, Hricak H. Interactive dedicated training curriculum improves accuracy in the interpretation of MR imaging of prostate cancer. Eur Radiol 2010;20(4):995-1002.