Can diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging predict a high gleason score of prostate cancer?

Korean Journal of Urology

Volumn 54, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 234-238

  Shigemura, Katsumi ^a,b   Yamanaka, Nozomu ^a,c   Yamashita, Masuo ^a  

^a Shinko Hospital   (Japan)

^b KOBE UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (Japan)

^c Yamanaka Clinic   (Japan)

Author keywords

Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging; Neoplasm grading; Prostatic neoplasms

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTIPLE CANCER; MULTIPLE REGRESSION; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; UNIVARIATE ANALYSIS;

EID: 84876444603     PISSN: 20056737     EISSN: 20056745     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4111/kju.2013.54.4.234     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Woodfield CA, Tung GA, Grand DJ, Pezzullo JA, Machan JT, Renzulli JF 2nd. Diffusion-weighted MRI of peripheral zone pros-tate cancer: comparison of tumor apparent diffusion coefficient with Gleason score and percentage of tumor on core biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;194:W316-22.
2. Yoshimitsu K, Kiyoshima K, Irie H, Tajima T, Asayama Y, Hirakawa M, et al. Usefulness of apparent diffusion coefficient map in diagnosing prostate carcinoma: correlation with stepwise histopathology. J Magn Reson Imaging 2008;27:132-9.
3. Kim CK, Park BK, Han JJ, Kang TW, Lee HM. Diffusion-weight-ed imaging of the prostate at 3 T for differentiation of malignant and benign tissue in transition and peripheral zones: preliminary results. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2007;31:449-54.
4. Gibbs P, Pickles MD, Turnbull LW. Diffusion imaging of the pros-tate at 3.0 tesla. Invest Radiol 2006;41:185-8.
5. Pickles MD, Gibbs P, Sreenivas M, Turnbull LW. Diffusion-weighted imaging of normal and malignant prostate tissue at 3.0T. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006;23:130-4.
6. Sato C, Naganawa S, Nakamura T, Kumada H, Miura S, Takizawa O, et al. Differentiation of noncancerous tissue and can-cer lesions by apparent diffusion coefficient values in transition and peripheral zones of the prostate. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005;21:258-62.
7. Tamada T, Sone T, Jo Y, Toshimitsu S, Yamashita T, Yamamoto A, et al. Apparent diffusion coefficient values in peripheral and transition zones of the prostate: comparison between normal and malignant prostatic tissues and correlation with histologic grade. J Magn Reson Imaging 2008;28:720-6.
8. Bittencourt LK, Barentsz JO, de Miranda LC, Gasparetto EL. Prostate MRI: diffusion-weighted imaging at 1.5T correlates bet-ter with prostatectomy Gleason Grades than TRUS-guided biop-sies in peripheral zone tumours. Eur Radiol 2012;22:468-75.
9. Gleason DF, Mellinger GT. Prediction of prognosis for prostatic adenocarcinoma by combined histological grading and clinical staging. J Urol 1974;111:58-64.
10. Epstein JI, Allsbrook WC Jr, Amin MB, Egevad LL; ISUP Grading Committee. The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 2005;29:1228-42.
11. Hambrock T, Somford DM, Huisman HJ, van Oort IM, Witjes JA, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa CA, et al. Relationship between apparent diffusion coefficients at 3.0-T MR imaging and Gleason grade in peripheral zone prostate cancer. Radiology 2011;259:453-61.
12. Koksal IT, Ozcan F, Kadioglu TC, Esen T, Kilicaslan I, Tunc M. Discrepancy between Gleason scores of biopsy and radical prosta-tectomy specimens. Eur Urol 2000;37:670-4.
13. Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R, Choyke P, Verma S, Villeirs G, et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol 2012;22:746-57.
14. Yagci AB, Ozari N, Aybek Z, Duzcan E. The value of diffusion-weighted MRI for prostate cancer detection and localization. Diagn Interv Radiol 2011;17:130-4.
15. Tan N, Margolis DJ, McClure TD, Thomas A, Finley DS, Reiter RE, et al. Radical prostatectomy: value of prostate MRI in surgical planning. Abdom Imaging 2012;37:664-74.
16. Simmons MN, Stephenson AJ, Klein EA. Natural history of bio-chemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy: risk assess-ment for secondary therapy. Eur Urol 2007;51:1175-84.
17. Kotb AF, Elabbady AA. Prognostic factors for the development of biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Prostate Cancer 2011;2011:485189.
18. Amin A, Partin A, Epstein JI. Gleason score 7 prostate cancer on needle biopsy: relation of primary pattern 3 or 4 to pathological stage and progression after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2011; 186:1286-90.
19. Sinnott M, Falzarano SM, Hernandez AV, Jones JS, Klein EA, Zhou M, et al. Discrepancy in prostate cancer localization between biopsy and prostatectomy specimens in patients with unilateral positive biopsy: implications for focal therapy. Prostate 2012;72: 1179-86.
20. Tan CH, Wang J, Kundra V. Diffusion weighted imaging in pros-tate cancer. Eur Radiol 2011;21:593-603.
21. Makarov DV, Loeb S, Magheli A, Zhao K, Humphreys E, Gonzalgo ML, et al. Significance of preoperative PSA velocity in men with low serum PSA and normal DRE. World J Urol 2011;29:11-4.
22. Yasui O, Sato M, Kamada A. Diffusion-weighted imaging in the detection of lymph node metastasis in colorectal cancer. Tohoku J Exp Med 2009;218:177-83.
23. Park SY, Kim CK, Park BK, Park W, Park HC, Han DH, et al. Early changes in apparent diffusion coefficient from diffusion-weighted MR imaging during radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2012;83:749-55.