Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Prostate

Magnetic Resonance Imaging Clinics of North America

Volumn 21, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 409-426

  Oliveira Neto, Jaime Araujo ^a   Parente, Daniella Braz ^b  

^a Fleury   (Brazil)

^b D OR INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATION IDOR   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Diagnostic; Diffusion weighted; Dynamic contrast enhanced; Magnetic resonance spectroscopy; MRI; Multiparametric; Prostate cancer; Staging

Indexed keywords

CANCER STAGING; CANCER THERAPY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; DYNAMIC CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; SCORING SYSTEM; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; NEOPLASM STAGING; PROSTATE; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS;

EID: 84877147784     PISSN: 10649689     EISSN: 15579786     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.mric.2013.01.004     Document Type: Review

References (87)

1. Jemal A., Bray F., Center M.M., et al. Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 2011, 61(2):69-90.
2. Ferlay J, Shin HR, Bray F, et al. Globocan 2008. Prostate cancer incidence, mortality and prevalence worldwide in 2008. 2008. Available at: . Accessed August 18, 2012. http://globocan.iarc.fr.
3. Thompson I., Thrasher J.B., Aus G., et al. Guideline for the management of clinically localized prostate cancer: 2007 update. J Urol 2007, 177(6):2106-2131.
4. Crawford E.D., DeAntoni E.P., Etzioni R., et al. Serum prostate-specific antigen and digital rectal examination for early detection of prostate cancer in a national community-based program. The Prostate Cancer Education Council. Urology 1996, 47(6):863-869.
5. Smith D.S., Catalona W.J. Interexaminer variability of digital rectal examination in detecting prostate cancer. Urology 1995, 45(1):70-74.
6. Arcangeli C.G., Ornstein D.K., Keetch D.W., et al. Prostate-specific antigen as a screening test for prostate cancer. The United States experience. Urol Clin North Am 1997, 24(2):299-306.
7. Djavan B., Ravery V., Zlotta A., et al. Prospective evaluation of prostate cancer detected on biopsies 1, 2, 3 and 4: when should we stop?. J Urol 2001, 166(5):1679-1683.
8. Moore C.M., Robertson N.L., Arsanious N., et al. Image-guided prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance imaging-derived targets: a systematic review. Eur Urol 2013, 63(1):125-140.
9. Wolf A.M., Wender R.C., Etzioni R.B., et al. American Cancer Society guideline for the early detection of prostate cancer: update 2010. CA Cancer J Clin 2010, 60(2):70-98.
10. Egevad L., Granfors T., Karlberg L., et al. Prognostic value of the Gleason score in prostate cancer. BJU Int 2002, 89(6):538-542.
11. Divrik R.T., Eroglu A., Sahin A., et al. Increasing the number of biopsies increases the concordance of Gleason scores of needle biopsies and prostatectomy specimens. Urol Oncol 2007, 25(5):376-382.
12. Hambrock T., Hoeks C., Hulsbergen-van de Kaa C., et al. Prospective assessment of prostate cancer aggressiveness using 3-T diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsies versus a systematic 10-core transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsy cohort. Eur Urol 2012, 61(1):177-184.
13. Kundra V., Silverman P.M., Matin S.F., et al. Imaging in oncology from the University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center: diagnosis, staging, and surveillance of prostate cancer. Am J Roentgenol 2007, 189(4):830-844.
14. Bloch B.N., Genega E.M., Costa D.N., et al. Prediction of prostate cancer extracapsular extension with high spatial resolution dynamic contrast-enhanced 3-T MRI. Eur Radiol 2012, 22(10):2201-2210.
15. Wang L., Hricak H., Kattan M.W., et al. Prediction of organ-confined prostate cancer: incremental value of MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging to staging nomograms. Radiology 2006, 238(2):597-603.
16. Hricak H., Dooms G.C., McNeal J.E., et al. MR imaging of the prostate gland: normal anatomy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1987, 148(1):51-58.
17. Dickinson L., Ahmed H.U., Allen C., et al. Magnetic resonance imaging for the detection, localisation, and characterisation of prostate cancer: recommendations from a European consensus meeting. Eur Urol 2011, 59(4):477-494.
18. Langer D.L., van der Kwast T.H., Evans A.J., et al. Intermixed normal tissue within prostate cancer: effect on MR imaging measurements of apparent diffusion coefficient and T2-sparse versus dense cancers. Radiology 2008, 249(3):900-908.
19. Ikonen S., Kivisaari L., Tervahartiala P., et al. Prostatic MR imaging. Accuracy in differentiating cancer from other prostatic disorders. Acta Radiol 2001, 42(4):348-354.
20. Purysko A.S., Herts B.R. Prostate MRI: the hemorrhage exclusion sign. J Urol 2012, 188(5):1946-1947.
21. Cruz M., Tsuda K., Narumi Y., et al. Characterization of low-intensity lesions in the peripheral zone of prostate on pre-biopsy endorectal coil MR imaging. Eur Radiol 2002, 12(2):357-365.
22. Akin O., Sala E., Moskowitz C.S., et al. Transition zone prostate cancers: features, detection, localization, and staging at endorectal MR imaging. Radiology 2006, 239(3):784-792.
23. Koh D.M., Collins D.J. Diffusion-weighted MRI in the body: applications and challenges in oncology. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007, 188(6):1622-1635.
24. Le Bihan D., Breton E., Lallemand D., et al. MR imaging of intravoxel incoherent motions: application to diffusion and perfusion in neurologic disorders. Radiology 1986, 161(2):401-407.
25. Issa B. In vivo measurement of the apparent diffusion coefficient in normal and malignant prostatic tissues using echo-planar imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2002, 16(2):196-200.
26. Rosenkrantz A.B., Kong X., Niver B.E., et al. Prostate cancer: comparison of tumor visibility on trace diffusion-weighted images and the apparent diffusion coefficient map. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011, 196(1):123-129.
27. Hambrock T., Somford D.M., Huisman H.J., et al. Relationship between apparent diffusion coefficients at 3.0-T MR imaging and Gleason grade in peripheral zone prostate cancer. Radiology 2011, 259(2):453-461.
28. Vargas H.A., 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.
29. Kim J.H., Kim J.K., Park B.W., et al. Apparent diffusion coefficient: prostate cancer versus noncancerous tissue according to anatomical region. J Magn Reson Imaging 2008, 28(5):1173-1179.
30. Thormer G., Otto J., Reiss-Zimmermann M., et al. Diagnostic value of ADC in patients with prostate cancer: influence of the choice of b values. Eur Radiol 2012, 22(8):1820-1828.
31. Metens T., Miranda D., Absil J., et al. What is the optimal b value in diffusion-weighted MR imaging to depict prostate cancer at 3T?. Eur Radiol 2012, 22(3):703-709.
32. Ohgiya Y., Suyama J., Seino N., et al. Diagnostic accuracy of ultra-high-b-value 3.0-T diffusion-weighted MR imaging for detection of prostate cancer. Clin Imaging 2012, 36(5):526-531.
33. Kim C.K., Park B.K., Kim B. High-b-value diffusion-weighted imaging at 3 T to detect prostate cancer: comparisons between b values of 1,000 and 2,000 s/mm2. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010, 194(1):W33-W37.
34. Barentsz J.O., Richenberg J., Clements R., et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol 2012, 22(4):746-757.
35. Folkman J., Beckner K. Angiogenesis imaging. Acad Radiol 2000, 7(10):783-785.
36. Mirowitz S.A., Brown J.J., Heiken J.P. Evaluation of the prostate and prostatic carcinoma with gadolinium-enhanced endorectal coil MR imaging. Radiology 1993, 186(1):153-157.
37. McMahon C.J., Bloch B.N., Lenkinski R.E., et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging in the evaluation of patients with prostate cancer. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2009, 17(2):363-383.
38. Tofts P.S., Brix G., Buckley D.L., et al. Estimating kinetic parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced T(1)-weighted MRI of a diffusable tracer: standardized quantities and symbols. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999, 10(3):223-232.
39. Isebaert S., De Keyzer F., Haustermans K., et al. Evaluation of semi-quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI parameters for prostate cancer in correlation to whole-mount histopathology. Eur J Radiol 2012, 81(3):e217-e222.
40. Verma S., Turkbey B., Muradyan N., et al. Overview of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in prostate cancer diagnosis and management. Am J Roentgenol 2012, 198(6):1277-1288.
41. 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 2003, 76(909):617-624.
42. 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 2007, 245(1):176-185.
43. Girouin N., Mège-Lechevallier F., Tonina Senes A., et al. Prostate dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI with simple visual diagnostic criteria: is it reasonable?. Eur Radiol 2006, 17(6):1498-1509.
44. Hoeks C.M., Barentsz J.O., Hambrock T., et al. Prostate cancer: multiparametric MR imaging for detection, localization, and staging. Radiology 2011, 261(1):46-66.
45. Kurhanewicz J., Vigneron D.B. Advances in MR spectroscopy of the prostate. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2008, 16(4):697-710. ix-x.
46. Tanimoto A., Nakashima J., Kohno H., et al. Prostate cancer screening: the clinical value of diffusion-weighted imaging and dynamic MR imaging in combination with T2-weighted imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007, 25(1):146-152.
47. Turkbey B., Pinto P.A., Mani H., et al. Prostate cancer: value of multiparametric MR imaging at 3 T for detection-histopathologic correlation. Radiology 2010, 255(1):89-99.
48. Riches S.F., Payne G.S., Morgan V.A., et al. MRI in the detection of prostate cancer: combined apparent diffusion coefficient, metabolite ratio, and vascular parameters. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009, 193(6):1583-1591.
49. Molleran V., Mahoney M.C. The BI-RADS breast magnetic resonance imaging lexicon. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2010, 18(2):171-185. vii.
50. Portalez D., Mozer P., Cornud F., et al. Validation of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology scoring system for prostate cancer diagnosis on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in a cohort of repeat biopsy patients. Eur Urol 2012, 62(6):986-996.
51. Hricak H., White S., Vigneron D., et al. Carcinoma of the prostate gland: MR imaging with pelvic phased-array coils versus integrated endorectal-pelvic phased-array coils. Radiology 1994, 193(3):703-709.
52. Engelbrecht N.E., Aaberg T.M., Sung J., et al. Neovascular membranes associated with idiopathic juxtafoveolar telangiectasis. Arch Ophthalmol 2002, 120(3):320-324.
53. Renard-Penna R., Roupret M., Comperat E., et al. Accuracy of high resolution (1.5 tesla) pelvic phased array magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in staging prostate cancer in candidates for radical prostatectomy: results from a prospective study. Urol Oncol 2011, [Epub ahead of print].
54. Israel GM, Francis IR, Roach M III, et al. American College of Radiology appropriateness criteria-pretreatment staging prostate cancer. 2005. Available at: . Accessed October 31, 2012. http://www.acr.org/%7E/media/A939E3544ACA4B5B881342F34B3804A4.pdf.
55. Sosna J., Pedrosa I., Dewolf W.C., et al. MR imaging of the prostate at 3 tesla. Acad Radiol 2004, 11(8):857-862.
56. Beyersdorff D. MRI of prostate cancer at 1.5 and 3.0 T: comparison of image quality in tumor detection and staging. Am J Roentgenol 2005, 185(5):1214-1220.
57. 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 2004, 11(8):863-867.
58. Cornfeld D.M., Weinreb J.C. MR imaging of the prostate: 1.5T versus 3T. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2007, 15(3):433-448.
59. Heijmink S.W., Futterer J.J., Hambrock T., et al. Prostate cancer: body-array versus endorectal coil MR imaging at 3 T-comparison of image quality, localization, and staging performance. Radiology 2007, 244(1):184-195.
60. Bittencourt L.K., Barentsz J.O., Miranda L.C., et al. Prostate MRI: diffusion-weighted imaging at 1.5T correlates better with prostatectomy Gleason grades than TRUS-guided biopsies in peripheral zone tumours. Eur Radiol 2011, 22(2):468-475.
61. Kobus T., Vos P.C., Hambrock T., et al. Prostate cancer aggressiveness: in vivo assessment of MR spectroscopy and diffusion-weighted imaging at 3 T. Radiology 2012, 265(2):457-467.
62. Wang L., Mazaheri Y., Zhang J., et al. Assessment of biologic aggressiveness of prostate cancer: correlation of MR signal intensity with Gleason grade after radical prostatectomy. Radiology 2008, 246(1):168-176.
63. Chen Y.J., Chu W.C., Pu Y.S., et al. Washout gradient in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI is associated with tumor aggressiveness of prostate cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 2012, 36(4):912-919.
64. Oto A., Yang C., Kayhan A., et al. Diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of prostate cancer: correlation of quantitative MR parameters with Gleason score and tumor angiogenesis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011, 197(6):1382-1390.
65. Mohler J.L., Armstrong A.J., Bahnson R.R., et al. Prostate cancer, version 3.2012 featured updates to the NCCN guidelines. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2012, 10(9):1081-1087.
66. Haffner J., Lemaitre L., Puech P., et al. Role of magnetic resonance imaging before initial biopsy: comparison of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted and systematic biopsy for significant prostate cancer detection. BJU Int 2011, 108(8 Pt 2):E171-E178.
67. Pinto P.A., Chung P.H., Rastinehad A.R., et al. Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion guided prostate biopsy improves cancer detection following transrectal ultrasound biopsy and correlates with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. J Urol 2011, 186(4):1281-1285.
68. Bott S.R., Young M.P., Kellett M.J., et al. Anterior prostate cancer: is it more difficult to diagnose?. BJU Int 2002, 89(9):886-889.
69. Ouzzane A., Puech P., Lemaitre L., et al. Combined multiparametric MRI and targeted biopsies improve anterior prostate cancer detection, staging, and grading. Urology 2011, 78(6):1356-1362.
70. Ahmed H.U., Kirkham A., Arya M., et al. Is it time to consider a role for MRI before prostate biopsy?. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2009, 6(4):197-206.
71. Villers A., Marliere F., Ouzzane A., et al. MRI in addition to or as a substitute for prostate biopsy: the clinician's point of view. Diagn Interv Imaging 2012, 93(4):262-267.
72. Vourganti S., Rastinehad A., Yerram N.K., et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound fusion biopsy detect prostate cancer in patients with prior negative transrectal ultrasound biopsies. J Urol 2012, 188(6):2152-2157.
73. Klotz L., Zhang L., Lam A., et al. 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.
74. Ouzzane A., Puech P., Villers A. MRI and surveillance. Curr Opin Urol 2012, 22(3):231-236.
75. van As N.J., de Souza N.M., Riches S.F., et al. A study of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in men with untreated localised prostate cancer on active surveillance. Eur Urol 2009, 56(6):981-987.
76. Giles S.L., Morgan V.A., Riches S.F., et al. Apparent diffusion coefficient as a predictive biomarker of prostate cancer progression: value of fast and slow diffusion components. Am J Roentgenol 2011, 196(3):586-591.
77. Fradet V., Kurhanewicz J., Cowan J.E., et al. Prostate cancer managed with active surveillance: role of anatomic MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging. Radiology 2010, 256(1):176-183.
78. Margel D., Yap S.A., Lawrentschuk N., et al. Impact of multiparametric endorectal coil prostate magnetic resonance imaging on disease reclassification among active surveillance candidates: a prospective cohort study. J Urol 2012, 187(4):1247-1252.
79. Hricak H., Wang L., Wei D.C., et al. The role of preoperative endorectal magnetic resonance imaging in the decision regarding whether to preserve or resect neurovascular bundles during radical retropubic prostatectomy. Cancer 2004, 100(12):2655-2663.
80. Cornud F., Rouanne M., Beuvon F., et al. Endorectal 3D T2-weighted 1mm-slice thickness MRI for prostate cancer staging at 1.5Tesla: should we reconsider the indirect signs of extracapsular extension according to the D'Amico tumor risk criteria?. Eur J Radiol 2012, 81(4):e591-e597.
81. Yu K.K., Scheidler J., Hricak H., et al. Prostate cancer: prediction of extracapsular extension with endorectal MR imaging and three-dimensional proton MR spectroscopic imaging. Radiology 1999, 213(2):481-488.
82. Futterer J.J., Engelbrecht M.R., Jager G.J., et al. Prostate cancer: comparison of local staging accuracy of pelvic phased-array coil alone versus integrated endorectal-pelvic phased-array coils. Local staging accuracy of prostate cancer using endorectal coil MR imaging. Eur Radiol 2007, 17(4):1055-1065.
83. Mullerad M., Hricak H., Wang L., et al. Prostate cancer: detection of extracapsular extension by genitourinary and general body radiologists at MR imaging. Radiology 2004, 232(1):140-146.
84. 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 2005, 237(2):541-549.
85. 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 1996, 166(4):845-852.
86. Epstein J.I., Carmichael M.J., Pizov G., et al. Influence of capsular penetration on progression following radical prostatectomy: a study of 196 cases with long-term followup. J Urol 1993, 150(1):135-141.
87. Manzone T.A., Malkowicz S.B., Tomaszewski J.E., et al. Use of endorectal MR imaging to predict prostate carcinoma recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Radiology 1998, 209(2):537-542.