Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in patients with muscle-invasivetransitional cell carcinoma of the bladder can distinguish between residual tumour and post-chemotherapy effect

European Journal of Radiology

Volumn 82, Issue 12, 2013, Pages 2161-2168

  Donaldson, Stephanie B ^a,b,c   Bonington, Suzanne C ^b   Kershaw, Lucy E ^b   Cowan, Richard ^b   Lyons, Jeanette ^b   Elliott, Tony ^b   Carrington, Bernadette M ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

^b CHRISTIE HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS BIRMINGHAM NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Bladder cancer; Magnetic resonance imaging; Neoadjuvant chemotherapy; Perfusion; Tracer kinetic model; Treatment effects

Indexed keywords

CISPLATIN; GEMCITABINE;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BLEEDING; CANCER ADJUVANT THERAPY; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER SURGERY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CYSTECTOMY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INFLAMMATION; MALE; MINIMAL RESIDUAL DISEASE; MULTIPLE CYCLE TREATMENT; MUSCLE INVASIVE BLADDER CANCER; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SCANNER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RADIODIAGNOSIS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; THERAPY EFFECT; TRANSITIONAL CELL CARCINOMA;

BLADDER CANCER; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NEOADJUVANT CHEMOTHERAPY; PERFUSION; TRACER KINETIC MODEL; TREATMENT EFFECTS;

AGED; CARCINOMA, TRANSITIONAL CELL; CHEMOTHERAPY, ADJUVANT; CONTRAST MEDIA; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MUSCLE NEOPLASMS; MYOSITIS; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; NEOPLASM, RESIDUAL; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TREATMENT OUTCOME; URINARY BLADDER NEOPLASMS;

EID: 84890786068     PISSN: 0720048X     EISSN: 18727727     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.08.008     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Steliarova-Foucher E, OCallaghan M, Ferlay J, Masuyer E, et al. European cancerobservatory: cancer incidence, mortality, prevalence and survival in Europe.Version 1.0. In: European Network of Cancer Registries. International Agencyfor Research on Cancer; 2012 http://eco.iarc.fr
2. MacVicar D. In: Reznek R, editor. Carcinoma of the Bladder. New York:Cambridge University Press; 2008.
3. CRUK. Bladder Cancer-Survival Statistics for England and Wales. Office for National Statistics (ONS). Cancer survival in England: Patients diagnosed 2005-2009 and followed up to 2010. London: ONS; 2011.
4. MacVicar AD. Bladder cancer staging. BJU Int 2000;86(Suppl 1):111-22.
5. Vargas Ha, Akin O, Schöder H, et al. Prospective evaluation of MRI,11C-acetatePET/CT and contrast-enhanced CT for staging of bladder cancer. Eur J Radiol 2012;81(12):4131-7.
6. Green Da, Durand M, Gumpeni N, et al. Role of magnetic resonance imag-ing in bladder cancer: current status and emerging techniques. BJU Int 2012;110(10):1463-70.
7. Barentsz J, Jager G, Van Vierzen P, et al. Staging urinary bladder cancer aftertransurethral biopsy: value of fast dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging.Radiology 1996;201:185-93.
8. Daneshmand S, Ahmadi H, Huynh LN, Dobos N. Preoperative staging of inva-sive bladder cancer with dynamic gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonanceimaging: results from a prospective study. Urology 2012;80(6):1313-8.
9. Koga F, Kihara K. Selective bladder preservation with curative intentfor muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a contemporary review. Int J Urol 2012;19(5):388-401.
10. De Wit R. Overview of bladder cancer trials in the European organization forresearch and treatment. Cancer 2003;97(8 Suppl):2120-6.
11. McCarville MB, Hoffer FA, Gingrich JR, Jenkins JJ. Imaging findings of hemor-rhagic cystitis in pediatric oncology patients. Pediatr Radiol 2000;30(3):131-8.
12. Cheong JJW, Woodward PJ, Maria A, Davis CJ. From the archives of the AFIPinflammatory and nonneoplastic bladder masses: radiologic-pathologic cor-relation. Radiographics 2006;26(6):1847-69.
13. Sourbron S. Technical aspects of MR perfusion. Eur J Radiol 2010;76(3):304-13.
14. Donaldson SB, West CML, Davidson SE, et al. A comparison of tracer kineticmodels for T1-weighted dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: application in carci-noma of the cervix. Magn Reson Med 2010;63(3):691-700.
15. Dobson MJ, Carrington BM, Collins CD, et al. The assessment of irradiatedbladder carcinoma using dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Clin Radiol 2001;56(2):94-8.
16. Tuncbilek N, Kaplan M, Altaner S, et al. Value of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and correlation with tumor angiogenesis in bladder cancer. AJR 2009;192(4):949-55.
17. Schrier BP, Peters M, Barentsz JO, Witjes JA. Evaluation of chemotherapy withmagnetic resonance imaging in patients with regionally metastatic or unre-sectable bladder cancer. Eur Urol 2006;49(4):698-703.
18. Bains LJ, McGrath DM, Naish JH, et al. Tracer kinetic analysis of dynamiccontrast-enhanced MRI and CT bladder cancer data: a preliminary compar-ison to assess the magnitude of water exchange effects. Magn Reson Med 2010;64(2):595-603.
19. Brix G, Kiessling F, Lucht R, et al. Microcirculation and microvasculature inbreast tumors: pharmacokinetic analysis of dynamic MR image series. MagnReson Med 2004;52(2):420-9.
20. Naish JH, McGrath DM, Bains LJ, et al. Comparison of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and dynamic contrast-enhanced CT biomarkers in bladdercancer. Magn Reson Med 2011;66(1):219-26.
21. Tofts PS, Brix G, Buckley DL, et al. Estimating kinetic parameters from dynamiccontrast-enhanced T(1)-weighted MRI of a diffusable tracer: standardizedquantities and symbols. J Magn Reson Imag 1999;10(3):223-32.
22. Mak S, Hulse P, Carrington B, editors. MRI Manual of Pelvic Cancer. 2nd ed.London: Informa Healthcare; 2011. p. 201-9.
23. Brookes JA, Redpath TW, Gilbert FJ, Murray AD, Staff RT. Accuracy of T1measurement in dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI using two- andthree-dimensional variable flip angle fast low-angle shot. J Magn Reson Imag 1999;9(2):163-71.
24. Haase A, Matthaei D, Hnicke W, Frahm J. Dynamic digital subtraction imagingusing fast low-angle shot MR movie sequence. Radiology 1986;160(2):537-41.
25. Sourbron SP, Buckley DL. On the scope and interpretation of the Tofts modelsfor DCE-MRI. Magn Reson Med 2011;66(3):735-45.
26. De Bazelaire C, Siauve N, Fournier L, et al. Comprehensive model for simul-taneous MRI determination of perfusion and permeability using a blood-poolagent in rats rhabdomyosarcoma. Eur Radiol 2005;15(12):2497-505.
27. Stark D, Bradley W. Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Maryland Heights, MO:Mosby; 1999.
28. Kershaw LE, Buckley DL. Precision in measurements of perfusion and microvas-cular permeability with T(1)-weighted dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. MagnReson Med 2006;56(5):986-92.
29. Ewing JR, Brown SL, Lu M, et al. Model selection in magnetic resonance imagingmeasurements of vascular permeability: gadomer in a 9L model of rat cerebraltumor. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 2006;26(3):310-20.
30. Altman DG, Bland JM. Diagnostic tests. 1: sensitivity and specificity. BMJ 1994;308(6943):1552.
31. Barentsz JO, Berger-Hartog O, Witjes JA, et al. Evaluation of chemotherapy inadvanced urinary bladder cancer with fast dynamic contrast-enhanced MRimaging. Radiology 1998;207(3):791-7.
32. George ML, Dzik-Jurasz AS, Padhani AR, et al. Non-invasive methods ofassessing angiogenesis and their value in predicting response to treatment incolorectal cancer. Br J Surg 2001;88(12):1628-36.
33. Van Osch MJP, van der Grond J, Bakker CJG. Partial volume effects on arterialinput functions: shape and amplitude distortions and their correction. J MagnReson Imag 2005;22(6):704-9.
34. Ivancevic MK, Zimine I, Montet X, et al. Inflow effect correction in fast gradient-echo perfusion imaging. Magn Reson Med 2003;50(5):885-91.
35. Larsson HB, Rosenbaum S, Fritz-Hansen T. Quantification of the effect of waterexchange in dynamic contrast MRI perfusion measurements in the brain andheart. Magn Reson Med 2001;46(2):272-81.