The role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in focal therapy for prostate cancer: Recommendations from a consensus panel

BJU International

Volumn 113, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 218-227

  Muller, Berrend G ^a   Fütterer, Jurgen J ^b,c   Gupta, Rajan T ^d   Katz, Aaron ^e   Kirkham, Alexander ^f   Kurhanewicz, John ^g   Moul, Judd W ^d   Pinto, Peter A ^h   Rastinehad, Ardeshir R ⁱ   Robertson, Cary ⁱ   De La Rosette, Jean ^a   Sanchez Salas, Rafael ^j   Jones, J Stephen ^k   Ukimura, Osamu ^l   Verma, Sadhna ^m   Wijkstra, Hessel ^a,n   Marberger, Michael ^o  

^a ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

^d DUKE UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^e WINTHROP UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY COLLEGE HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^g UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^h NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

ⁱ New Hyde Park   (United States)

^j INSTITUT MUTUALISTE MONTSOURIS   (France)

^k LERNER RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^l UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^m UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI   (United States)

ⁿ EINDHOVEN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

^o MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA   (Austria)

more..

Author keywords

consensus; focal therapy; multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging; prostate biopsies; prostate cancer

Indexed keywords

ABLATION THERAPY; ARTICLE; CANCER GROWTH; CANCER LOCALIZATION; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CANCER THERAPY; CONSENSUS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; FOLLOW UP; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MULTIPARAMETRIC MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT MONITORING; PATIENT SELECTION; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SURGEON; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TUMOR BIOPSY; TUMOR VOLUME;

CONSENSUS; FOCAL THERAPY; MULTIPARAMETRIC MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PROSTATE BIOPSIES; PROSTATE CANCER;

BIOPSY; CONSENSUS; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; PATIENT SELECTION; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RISK ASSESSMENT; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, INTERVENTIONAL; ULTRASOUND, HIGH-INTENSITY FOCUSED, TRANSRECTAL; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84892523160     PISSN: 14644096     EISSN: 1464410X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/bju.12243     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. Heidenreich A, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, et al. EAU Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised disease. Eur Urol 2011; 59: 61-71
2. De la Rosette J, Ahmed H, Barentsz J, et al. Focal therapy in prostate cancer-report from a consensus panel. J Endourol 2010; 24: 775-780
3. Moore CM, Robertson NL, Arsanious N, et al. Image-guided prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance imaging-derived targets: a systematic review. Eur Urol 2013; 63: 125-140
4. Fink A, Kosecoff J, Chassin M, Brook RH,. Consensus methods: characteristics and guidelines for use. Am J Public Health 1984; 74: 979-983
5. Butler CT, Rothstein A,. On Conflict and Consensus: A Handbook on Formal Consensus Decision Making. Mountain View, CA: Creative Commons, 2007
6. Kim CK, Park BK, Kim B,. Localization of prostate cancer using 3T MRI: comparison of T2-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2006; 30: 7-11
7. Torricelli P, Cinquantini F, Ligabue G, Bianchi G, Sighinolfi P, Romagnoli R,. Comparative evaluation between external phased array coil at 3 T and endorectal coil at 1.5 T: preliminary results. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2006; 30: 355-361
8. Park BK, Kim B, Kim CK, Lee HM, Kwon GY,. Comparison of phased-array 3.0-T and endorectal 1.5-T magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of local staging accuracy for prostate cancer. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2007; 31: 534-538
9. Fütterer JJ, Heijmink SW, Scheenen TW, et al. Prostate cancer localization with dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging and proton MR spectroscopic imaging. Radiology 2006; 241: 449-458
10. Kim CK, Park BK, Lee HM, Kwon GY,. Value of diffusion-weighted imaging for the prediction of prostate cancer location at 3T using a phased-array coil: preliminary results. Invest Radiol 2007; 42: 842-847
11. 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 2007; 189: W192-W201
12. Scheenen TW, Heijmink SW, Roell SA, et al. Three-dimensional proton MR spectroscopy of human prostate at 3 T without endorectal coil: feasibility. Radiology 2007; 245: 507-516
13. Heijmink SW, Fütterer JJ, 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: 184-195
14. Miao H, Fukatsu H, Ishigaki T,. Prostate cancer detection with 3-T MRI: comparison of diffusion-weighted and T2-weighted imaging. Eur J Radiol 2007; 61: 297-302
15. 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: 425-434
16. Turkbey B, Pinto PA, Mani H, et al. Prostate cancer: value of multiparametric MR imaging at 3 T for detection-histopathologic correlation. Radiology 2010; 255: 89-99
17. Rosenkrantz AB, Neil J, Kong X, et al. Prostate cancer: comparison of 3D T2-weighted with conventional 2D T2-weighted imaging for image quality and tumor detection. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010; 194: 446-452
18. Riches SF, Payne GS, Morgan VA, et al. MRI in the detection of prostate cancer: combined apparent diffusion coefficient, metabolite ratio, and vascular parameters. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009; 193: 1583-1591
19. Kitajima K, Kaji Y, Fukabori Y, Yoshida K, Suganuma N, Sugimura K,. Prostate cancer detection with 3 T MRI: comparison of diffusion-weighted imaging and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in combination with T2-weighted imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2010; 31: 625-631
20. Smeenge M, Barentsz J, Cosgrove D, et al. Role of transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) in focal therapy of prostate cancer: report from a Consensus Panel. BJU Int 2012; 110: 1-7
21. Heidenreich A,. Consensus criteria for the use of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis and staging of prostate cancer: not ready for routine use. Eur Urol 2011; 59: 495-497
22. Scheidler J, Hricak H, Vigneron DB, et al. Prostate cancer: localization with three-dimensional proton MR spectroscopic imaging-clinicopathologic study. Radiology 1999; 213: 473-480
23. Villers A, Puech P, Mouton D, Leroy X, Ballereau C, Lemaitre L,. Dynamic contrast enhanced, pelvic phased array magnetic resonance imaging of localized prostate cancer for predicting tumor volume: correlation with radical prostatectomy findings. J Urol 2006; 176: 2432-2437
24. Turkbey B, Mani H, Shah V, et al. Multiparametric 3T prostate magnetic resonance imaging to detect cancer: histopathological correlation using prostatectomy specimens processed in customized magnetic resonance imaging based molds. J Urol 2011; 186: 1818-1824
25. Turkbey B, Xu S, Kruecker J, et al. Documenting the location of systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsies: correlation with multi-parametric MRI. Cancer Imaging 2011; 11: 31-36
26. Hadaschik BA, Kuru TH, Tulea C, et al. A novel stereotactic prostate biopsy system integrating pre-interventional magnetic resonance imaging and live ultrasound fusion. J Urol 2011; 186: 2214-2220
27. Meiers I, Waters DJ, Bostwick DG,. Preoperative prediction of multifocal prostate cancer and application of focal therapy: review 2007. Urology 2007; 70: 3-8
28. Eggener SE, Scardino PT, Carroll PR, et al. Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer: a critical appraisal of rationale and modalities. J Urol 2007; 178: 2260-2267
29. Oon SF, Watson RW, O'Leary JJ, Fitzpatrick JM,. Epstein criteria for insignificant prostate cancer. BJU Int 2011; 108: 518-525
30. Fütterer JJ, Heijmink SW, Scheenen TW, et al. Prostate cancer: local staging at 3-T endorectal MR imaging-early experience. Radiology 2006; 238: 184-191
31. 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: 472-477
32. Sommer FG, Nghiem HV, Herfkens R, McNeal J, Low RN,. Determining the volume of prostatic carcinoma: value of MR imaging with an external-array coil. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1993; 161: 81-86
33. Desouza NM, Reinsberg SA, Scurr ED, Brewster JM, Payne GS,. Magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer: the value of apparent diffusion coefficients for identifying malignant nodules. Br J Radiol 2007; 80: 90-95
34. Jager GJ, Ruijter ET, Van de Kaa CA, et al. Local staging of prostate cancer with endorectal MR imaging: correlation with histopathology. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996; 166: 845-852
35. Kirkham APS, Emberton M, Allen C,. How good is MRI at detecting and characterising cancer within the prostate? Eur Urol 2006; 50: 1163-1175
36. Charles-Edwards EM, deSouza NM,. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging and its application to cancer. Cancer Imaging 2006; 6: 135-143
37. Coakley FV, Kurhanewicz J, Lu Y, et al. Prostate cancer tumor volume: measurement with endorectal MR and MR spectroscopic imaging. Radiology 2002; 223: 91-97
38. Shimofusa R, Fujimoto H, Akamata H, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging of prostate cancer. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2005; 29: 149-153
39. Sato C, Naganawa S, Nakamura T, et al. Differentiation of noncancerous tissue and cancer lesions by apparent diffusion coefficient values in transition and peripheral zones of the prostate. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005; 21: 258-262
40. Haider MA, Van der Kwast TH, Tanguay J, et al. Combined T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted MRI for localization of prostate cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007; 189: 323-328
41. Yoshimitsu K, Kiyoshima K, Irie H, et al. Usefulness of apparent diffusion coefficient map in diagnosing prostate carcinoma: correlation with stepwise histopathology. J Magn Reson Imaging 2008; 27: 132-139
42. Mazaheri Y, Hricak H, Fine SW, et al. Prostate tumor volume measurement with combined T2-weighted imaging and diffusion-weighted MR: correlation with pathologic tumor volume. Radiology 2009; 252: 449-457
43. 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: 786-793
44. Wang L, Hricak H, Kattan MW, Chen H, Scardino PT, Kuroiwa K,. Prediction of organ-confined prostate cancer: incremental value of MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging to staging nomograms. Radiology 2006; 238: 597-603
45. Fütterer JJ, Scheenen TW, Heijmink SW, et al. Standardized threshold approach using three-dimensional proton magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging in prostate cancer localization of the entire prostate. Invest Radiol 2007; 42: 116-122
46. Jung JA, Coakley FV, Vigneron DB, et al. Prostate depiction at endorectal MR spectroscopic imaging: investigation of a standardized evaluation system. Radiology 2004; 233: 701-708
47. Langer DL, Van der Kwast TH, Evans AJ, Trachtenberg J, Wilson BC, Haider MA,. Prostate cancer detection with multi-parametric MRI: logistic regression analysis of quantitative T2, diffusion-weighted imaging, and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2009; 30: 327-334
48. Umbehr M, Bachmann LM, Held U, et al. Combined magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance spectroscopy imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 2009; 55: 575-590
49. Kozlowski P, Chang SD, Jones EC, Berean KW, Chen H, Goldenberg SL,. Combined diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for prostate cancer diagnosis-correlation with biopsy and histopathology. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 24: 108-113
50. Chen M, Dang HD, Wang JY, et al. Prostate cancer detection: comparison of T2-weighted imaging, diffusion-weighted imaging, proton magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging, and the three techniques combined. Acta Radiol 2008; 49: 602-610
51. Tanimoto A, Nakashima J, Kohno H, Shinmoto H, Kuribayashi S,. 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: 146-152
52. Fütterer JJ, Engelbrecht MR, Huisman HJ, et al. Staging prostate cancer with dynamic contrast-enhanced endorectal MR imaging prior to radical prostatectomy: experienced versus less experienced readers. Radiology 2005; 237: 541-549
53. Mazaheri Y, Shukla-Dave A, Hricak H, et al. Prostate cancer: identification with combined diffusion-weighted MR imaging and 3D 1H MR spectroscopic imaging-correlation with pathologic findings. Radiology 2008; 246: 480-488
54. deSouza NM, Riches SF, Vanas NJ, et al. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging: a potential non-invasive marker of tumour aggressiveness in localized prostate cancer. Clin Radiol 2008; 63: 774-782
55. Hambrock T, Somford DM, Huisman HJ, et al. Relationship between apparent diffusion coefficients at 3.0-T MR imaging and Gleason grade in peripheral zone prostate cancer. Radiology 2011; 259: 453-461
56. Villeirs GM, De Meerleer GO, De Visschere PJ, Fonteyne VH, Verbaeys AC, Oosterlinck W,. Combined magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy in the assessment of high grade prostate carcinoma in patients with elevated PSA: a single-institution experience of 356 patients. Eur J Radiol 2011; 77: 340-345
57. 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: 804-814
58. Wang L, Mazaheri Y, Zhang J, Ishill NM, Kuroiwa K, Hricak H,. Assessment of biologic aggressiveness of prostate cancer: correlation of MR signal intensity with Gleason grade after radical prostatectomy. Radiology 2008; 246: 168-176
59. Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R, et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol 2012; 22: 746-757
60. Rieke V, Butts Pauly K,. MR thermometry. J Magn Reson Imaging 2008; 27: 376-390
61. Raz O, Haider MA, Davidson SR, et al. Real-time magnetic resonance imaging-guided focal laser therapy in patients with low-risk prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2010; 58: 173-177
62. Chopra R, Burtnyk M, N'djin WA, Bronskill M,. MRI-controlled transurethral ultrasound therapy for localised prostate cancer. Int J Hyperthermia 2010; 26: 804-821
63. Siddiqui K, Chopra R, Vedula S, et al. MRI-guided transurethral ultrasound therapy of the prostate gland using real-time thermal mapping: initial studies. Urology 2010; 76: 1506-1511
64. Kalbhen CL, Hricak H, Shinohara K, et al. Prostate carcinoma: MR imaging findings after cryosurgery. Radiology 1996; 198: 807-811
65. Rouvière O, Lyonnet D, Raudrant A, et al. MRI appearance of prostate following transrectal HIFU ablation of localized cancer. Eur Urol 2001; 40: 265-274
66. Kirkham AP, Emberton M, Hoh IM, Illing RO, Freeman AA, Allen C,. MR imaging of prostate after treatment with high-intensity focused ultrasound. Radiology 2008; 246: 833-844
67. Haider MA, Davidson SR, Kale AV, et al. Prostate gland: MR imaging appearance after vascular targeted photodynamic therapy with palladium-bacteriopheophorbide. Radiology 2007; 244: 196-204
68. Vargas HA, Wassberg C, Akin O, Hricak H,. MR imaging of treated prostate cancer. Radiology 2012; 262: 26-42
69. Parivar F, Hricak H, Shinohara K, et al. Detection of locally recurrent prostate cancer after cryosurgery: evaluation by transrectal ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, and three-dimensional proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Urology 1996; 48: 594-599
70. Donnelly SE, Donnelly BJ, Saliken JC, Raber EL, Vellet AD,. Prostate cancer: gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging at 3 weeks compared with needle biopsy at 6 months after cryoablation. Radiology 2004; 232: 830-833
71. Kim CK, Park BK, Lee HM, Kim SS, Kim E,. MRI techniques for prediction of local tumor progression after high-intensity focused ultrasonic ablation of prostate cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008; 190: 1180-1186
72. Rouvière O, Girouin N, Glas L, et al. Prostate cancer transrectal HIFU ablation: detection of local recurrences using T2-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Eur Radiol 2010; 20: 48-55
73. Punwani S, Emberton M, Walkden M, et al. Prostatic cancer surveillance following whole-gland high-intensity focused ultrasound: comparison of MRI and prostate-specific antigen for detection of residual or recurrent disease. Br J Radiol 2012; 85: 720-728
74. Ahmed HU, Cathcart P, McCartan N, et al. Focal salvage therapy for localized prostate cancer recurrence after external beam radiotherapy: a pilot study. Cancer 2012; 118: 4148-4155