Detection of prostate cancer in peripheral zone: Comparison of MR diffusion tensor imaging, quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI, and the two techniques combined at 3.0 T

Acta Radiologica

Volumn 55, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 239-247

  Li, Chunmei ^a   Chen, Min ^a   Li, Saying ^a   Zhao, Xuna ^b   Zhang, Chen ^a   Luo, Xiaojie ^a   Zhou, Cheng ^a  

^a BEIJING HOSPITAL   (China)

^b PEKING UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Diffusion tensor imaging; Dynamic contrast enhanced MRI; Prostate cancer

Indexed keywords

APPARENT DIFFUSION COEFFICIENT; DIAGNOSTIC PERFORMANCE; DYNAMIC CONTRAST ENHANCED MRI; FRACTIONAL ANISOTROPY; LOGISTIC REGRESSION MODELS; PROSTATE CANCERS; QUANTITATIVE DYNAMICS; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS;

BIOPSY; DIFFUSION; DIFFUSION TENSOR IMAGING; DISEASES; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; RATE CONSTANTS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SEXTANTS;

TENSORS;

GADOLINIUM PENTETATE; GADOLINIUM PENTETATE MEGLUMINE; PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CIRCULATION TIME; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DIFFUSION COEFFICIENT; DIFFUSION TENSOR IMAGING; FRACTIONAL ANISOTROPY; GLEASON SCORE; HEART OUTPUT; HUMAN; IMAGE DISPLAY; MALE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SCANNER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; QUANTITATIVE DYNAMIC CONTRAST ENHANCED MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; RADIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY;

DIFFUSION TENSOR IMAGING; DYNAMIC CONTRAST-ENHANCED MRI; PROSTATE CANCER;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CONTRAST MEDIA; DIFFUSION TENSOR IMAGING; GADOLINIUM DTPA; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; ROC CURVE;

EID: 84896795583     PISSN: 02841851     EISSN: 16000455     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0284185113494978     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, et al. Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 2011;61: 69-90.
2. Villeirs GM, Oosterlinck W, Vanherreweghe E, et al. A qualitative approach to combined magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Eur J Radiol 2010;73: 352-356.
3. Saito K, Kaminaga T, Muto S, et al. Clinical efficacy of proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS) in the diagnosis of localized prostate cancer. Anticancer Res 2008;28: 1899-1904.
4. Katahira K, Takahara T, Kwee TC, et al. Ultra-high-bvalue diffusion-weighted MR imaging for the detection of prostate cancer: evaluation in 201 cases with histopathological correlation. Eur Radiol 2011;21: 188-196.
5. Rosenkrantz AB, Mannelli L, Kong X, et al. Prostate cancer: utility of fusion of T2-weighted and high b-value diffusion-weighted images for peripheral zone tumor detection and localization. J Magn Reson Imaging 2011;34: 95-100.
6. 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: 775-784.
7. Oto A, Kayhan A, Jiang Y, et al. Prostate cancer: differentiation of central gland cancer from benign prostatic hyperplasia by using diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast- enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 2010;257: 715-723.
8. Delongchamps NB, Rouanne M, Flam T, et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for the detection and localization of prostate cancer: combination of T2-weighted, dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion- weighted imaging. BJU Int 2011;107: 1411-1418.
9. Basser PJ, Pierpaoli C. Microstructural and physiological features of tissues elucidated by quantitative-diffusiontensor MRI. J Magn Reson B 1996;111: 209-219.
10. Reischauer C, Wilm BJ, Froehlich JM, et al. High-resolution diffusion tensor imaging of prostate cancer using a reduced FOV technique. Eur J Radiol 2011;80: 34-41.
11. Gibbs P, Pickles MD, Turnbull LW. Diffusion imaging of the prostate at 3.0 tesla. Invest Radiol 2006;41: 185-188.
12. Manenti G, Carlani M, Mancino S, et al. Diffusion tensor magnetic resonance imaging of prostate cancer. Invest Radiol 2007;42: 412-419.
13. Gürses B, Kabakci N, Kovanlikaya A, et al. Diffusion tensor imaging of the normal prostate at 3 Tesla. Eur Radiol 2008;18: 716-721.
14. Gürses B, Tasdelen N, Yencilek F, et al. Diagnostic utility of DTI in prostate cancer. Eur Radiol 2011; 79: 172-176.
15. Tofts PS, Brix G, Buckley DL, 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: 223-232.
16. Choyke PL, Dwyer AJ, Knopp MV. Functional tumor imaging with dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2003;17: 509-520.
17. Kozlowski P, Chang SD, Jones EC, et al. 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.
18. van Dorsten FA, van der Graaf M, Engelbrecht MR, et al. Combined quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging and (1)H MR spectroscopic imaging of human prostate cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 2004;20: 279-287.
19. Schlemmer HP, Merkle J, Grobholz R, et al. Can preoperative contrast-enhanced dynamic MR imaging for prostate cancer predict microvessel density in prostatectomy specimens. Eur Radiol 2004;14: 309-317.
20. Ocak I, Bernardo M, Metzger G, et al. Dynamic contrastenhanced MRI of prostate cancer at 3 T: a study of pharmacokinetic parameters. Am J Roentgenol 2007;189: 192-201.
21. Farrell JA, Landman BA, Jones CK, et al. Effects of signal-to-noise ratio on the accuracy and reproducibility of diffusion tensor imaging-derived fractional anisotropy, mean diffusivity, and principal Eigenvector measurements at 1.5T. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007;26: 756-767.
22. Brix G, Semmler W, Port R, et al. Pharmacokinetic parameters in CNS Gd-DTPA enhanced MR imaging. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1991;15: 621-628.
23. Furman-Haran E, Margalit R, Grobgeld D, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging reveals stress-induced angiogenesis in MCF7 human breast tumors. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1996; 93: 6247-6251.
24. de Rochefort L, Nguyen T, Brown R, et al. In vivo quantification of contrast agent concentration using the induced magnetic field for time-resolved arterial input function measurement with MRI. Med Phys 2008;35: 5328-5339.
25. 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.
26. Xu J, Humphrey PA, Kibel AS, et al. Magnetic resonance diffusion characteristics of histologically defined prostate cancer in humans. Magn Reson Med 2009;61: 842-850.
27. Padhani AR, Gapinski CJ, Macvicar DA, et al. Dynamic contrast enhanced MRI of prostate cancer: correlation with morphology and tumor stage, histological grade and PSA. Clin Radiol 2000;55: 99-109.
28. Kozlowski P, Chang SD, Meng R, et al. Combined prostate diffusion tensor imaging and dynamic contrast enhanced MRI at 3T - quantitative correlation with biopsy. Magn Reson Imaging 2010;28: 621-628.