Imaging modalities in focal therapy: Patient selection, treatment guidance, and follow-up

Current Opinion in Urology

Volumn 24, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 218-224

  Muller, Berrend G ^a   Van Den Bos, Willemien ^a   Pinto, Peter A ^b   De La Rosette, Jean J ^a  

^a ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

focal therapy; MRI; prostate cancer; ultrasonography

Indexed keywords

DUTASTERIDE;

CANCER PATIENT; CANCER THERAPY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CRYOSURGERY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; ELASTOGRAPHY; FOCAL THERAPY; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; MICROWAVE THERAPY; MINIMALLY INVASIVE PROCEDURE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PATIENT GUIDANCE; PATIENT SELECTION; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; RADIOFREQUENCY ABLATION; RADIOLOGIST; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; THERMOMETRY; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; TIME PERCEPTION; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY; TREATMENT PLANNING; UROLOGIST; ABLATION THERAPY; CANCER GRADING; COMPUTER ASSISTED SURGERY; CONSERVATIVE TREATMENT; ECHOGRAPHY; IMAGE GUIDED BIOPSY; MALE; MULTIMODAL IMAGING; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RISK FACTOR; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ABLATION TECHNIQUES; HUMANS; IMAGE-GUIDED BIOPSY; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MULTIMODAL IMAGING; NEOPLASM GRADING; ORGAN SPARING TREATMENTS; PATIENT SELECTION; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RISK FACTORS; SURGERY, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84898542454     PISSN: 09630643     EISSN: 14736586     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MOU.0000000000000041     Document Type: Review

References (45)

1. Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2013. CA Cancer J Clin 2013; 63:11-30.
2. 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.
3. Klotz L. Active surveillance for prostate cancer: a review. Curr Urol Rep 2010; 11:165-171.
4. Loeb S, Carter HB, Berndt SI, et al. Complications after prostate biopsy: data from SEER-Medicare. J Urol 2011; 186:1830-1834.
5. Van den Bergh RCN, Essink-Bot M-L, Roobol MJ, et al. Anxiety and distress during active surveillance for early prostate cancer. Cancer 2009; 115:3868-3878.
6. Marberger M, Barentsz J, Emberton M, et al. Novel approaches to improve prostate cancer diagnosis and management in early-stage disease. BJU Int 2012; 109 (Suppl. 2):1-7.
7. Ahmed HU, Emberton M. Active surveillance and radical therapy in prostate cancer: can focal therapy offer the middle way? World J Urol 2008; 26:457- 467.
8. Valerio M, Ahmed HU, Emberton M, et al. The role of focal therapy in the management of localised prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol 2013; 44:1-20.
9. Dickinson L, Ahmed HU, Kirkham AP, et al. A multicentre prospective development study evaluating focal therapy using high intensity focused ultrasound for localised prostate cancer: The INDEX study. Contemp Clin Trials 2013; 36:68-80.
10. Ahmed HU, Hindley RG, Dickinson L, et al. Focal therapy for localised unifocal and multifocal prostate cancer: a prospective development study. Lancet Oncol 2012; 13:622-632.
11. Hoang AN, Volkin D, Yerram NK, et al. Image guidance in the focal treatment of prostate cancer. Curr Opin Urol 2012; 22:328-335.
12. Schick F. Whole-body MRI at high field: technical limits and clinical potential. Eur Radiol 2005; 15:946-959.
13. Kirkham a PS, Haslam P, Keanie JY, et al. Prostate MRI: who, when, and how? Report from a UK consensus meeting. Clin Radiol 2013; 68:1016-1023.
14. Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R, et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol 2012; 22:746-757.
15. Dickinson L, Ahmed HU, 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; 59:477-494.
16. Muller B, van den Bos W, Brausi M, et al. The role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in focal therapy for prostate cancer: a Delphi Consensus Project. BJU Int 2013. [Epub ahead of print]
17. Orczyk C, Rusinek H, Rosenkrantz AB, et al. Preliminary experience with a novel method of three-dimensional co-registration of prostate cancer digital histology and in vivo multiparametric MRI. Clin Radiol 2013; 68:e652-e658.
18. Trivedi H, Turkbey B, Rastinehad AR, et al. Use of patient-specific MRI-based prostate mold for validation of multiparametric MRI in localization of prostate cancer. Urology 2012; 79:233-239.
19. Turkbey B, Mani H, Shah V, et al. Multiparametric 3 T 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.
20. Xie SW, Li HL, Du J, et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography with contrasttuned imaging technology for the detection of prostate cancer: comparison with conventional ultrasonography. BJU Int 2012; 109:1620-1626.
21. Simmons L a M, Autier P, Zat'ura F, et al. Detection, localisation and characterisation of prostate cancer by prostate HistoScanning(TM). BJU Int 2012; 110:28-35.
22. Brock M, von Bodman C, Palisaar RJ, et al. The impact of real-time elastography guiding a systematic prostate biopsy to improve cancer detection rate: a prospective study of 353 patients. J Urol 2012; 187:2039-2043.
23. Barr RG, Memo R, Schaub CR. Shear wave ultrasound elastography of the prostate: initial results. Ultrasound Q 2012; 28:13-20.
24. Turkbey B, Mani H, Aras O, et al. Correlation of magnetic resonance imaging tumor volume with histopathology. J Urol 2012; 188:1157-1163.
25. Rosenkrantz AB, Zhang B, Ben-Eliezer N, et al. T2-weighted prostate MRI at 7 Tesla using a simplified external transmit-receive coil array: correlation with radical prostatectomy findings in two prostate cancer patients. J Magn Reson Imaging 2013; 00:1-7.
26. Kobus T, Bitz AK, van Uden MJ, et al. In vivo 31P MR spectroscopic imaging of the human prostate at 7 T: safety and feasibility. Magn Reson Med 2012; 68:1683-1695.
27. Arteaga de Castro CS, van den Bergen B, Luijten PR, et al. Improving SNR and B1 transmit field for an endorectal coil in 7 T MRI and MRS of prostate cancer. Magn Reson Med 2012; 68:311-318.
28. Wong A, Glaister J, Cameron A, Haider M. Correlated diffusion imaging. BMC Med Imaging 2013; 13:26.
29. Maas MC, Futterer JJ, Scheenen TWJ. Quantitative evaluation of computed high B value diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate. Invest Radiol 2013; 48:779-786.
30. Artan Y, Oto A, Yetik IS. Cross-device automated prostate cancer localization with multiparametric MRI. IEEE Trans Image Process 2013; 22:5385- 5394.
31. Ghai S, Toi A. Role of transrectal ultrasonography in prostate cancer. Radiol Clin North Am 2012; 50:1061-1073.
32. 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; 110:942-948.
33. Rom M, Pycha A, Wiunig C, et al. Prospective randomized multicenter study comparing prostate cancer detection rates of end-fire and side-fire transrectal ultrasound probe configuration. Urology 2012; 80:15-18.
34. Halpern EJ, Gomella LG, Forsberg F, et al. Contrast enhanced transrectal ultrasound for the detection of prostate cancer: a randomized, double-blind trial of dutasteride pretreatment. J Urol 2012; 188:1739-1745.
35. ZaleskyM, Urban M, SmerhovskyZ, et al. Value of power Doppler sonography with 3D reconstruction in preoperative diagnostics of extraprostatic tumor extension in clinically localized prostate cancer. Int J Urol 2008; 15:68-75; discussion 75.
36. Lindner U, Ghai S, Spensieri P, et al. Focal magnetic resonance guided focused ultrasound for prostate cancer: initial North American experience. Can Urol Assoc J 2012; 6:E283-E286.
37. Bomers JGR, Sedelaar JPM, Barentsz JO, Futterer JJ. MRI-guided interventions for the treatment of prostate cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012; 199:714-720.
38. Partanen A, Yerram NK, Trivedi H, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)- guided transurethral ultrasound therapy of the prostate: a preclinical study with radiological and pathological correlation using customised MRI-based moulds. BJU Int 2013; 112:508-516.
39. Kuru TH, Roethke MC, Seidenader J, et al. Critical evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging targeted, transrectal ultrasound guided transperineal fusion biopsy for detection of prostate cancer. J Urol 2013; 190:1380- 1386.
40. Ukimura O, Desai MM, Palmer S, et al. 3-Dimensional elastic registration system of prostate biopsy location by real-time 3-dimensional transrectal ultrasound guidance with magnetic resonance/transrectal ultrasound image fusion. J Urol 2012; 187:1080-1086.
41. Betrouni N, Colin P, Puech P, et al. An image guided treatment platform for prostate cancer photodynamic therapy. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2013; 2013:370-373.
42. 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.
43. Arrayeh E, Westphalen AC, Kurhanewicz J, et al. Does local recurrence of prostate cancer after radiation therapy occur at the site of primary tumor? Results of a longitudinal MRI and MRSI study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2012; 82:e787-e793.
44. Del Vescovo R, Pisanti F, Russo V, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR evaluation of prostate cancer before and after endorectal high-intensity focused ultrasound. Radiol Med 2013; 118:851-862.
45. Shah V, Turkbey B, Mani H, et al. Decision support system for localizing prostate cancer based on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. Med Phys 2012; 39:4093-4103.