Magnetic resonance imaging-directed biopsy improves the prediction of prostate cancer aggressiveness compared with a 12-core transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy

Molecular Medicine Reports

Volumn 9, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 1989-1997

  Zhang, Jie ^a   Xiu, Jianjun ^a   Dong, Yin ^a   Wang, Muwen ^a   Han, Xue ^a   Qin, Yejun ^a   Huang, Zhaoqin ^a   Cai, Shifeng ^a   Yuan, Xianshun ^a   Liu, Qingwei ^a  

^a SHANDONG UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Aggressiveness; Diffusion weighted imaging; Gleason grade; Magnetic resonance imaging directed biopsy; Magnetic resonance spectroscopy; Prostate cancer

Indexed keywords

CHOLINE; CITRIC ACID; CREATINE;

12 CORE TRANSRECTAL ULTRASOUND GUIDED PROSTATE BIOPSY; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER SURGERY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; IMAGE GUIDED BIOPSY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING-ULTRASOUND FUSION-GUIDED PROSTATE BIOPSY DEVICE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SCANNER; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASOUND GUIDED MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING DIRECTED BIOPSY; VERY ELDERLY;

AGED; BIOPSY; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM GRADING; NEOPLASM STAGING; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84899565432     PISSN: 17912997     EISSN: 17913004     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3892/mmr.2014.1994     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Gleason DF and Mellinger GT: Prediction of prognosis for prostatic adenocarcinoma by combined histological grading and clinical staging. J Urol 111: 58-64, 1974.
2. Egevad L, Granfors T, Karlberg L, Bergh A and Stattin P: Prognostic value of the Gleason score in prostate cancer. BJU Int 89: 538-542, 2002.
3. Yang CW, Lin TP, Huang YH, et al: Does extended prostate needle biopsy improve the concordance of Gleason scores between biopsy and prostatectomy in the Taiwanese population? J Chin Med Assoc 75: 97-101, 2012.
4. Divrik RT, Eroglu A, Sahin A, Zorlu F and Ozen H: Increasing the number of biopsies increases the concordance of Gleason scores of needle biopsies and prostatectomy specimens. Urol Oncol 25: 376-382, 2007.
5. 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 107: 1411-1418, 2011.
6. 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 246: 480-488, 2008.
7. Park BK, Park JW, Park SY, et al: Prospective evaluation of 3-T MRI performed before initial transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in patients with high prostate-specific antigen and no previous biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 197: W876-W881, 2011.
8. 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 108: E171-E178, 2011.
9. Pinto PA, Chung PH, Rastinehad AR, 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 186: 1281-1285, 2011.
10. Vourganti S, Rastinehad A, Yerram NK, et al: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound fusion biopsy detect prostate cancer in patients with prior negative transrectal ultrasound biopsies. J Urol 188: 2152-2157, 2012.
11. Kobus T, Vos PC, Hambrock T, et al: Prostate cancer aggressiveness: in vivo assessment of MR spectroscopy and diffusion-weighted imaging at 3 T. Radiology 265: 457-467, 2012.
12. 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 259: 453-461, 2011.
13. Kobus T, Hambrock T, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa CA, et al: In vivo assessment of prostate cancer aggressiveness using magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging at 3 T with an endorectal coil. Eur Urol 60: 1074-1080, 2011.
14. Scheenen TW, Heijmink SW, Roell SA, et al: Three-dimensional proton MR spectroscopy of human prostate at 3 T without endorectal coil: feasibility. Radiology 245: 507-516, 2007.
15. Wang XZ, Wang B, Gao ZQ, et al: Diffusion-weighted imaging of prostate cancer: correlation between apparent diffusion coef- ficient values and tumor proliferation. J Magn Reson Imaging 29: 1360-1366, 2009.
16. Wang XZ, Wang B, Gao ZQ, et al: 1H-MRSI of prostate cancer: the relationship between metabolite ratio and tumor proliferation. Eur J Radiol 73: 345-351, 2010.
17. Stackhouse DA, Sun L, Schroeck FR, et al: Factors predicting prostatic biopsy Gleason sum under grading. J Urol 182: 118-124, 2009.
18. 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 234: 804-814, 2005.
19. Delongchamps NB, Peyromaure M, Schull A, et al: Prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging and prostate cancer detection: comparison of random and targeted biopsies. J Urol 189: 493-499, 2013.
20. Moore CM, Robertson NL, Arsanious N, et al: Image-guided prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance imaging-derived targets: a systematic review. Eur Urol 63: 125-140, 2013.
21. Verma S, Rajesh A, Morales H, et al: Assessment of aggressiveness of prostate cancer: correlation of apparent diffusion coefficient with histologic grade after radical prostatectomy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 196: 374-381, 2011.
22. San Francisco IF, DeWolf WC, Rosen S, Upton M and Olumi AF: Extended prostate needle biopsy improves concordance of Gleason grading between prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy. J Urol 169: 136-140, 2003.
23. Park BK, Lee HM, Kim CK, Choi HY and Park JW: Lesion localization in patients with a previous negative transrectal ultrasound biopsy and persistently elevated prostate specific antigen level using diffusion-weighted imaging at three Tesla before rebiopsy. Invest Radiol 43: 789-793, 2008.
24. Prando A, Kurhanewicz J, Borges AP, Oliveira EM Jr and Figueiredo E: Prostatic biopsy directed with endorectal MR spectroscopic imaging findings in patients with elevated prostate specific antigen levels and prior negative biopsy findings: early experience. Radiology 236: 903-910, 2005.
25. Tamada T, Sone T, Jo Y, et al: Apparent diffusion coefficient values in peripheral and transition zones of the prostate: comparison between normal and malignant prostatic tissues and correlation with histologic grade. J Magn Reson Imaging 28: 720-726, 2008.
26. 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 61: 177-184, 2012.
27. Na R, Jiang H, Kim ST, et al: Outcomes and treands of prostate biopsy for prostate cancer in Chinese men from 2003 to 2011. PLoS One 7: e49914, 2012.
28. Miyagawa T, Ishikawa S, Kimura T, et al: Real-time Virtual Sonography for navigation during targeted prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance imaging data. Int J Urol 17: 855-860, 2010.
29. Rastinehad AR, Baccala AA Jr, Chung PH, et al: D'Amico risk stratification correlates with degree of suspicion of prostate cancer on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. J Urol 185: 815-820, 2011.