Multiparametric MRI in prostate cancer management

Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology

Volumn 11, Issue 6, 2014, Pages 346-353

  Johnson, Linda M ^a   Turkbey, Baris ^a   Figg, William D ^a   Choyke, Peter L ^a  

^a NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

BLOOD LEVEL; CANCER CELL; CANCER GRADING; CANCER GROWTH; CANCER LOCALIZATION; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER STAGING; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIFFUSION COEFFICIENT; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; DIGITAL RECTAL EXAMINATION; DISEASE ACTIVITY; FUNCTIONAL MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; GLEASON SCORE; GROWTH RATE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; METASTASIS POTENTIAL; MULTIPARAMETRIC MRI; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN BLOOD LEVEL; PROSTATECTOMY; RADIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TREATMENT PLANNING; TUMOR INVASION;

HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS;

EID: 84902008416     PISSN: 17594774     EISSN: 17594782     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2014.69     Document Type: Review

References (103)

1. Siegel, R., Naishadham, D. & Jemal, A. Cancer statistics, 2013. CA Cancer J. Clin. 63, 11-30 (2013).
2. Jemal, A. et al. Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J. Clin. 61, 69-90 (2011).
3. O'Shaughnessy, M., Konety, B. & Warlick, C. Prostate cancer screening: issues and controversies. Minn. Med. 93, 39-44 (2010).
4. Weissbach, L. & Altwein, J. Active surveillance or active treatment in localized prostate cancer? Dtsch Arztebl. Int. 106, 371-376 (2009).
5. Powell, I. J., Bock, C. H., Ruterbusch, J. J. & Sakr, W. Evidence supports a faster growth rate and/or earlier transformation to clinically significant prostate cancer in black than in white American men, and influences racial progression and mortality disparity. J. Urol. 183, 1792-1796 (2010).
6. Stamatiou, K., Alevizos, A., Agapitos, E. & Sofras, F. Incidence of impalpable carcinoma of the prostate and of non-malignant and precarcinomatous lesions in Greek male population: an autopsy study. Prostate 66, 1319-1328 (2006).
7. Welch, H. G. & Black, W. C. Overdiagnosis in cancer. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 102, 605-613 (2010).
8. Schmid, H. P., McNeal, J. E. & Stamey, T. A. Observations on the doubling time of prostate cancer. The use of serial prostate-specific antigen in patients with untreated disease as a measure of increasing cancer volume. Cancer 71, 2031-2040 (1993).
9. Stamey, T. A. et al. Localized prostate cancer. Relationship of tumour volume to clinical significance for treatment of prostate cancer. Cancer 71, 933-938 (1993).
10. Mullerad, M. et al. Comparison of endorectal magnetic resonance imaging, guided prostate biopsy and digital rectal examination in the preoperative anatomical localization of prostate cancer. J. Urol. 174, 2158-2163 (2005).
11. Rastinehad, A. R. et al. Improving detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: MRI/TRUS fusion-guided prostate biopsy. J. Urol. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.12.007 (2013).
12. Habchi, H. et al. Value of prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for predicting biopsy results in first or repeat biopsy. Clin. Radiol. 69, e120-e128 (2014).
13. Schiavina, R. et al. The dilemma of localizing disease relapse after radical treatment for prostate cancer: which is the value of the actual imaging techniques? Curr. Radiopharm. 6, 92-95 (2013).
14. Dickinson, L. et al. Magnetic resonance imaging for the detection, localisation, and characterisation of prostate cancer: recommendations from a European consensus meeting. Eur. Urol. 59, 477-494 (2011).
15. Barentsz, J. O. et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur. Radiol. 22, 746-757 (2012).
16. Rosenkrantz, A. B. et al. Impact of delay after biopsy and post-biopsy haemorrhage on prostate cancer tumour detection using multi-parametric MRI: a multi-reader study. Clin. Radiol. 67, e83-e90 (2012).
17. White, S. et al. Prostate cancer: effect of postbiopsy haemorrhage on interpretation of MR images. Radiology 195, 385-390 (1995).
18. Thompson, J., Lawrentschuk, N., Frydenberg, M., Thompson, L. & Stricker, P. The role of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis and management of prostate cancer. BJU Int. 112 (Suppl. 2), 6-20 (2013).
19. Ikonen, S. et al. Optimal timing of post-biopsy MR imaging of the prostate. Acta Radiol. 42, 70-73 (2001).
20. Kirkham, A. P. et al. Prostate MRI: who, when, and how? Report from a UK consensus meeting. Clin. Radiol. 68, 1016-1023 (2013).
21. Kundra, V., Silverman, P. M., Matin, S. F. & Choi, H. Imaging in oncology from the University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Centre: diagnosis, staging, and surveillance of prostate cancer. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 189, 830-844 (2007).
22. Verma, S. & Rajesh, A. A clinically relevant approach to imaging prostate cancer: review. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 196 (Suppl. 3), S1-S10 (2011).
23. Akin, O. et al. Transition zone prostate cancers: features, detection, localization, and staging at endorectal MR imaging. Radiology 239, 784-792 (2006).
24. Cheng, L., Montironi, R., Bostwick, D. G., Lopez-Beltran, A. & Berney, D. M. Staging of prostate cancer. Histopathology 60, 87-117 (2012).
25. Roethke, M. C. et al. Accuracy of preoperative endorectal MRI in predicting extracapsular extension and influence on neurovascular bundle sparing in radical prostatectomy. World J. Urol. 31, 1111-1116 (2013).
26. Zhang, J. et al. Clinical stage T1c prostate cancer: evaluation with endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging. Radiology 253, 425-434 (2009).
27. Bloch, B. N. et al. Prostate cancer: accurate determination of extracapsular extension with high-spatial-resolution dynamic contrast-enhanced and T2-weighted MR imaging-initial results. Radiology 245, 176-185 (2007).
28. Lee, H. W., Seo, S. I., Jeon, S. S., Lee, H. M. & Choi, H. Y. Can we predict real T3 stage prostate cancer in patients with clinical T3 (cT3) disease before radical prostatectomy? Yonsei Med. J. 51, 700-707 (2010).
29. Masterson, T. A., Pettus, J. A., Middleton, R. G. & Stephenson, R. A. Isolated seminal vesicle invasion imparts better outcomes after radical retropubic prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer: prognostic stratification of pt3b disease by nodal and margin status. Urology 66, 152-155 (2005).
30. Chandra, R. V. et al. Endorectal magnetic resonance imaging staging of prostate cancer. ANZ J. Surg. 77, 860-865 (2007).
31. Hricak, H. et al. Carcinoma of the prostate gland: MR imaging with pelvic phased-array coils versus integrated endorectal-pelvic phased-array coils. Radiology 193, 703-709 (1994).
32. Casciani, E. et al. Contribution of the MR spectroscopic imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer in the peripheral zone. Abdom. Imaging 32, 796-802 (2007).
33. Costouros, N. G. et al. Diagnosis of prostate cancer in patients with an elevated prostate-specific antigen level: role of endorectal MRI and MR spectroscopic imaging. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 188, 812-816 (2007).
34. Haider, M. A. et al. Combined T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted MRI for localization of prostate cancer. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 189, 323-328 (2007).
35. Tamada, T. et al. Prostate cancer: relationships between postbiopsy haemorrhage and tumour detectability at MR diagnosis. Radiology 248, 531-539 (2008).
36. Scheidler, J. et al. Prostate cancer: localization with three-dimensional proton MR spectroscopic imaging-clinicopathologic study. Radiology 213, 473-480 (1999).
37. Ekici, S. et al. A comparison of transrectal ultrasonography and endorectal magnetic resonance imaging in the local staging of prostatic carcinoma. BJU Int. 83, 796-800 (1999).
38. Wefer, A. E. et al. Sextant localization of prostate cancer: comparison of sextant biopsy, magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging with step section histology. J. Urol. 164, 400-404 (2000).
39. Ikonen, S. et al. Prostatic MR imaging. Accuracy in differentiating cancer from other prostatic disorders. Acta Radiol. 42, 348-354 (2001).
40. Akin, O. et al. Local staging of prostate cancer with endorectal surface coil MR imaging in a mid-field magnetic system. Clin. Imaging 27, 47-51 (2003).
41. Kwek, J. W. et al. Phased-array magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate with correlation to radical prostatectomy specimens: local experience. Asian J. Surg. 27, 219-224 (2004).
42. Nakashima, J. et al. Endorectal MRI for prediction of tumour site, tumour size, and local extension of prostate cancer. Urology 64, 101-105 (2004).
43. Yamaguchi, T. et al. Prostate cancer: a comparative study of 11C-choline PET and MR imaging combined with proton MR spectroscopy. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging 32, 742-748 (2005).
44. Cirillo, S. et al. Endorectal magnetic resonance imaging at 1.5 Tesla to assess local recurrence following radical prostatectomy using T2-weighted and contrast-enhanced imaging. Eur. Radiol. 19, 761-769 (2009).
45. Sala, E. et al. Endorectal MR imaging before salvage prostatectomy: tumour localization and staging. Radiology 238, 176-183 (2006).
46. Tan, J. S. et al. Local experience of endorectal magnetic resonance imaging of prostate with correlation to radical prostatectomy specimens. Ann. Acad. Med. Singapore 37, 40-43 (2008).
47. Futterer, J. J. et al. Staging prostate cancer with dynamic contrast-enhanced endorectal MR imaging before radical prostatectomy: experienced versus less experienced readers. Radiology 237, 541-549 (2005).
48. Stejskal, E. O. & Tanner, J. E. Spin diffusion measurements: spin echoes in the presence of a time-dependent field gradient. J. Chem. Phys. 42, 288-292 (1965).
49. Schmid-Tannwald, C., Oto, A., Reiser, M. F. & Zech, C. J. Diffusion-weighted MRI of the abdomen: current value in clinical routine. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 37, 35-47 (2013).
50. Issa, B. In vivo measurement of the apparent diffusion coefficient in normal and malignant prostatic tissues using echo-planar imaging. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 16, 196-200 (2002).
51. Esen, M., Onur, M. R., Akpolat, N., Orhan, I. & Kocakoc, E. Utility of ADC measurement on diffusion-weighted MRI in differentiation of prostate cancer, normal prostate and prostatitis. Quant. Imaging Med. Surg. 3, 210-216 (2013).
52. Kim, C. K., Park, B. K. & Kim, B. High-b-value diffusion-weighted imaging at 3T to detect prostate cancer: comparisons between b values of 1,000 and 2,000 s/mm2. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 194, W33-W37 (2010).
53. Rosenkrantz, A. B. et al. Computed diffusion-weighted imaging of the prostate at 3T: impact on image quality and tumour detection. Eur. Radiol. 23, 3170-3177 (2013).
54. Ueno, Y. et al. Computed diffusion-weighted imaging using 3-T magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer diagnosis. Eur. Radiol. 23, 3509-3516 (2013).
55. Quentin, M. et al. Increased signal intensity of prostate lesions on high b-value diffusion-weighted images as a predictive sign of malignancy. Eur. Radiol. 24, 209-213 (2014).
56. Katahira, K. et al. Ultra-high-b-value diffusion-weighted MR imaging for the detection of prostate cancer: evaluation in 201 cases with histopathological correlation. Eur. Radiol. 21, 188-196 (2011).
57. Delongchamps, N. B. 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).
58. Kim, C. K., Park, B. K., Lee, H. M. & Kwon, G. Y. Value of diffusion-weighted imaging for the prediction of prostate cancer location at 3T using a phased-array coil: preliminary results. Invest. Radiol. 42, 842-847 (2007).
59. Kitajima, K. et al. Prostate cancer detection with 3T MRI: comparison of diffusion-weighted imaging and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in combination with T2-weighted imaging. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 31, 625-631 (2010).
60. Lim, H. K., Kim, J. K., Kim, K. A. & Cho, K. S. Prostate cancer: apparent diffusion coefficient map with T2-weighted images for detection-a multireader study. Radiology 250, 145-151 (2009).
61. Morgan, V. A., Kyriazi, S., Ashley, S. E. & DeSouza, N. M. Evaluation of the potential of diffusion-weighted imaging in prostate cancer detection. Acta Radiol. 48, 695-703 (2007).
62. 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 25, 146-152 (2007).
63. Vargas, H. A. et al. Diffusion-weighted endorectal MR imaging at 3 T for prostate cancer: tumour detection and assessment of aggressiveness. Radiology 259, 775-784 (2011).
64. Yoshimitsu, K. et al. Usefulness of apparent diffusion coefficient map in diagnosing prostate carcinoma: correlation with stepwise histopathology. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 27, 132-139 (2008).
65. Wu, L. M. et al. Usefulness of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Acad. Radiol. 19, 1215-1224 (2012).
66. Turkbey, B. et al. Correlation of magnetic resonance imaging tumour volume with histopathology. J. Urol. 188, 1157-1163 (2012).
67. Hambrock, T. 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).
68. Jung, S. I. et al. Transition zone prostate cancer: incremental value of diffusion-weighted endorectal MR imaging in tumour detection and assessment of aggressiveness. Radiology 269, 493-503 (2013).
69. Turkbey, B. et al. Is apparent diffusion coefficient associated with clinical risk scores for prostate cancers that are visible on 3-T MR images? Radiology 258, 488-495 (2011).
70. Turkbey, B. et al. Comparison of endorectal coil and nonendorectal coil T2W and diffusion-weighted MRI at 3 Tesla for localizing prostate cancer: correlation with whole-mount histopathology. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmri.24317 (2013).
71. Soylu, F. N. et al. Seminal vesicle invasion in prostate cancer: evaluation by using multiparametric endorectal MR imaging. Radiology 267, 797-806 (2013).
72. Sciarra, A. et al. Modern role of magnetic resonance and spectroscopy in the imaging of prostate cancer. Urol. Oncol. 29, 12-20 (2011).
73. Ganie, F. A. et al. Endorectal coil MRI and MR-spectroscopic imaging in patients with elevated serum prostate specific antigen with negative trus transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy. Urol. Ann. 5, 172-178 (2013).
74. Kobus, T. et al. Prostate cancer aggressiveness: in vivo assessment of MR spectroscopy and diffusion-weighted imaging at 3T. Radiology 265, 457-467 (2012).
75. Jung, J. A. et al. Prostate depiction at endorectal MR spectroscopic imaging: investigation of a standardized evaluation system. Radiology 233, 701-708 (2004).
76. Feng, Y., Jeong, E. K., Mohs, A. M., Emerson, L. & Lu, Z. R. Characterization of tumour angiogenesis with dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and biodegradable macromolecular contrast agents in mice. Magn. Reson. Med. 60, 1347-1352 (2008).
77. Verma, S. et al. Overview of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in prostate cancer diagnosis and management. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 198, 1277-1288 (2012).
78. Nicholson, B., Schaefer, G. & Theodourescu, D. Angiogenesis in prostate cancer: biology and therapeutic opportunities. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 20, 297-319 (2001).
79. Jackson, A. S. et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for prostate cancer localization. Br. J. Radiol. 82, 148-156 (2009).
80. Tofts, P. S. 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 10, 223-232 (1999).
81. Grant, K. et al. Functional and molecular imaging of localized and recurrent prostate cancer. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging 40 (Suppl. 1), S48-S59 (2013).
82. Talab, S. S., Preston, M. A., Elmi, A. & Tabatabaei, S. Prostate cancer imaging: what the urologist wants to know. Radiol. Clin. North Am. 50, 1015-1041 (2012).
83. Kim, J. K. et al. Wash-in rate on the basis of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: usefulness for prostate cancer detection and localization. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 22, 639-646 (2005).
84. Jager, G. J. et al. Dynamic TurboFLASH subtraction technique for contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the prostate: correlation with histopathologic results. Radiology 203, 645-652 (1997).
85. Vos, E. K. et al. Assessment of prostate cancer aggressiveness using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging at 3T. Eur. Urol. 64, 448-455 (2013).
86. Li, C. et al. 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 Radiol. 55, 239-247 (2013).
87. Deering, R. E., Bigler, S. A., Brown, M. & Brawer, M. K. Microvascularity in benign prostatic hyperplasia. Prostate 26, 111-115 (1995).
88. Padhani, A. R. et al. Dynamic contrast enhanced MRI of prostate cancer: correlation with morphology and tumour stage, histological grade and PSA. Clin. Radiol. 55, 99-109 (2000).
89. Babaian, R. J. et al. A comparative analysis of sextant and an extended 11-core multisite directed biopsy strategy. J. Urol. 163, 152-157 (2000).
90. Presti, J. C. Jr, O'Dowd, G. J., Miller, M. C., Mattu, R. & Veltri, R. W. Extended peripheral zone biopsy schemes increase cancer detection rates and minimize variance in prostate specific antigen and age related cancer rates: results of a community multi-practice study. J. Urol. 169, 125-129 (2003).
91. Eskew, L. A., Bare, R. L. & McCullough, D. L. Systematic 5 region prostate biopsy is superior to sextant method for diagnosing carcinoma of the prostate. J. Urol. 157, 199-202; discussion 202-203 (1997).
92. Ouzzane, A. et al. Combined multiparametric MRI and targeted biopsies improve anterior prostate cancer detection, staging, and grading. Urology 78, 1356-1362 (2011).
93. Lemaitre, L. et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of anterior prostate cancer: morphometric assessment and correlation with radical prostatectomy findings. Eur. Radiol. 19, 470-480 (2009).
94. Villers, A. et al. Dynamic contrast enhanced, pelvic phased array magnetic resonance imaging of localized prostate cancer for predicting tumour volume: correlation with radical prostatectomy findings. J. Urol. 176, 2432-2437 (2006).
95. Puech, P. et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced-magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of intraprostatic prostate cancer: correlation with radical prostatectomy specimens. Urology 74, 1094-1099 (2009).
96. Moore, C. M. et al. Image-guided prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance imaging-derived targets: a systematic review. Eur. Urol. 63, 125-140 (2013).
97. Haffner, J. 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).
98. Watanabe, Y. et al. Detection and localization of prostate cancer with the targeted biopsy strategy based on ADC map: a prospective large-scale cohort study. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 35, 1414-1421 (2012).
99. Siddiqui, M. M. et al. Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound-fusion biopsy significantly upgrades prostate cancer versus systematic 12-core transrectal ultrasound biopsy. Eur. Urol. 64, 713-719 (2013).
100. Ouzzane, A., Puech, P. & Villers, A. MRI and surveillance. Curr. Opin. Urol. 22, 231-236 (2012).
101. Dickinson, L. et al. Magnetic resonance imaging for the detection, localisation, and characterisation of prostate cancer: recommendations from a European consensus meeting. Eur. Urol. 59, 477-494 (2011).
102. Muller, B. et al. The role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in focal therapy for prostate cancer: a delphi consensus project. BJU Int. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bju.12548 (2013).
103. Hovels, A. M. et al. The diagnostic accuracy of CT and MRI in the staging of pelvic lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Clin. Radiol. 63, 387-395 (2008).