Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging enhances detection of significant tumor in patients on active surveillance for prostate cancer

Urology

Volumn 85, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 423-429

  Abdi, Hamidreza ^a   Pourmalek, Farshad ^a   Zargar, Homayoun ^a   Walshe, Triona ^a   Harris, Alison C ^a   Chang, Silvia D ^a   Eddy, Christopher ^a   So, Alan I ^a   Gleave, Martin E ^a   Machan, Lindsay ^a   Goldenberg, S Larry ^a   Black, Peter C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

GADOBUTROL; PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL RECORD REVIEW; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; RADIODIAGNOSIS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY; AGED; ECHOGRAPHY; ENDOSCOPIC ECHOGRAPHY; IMAGE GUIDED BIOPSY; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; PROSTATE TUMOR; WATCHFUL WAITING;

AGED; HUMANS; IMAGE-GUIDED BIOPSY; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, INTERVENTIONAL; WATCHFUL WAITING;

EID: 84921475666     PISSN: 00904295     EISSN: 15279995     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2014.09.060     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. K. Lin, J.M. Croswell, and H. Koenig Prostate-specific Antigen-based Screening for Prostate Cancer: An Evidence Update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force 2011 Rockville, MD
2. F.H. Schroder, J. Hugosson, and M.J. Roobol Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study N Engl J Med 360 2009 1320 1328
3. D. Margel, S.A. Yap, and N. Lawrentschuk Impact of multiparametric endorectal coil prostate magnetic resonance imaging on disease reclassification among active surveillance candidates: a prospective cohort study J Urol 187 2012 1247 1252
4. R.K. Berglund, T.A. Masterson, and K.C. Vora Pathological upgrading and up staging with immediate repeat biopsy in patients eligible for active surveillance J Urol 180 2008 1964 1967 discussion: 7-8
5. A.R. Cabrera, F.V. Coakley, and A.C. Westphalen Prostate cancer: is inapparent tumor at endorectal MR and MR spectroscopic imaging a favorable prognostic finding in patients who select active surveillance? Radiology 247 2008 444 450
6. G. Ploussard, E. Xylinas, and X. Durand Magnetic resonance imaging does not improve the prediction of misclassification of prostate cancer patients eligible for active surveillance when the most stringent selection criteria are based on the saturation biopsy scheme BJU Int 108 2011 513 517
7. C.M. Hoeks, D.M. Somford, and I.M. van Oort Value of 3-T multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance-guided biopsy for early risk restratification in active surveillance of low-risk prostate cancer: a prospective multicenter cohort study Invest Radiol 49 2014 165 172
8. H.A. Vargas, O. Akin, and A. Afaq Magnetic resonance imaging for predicting prostate biopsy findings in patients considered for active surveillance of clinically low risk prostate cancer J Urol 188 2012 1732 1738
9. A. Adamy, D.S. Yee, and K. Matsushita Role of prostate specific antigen and immediate confirmatory biopsy in predicting progression during active surveillance for low risk prostate cancer J Urol 185 2011 477 482
10. M.S. Soloway, C.T. Soloway, and S. Williams Active surveillance; a reasonable management alternative for patients with prostate cancer: the Miami experience BJU Int 101 2008 165 169
11. N.J. van As, and C.C. Parker Active surveillance with selective radical treatment for localized prostate cancer Cancer J 13 2007 289 294
12. J.J. Tosoian, B.J. Trock, and P. Landis Active surveillance program for prostate cancer: an update of the Johns Hopkins experience J Clin Oncol 29 2011 2185 2190
13. M.R. Cooperberg, J.E. Cowan, and J.F. Hilton Outcomes of active surveillance for men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer J Clin Oncol 29 2011 228 234
14. L. Klotz, L. Zhang, and A. Lam Clinical results of long-term follow-up of a large, active surveillance cohort with localized prostate cancer J Clin Oncol 28 2010 126 131
15. R.C. van den Bergh, S. Roemeling, and M.J. Roobol Outcomes of men with screen-detected prostate cancer eligible for active surveillance who were managed expectantly Eur Urol 55 2009 1 8
16. J.O. Barentsz, J. Richenberg, and R. Clements ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012 Eur Radiol 22 2012 746 757
17. A. Ouzzane, P. Puech, and L. Lemaitre Combined multiparametric MRI and targeted biopsies improve anterior prostate cancer detection, staging, and grading Urology 78 2011 1356 1362
18. P. Motamedinia, J.L. RiChard, and J.M. McKiernan Role of immediate confirmatory prostate biopsy to ensure accurate eligibility for active surveillance Urology 80 2012 1070 1074
19. A.C. King, A. Livermore, and T.A. Laurila Impact of immediate TRUS rebiopsy in a patient cohort considering active surveillance for favorable risk prostate cancer Urol Oncol 31 2013 739 743
20. M.R. Cooperberg, P.R. Carroll, and L. Klotz Active surveillance for prostate cancer: progress and promise J Clin Oncol 29 2011 3669 3676
21. J.I. Epstein Prognostic significance of tumor volume in radical prostatectomy and needle biopsy specimens J Urol 186 2011 790 797
22. P. Puech, E. Potiron, and L. Lemaitre Dynamic contrast-enhanced-magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of intraprostatic prostate cancer: correlation with radical prostatectomy specimens Urology 74 2009 1094 1099