Role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in early detection of prostate cancer

Insights into Imaging

Volumn 7, Issue 2, 2016, Pages 205-214

  De Visschere, Pieter J L ^a   Briganti, Alberto ^b   Fütterer, Jurgen J ^c   Ghadjar, Pirus ^d   Isbarn, Hendrik ^e,f   Massard, Christophe ^g   Ost, Piet ^a   Sooriakumaran, Prasanna ^h,i   Surcel, Cristian I ^j   Valerio, Massimo ^k   van den Bergh, Roderick C N ^c   Ploussard, Guillaume ^l,m   Giannarini, Gianluca ⁿ   Villeirs, Geert M ^a  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Belgium)

^b VITA SALUTE SAN RAFFAELE UNIVERSITY   (Italy)

^c RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^d CHARITÉ UNIVERSITÄTSMEDIZIN BERLIN   (Germany)

^e Regio Klinik Wedel   (Germany)

^f UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER HAMBURG EPPENDORF   (Germany)

^g INSTITUT GUSTAVE ROUSSY   (France)

^h UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

ⁱ KAROLINSKA INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

^j FUNDENI CLINICAL INSTITUTE   (Romania)

^k LAUSANNE UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Switzerland)

^l Saint Jean Languedoc Clinic   (France)

^m INSERM U955   (France)

ⁿ SANTA MARIA DELLA MISERICORDIA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Italy)

more..

Author keywords

Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging; Magnetic resonance imaging; Magnetic resonance spectroscopy; Prostate; Prostatic neoplasms

Indexed keywords

EID: 84961736125     PISSN: None     EISSN: 18694101     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s13244-016-0466-9     Document Type: Review

References (116)

1. Candefjord S, Ramser K, Lindahl OA (2009) Technologies for localization and diagnosis of prostate cancer. J Med Eng Technol 33(8):585–603
2. Schroder FH, Roobol MJ (2009) Defining the optimal prostate-specific antigen threshold for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Curr Opin Urol 19(3):227–231
3. Catalona WJ, Loeb S (2005) The PSA era is not over for prostate cancer. Eur Urol 48(4):541–545
4. Verbaeys C, Oosterlinck W (2008) Prostaatspecifiek antigeen (PSA): indicatie, interpretatie en therapeutisch gevolg. Tijdschr Geneesk 64(12):609–613
5. Fuchsjager M et al (2008) Prostate cancer imaging. Acta Radiol 49(1):107–120
6. Catalona WJ et al (2000) Comparison of percent free PSA, PSA density, and age-specific PSA cutoffs for prostate cancer detection and staging. Urology 56(2):255–260
7. De Visschere P et al (2010) Clinical and imaging tools in the early diagnosis of prostate cancer, a review. JBR-BTR 93(2):62–70
8. Cohen MS et al (2008) Comparing the Gleason prostate biopsy and Gleason prostatectomy grading system: the Lahey Clinic Medical Center experience and an international meta-analysis. Eur Urol 54(2):371–381
9. Djavan B et al (2001) Prospective evaluation of prostate cancer detected on biopsies 1, 2, 3 and 4: when should we stop? J Urol 166(5):1679–1683
10. Rabbani F et al (1998) Incidence and clinical significance of false-negative sextant prostate biopsies. J Urol 159(4):1247–1250
11. Lumen N et al (2012) Population screening for prostate cancer: an overview of available studies and meta-analysis. Int J Urol 19(2):100–108
12. Loeb S et al (2014) Overdiagnosis and overtreatment of prostate cancer. Eur Urol 65(6):1046–1055
13. Thompson J et al (2013) The role of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis and management of prostate cancer. BJU Int 112(Suppl 2):6–20
14. Barentsz JO et al (2012) ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol 22(4):746–757
15. Heidenreich A et al (2011) EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised disease. Eur Urol 59(1):61–71
16. Carroll PR et al (2014) Prostate cancer early detection, version 1.2014. Featured updates to the NCCN Guidelines. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 12(9):1211–1219, quiz 1219
17. Sciarra A et al (2011) Advances in magnetic resonance imaging: how they are changing the management of prostate cancer. Eur Urol 59(6):962–977
18. Kim CK, Park BK (2008) Update of prostate magnetic resonance imaging at 3 T. J Comput Assist Tomogr 32(2):163–172
19. Turkbey B et al (2014) 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 39(6):1443–1448
20. Gandaglia G et al (2015) What is the optimal definition of misclassification in patients with very low-risk prostate cancer eligible for active surveillance? Results from a multi-institutional series. Urol Oncol 33(4):164, e1-9
21. Bastian PJ et al (2012) High-risk prostate cancer: from definition to contemporary management. Eur Urol 61(6):1096–1106
22. Klotz L (2013) Active surveillance: patient selection. Curr Opin Urol 23(3):239–244
23. Ross HM et al (2012) Do adenocarcinomas of the prostate with Gleason score (GS)
24. Wolters T et al (2011) A critical analysis of the tumor volume threshold for clinically insignificant prostate cancer using a data set of a randomized screening trial. J Urol 185(1):121–125
25. Epstein JI et al (2015) A contemporary prostate cancer grading system: a validated alternative to the gleason score. Eur Urol. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.046
26. Coakley F, Hricak H (2000) Radiologic anatomy of the prostate gland: a clinical approach. Radiol Clin North Am 38(1):15–30
27. Janus C, Lippert M (1992) Benign prostatic hyperplasia: appearance on magnetic resonance imaging. Urology 40(6):539–541
28. Villeirs GM et al (2010) A qualitative approach to combined magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Eur J Radiol 73(2):352–356
29. Li H et al (2006) Conventional MRI capabilities in the diagnosis of prostate cancer in the transition zone. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186(3):729–742
30. Jung JA et al (2004) Prostate depiction at endorectal MR spectroscopic imaging: investigation of a standardized evaluation system. Radiology 233(3):701–708
31. Prando A et al (2005) 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(3):903–910
32. Scheidler J et al (1999) Prostate cancer: localization with three-dimensional proton MR spectroscopic imaging - clinicopathologic study. Radiology 213:473–480
33. Testa C et al (2007) Prostate cancer: sextant localization with MR imaging, MR spectroscopy, and 11C-choline PET/CT. Radiology 244(3):797–806
34. Wefer AE et al (2000) Sextant localization of prostate cancer: comparison of sextant biopsy, magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging with step section histology. J Urol 164(2):400–404
35. Yuen JS et al (2004) Endorectal magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy for the detection of tumor foci in men with prior negative transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsy. J Urol 171(4):1482–1486
36. Beyersdorff D et al (2002) Patients with a history of elevated prostate-specific antigen levels and negative transrectal US-guided quadrant or sextant biopsy results: value of MR imaging. Radiology 224(3):701–706
37. Casciani E et al (2007) Contribution of the MR spectroscopic imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer in the peripheral zone. Abdom Imaging 32:796–802
38. Perrotti M et al (1999) Prospective evaluation of endorectal magnetic resonance imaging to detect tumor foci in men with prior negative prostastic biopsy: a pilot study. J Urol 162(4):1314–1317
39. Vilanova JC et al (2001) The value of endorectal MR imaging to predict positive biopsies in clinically intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients. Eur Radiol 11(2):229–235
40. Morakkabati-Spitz N et al (2008) MR imaging of the prostate at 3.0T with external phased array coil - preliminary results. Eur J Med Res 13(6):287–291
41. Mowatt G et al (2013) The diagnostic accuracy and cost-effectiveness of magnetic resonance spectroscopy and enhanced magnetic resonance imaging techniques in aiding the localisation of prostate abnormalities for biopsy: a systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 17(20):vii–xix, 1–281
42. Hoeks CM et al (2013) Transition zone prostate cancer: detection and localization with 3-T multiparametric MR imaging. Radiology 266(1):207–217
43. Westphalen AC, Rosenkrantz AB (2014) Prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS): reflections on early experience with a standardized interpretation scheme for multiparametric prostate MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 202(1):121–123
44. Seitz M et al (2009) Functional magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer. Eur Urol 55(4):801–814
45. Somford DM et al (2008) Diffusion and perfusion MR imaging of the prostate. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 16(4):685–695, ix
46. Mazaheri Y et al (2008) MR imaging of the prostate in clinical practice. MAGMA 21(6):379–392
47. Sato C et al (2005) Differentiation of noncancerous tissue and cancer lesions by apparent diffusion coefficient values in transition and peripheral zones of the prostate. J Magn Reson Imaging 21(3):258–262
48. Turkbey B et al (2012) Diffusion-weighted MRI for detecting and monitoring cancer: a review of current applications in body imaging. Diagn Interv Radiol 18(1):46–59
49. Jin G et al (2013) Meta-analysis of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in detecting prostate cancer. J Comput Assist Tomogr 37(2):195–202
50. Langer DL et al (2009) Prostate cancer detection with multi-parametric MRI: logistic regression analysis of quantitative T2, diffusion-weighted imaging, and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 30(2):327–334
51. McMahon CJ et al (2009) Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging in the evaluation of patients with prostate cancer. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 17(2):363–383
52. Ocak I et al (2007) Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of prostate cancer at 3 T: a study of pharmacokinetic parameters. AJR Am J Roentgenol 189(4):849
53. Weinreb JC et al (2016) PI-RADS prostate imaging - reporting and data system: 2015, version 2. Eur Urol 69(1):16–40
54. Oto A et al (2010) Prostate cancer: differentiation of central gland cancer from benign prostatic hyperplasia by using diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 257(3):715–723
55. Westphalen AC et al (2008) Peripheral zone prostate cancer: accuracy of different interpretative approaches with MR and MR spectroscopic imaging. Radiology 246(1):177–184
56. Kurhanewicz J, Vigneron DB (2008) Advances in MR spectroscopy of the prostate. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 16(4):697–710, ix-x
57. Zakian KL et al (2005) Correlation of proton MR spectroscopic imaging with Gleason score based on step-section pathologic analasis after radical prostatectomy. Radiology 234:804–814
58. Futterer JJ et al (2006) Prostate cancer localization with dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging and proton MR spectroscopic imaging. Radiology 241(2):449–458
59. Villeirs GM et al (2011) Combined magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy in the assessment of high grade prostate carcinoma in patients with elevated PSA: a single-institution experience of 356 patients. Eur J Radiol 77(2):340–345
60. Vache T et al (2014) Characterization of prostate lesions as benign or malignant at multiparametric MR imaging: comparison of three scoring systems in patients treated with radical prostatectomy. Radiology 272(2):446–455
61. Rosenkrantz AB et al (2013) Comparison of interreader reproducibility of the prostate imaging reporting and data system and likert scales for evaluation of multiparametric prostate MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 201(4):W612–W618
62. Barentsz JO et al (2016) Synopsis of the PI-RADS v2 Guidelines for Multiparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Recommendations for Use. Eur Urol 69(1):41–49
63. Junker D et al (2013) Evaluation of the PI-RADS scoring system for classifying mpMRI findings in men with suspicion of prostate cancer. Biomed Res Int 2013:252939
64. Bratan F et al (2013) Influence of imaging and histological factors on prostate cancer detection and localisation on multiparametric MRI: a prospective study. Eur Radiol 23(7):2019–2029
65. Rosenkrantz AB et al (2012) Prostate cancer foci detected on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging are histologically distinct from those not detected. J Urol 187(6):2032–2038
66. Langer DL et al (2008) Intermixed normal tissue within prostate cancer: effect on MR imaging measurements of apparent diffusion coefficient and T2--sparse versus dense cancers. Radiology 249(3):900–908
67. Pokorny MR et al (2014) Prospective study of diagnostic accuracy comparing prostate cancer detection by transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy versus magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with subsequent MR-guided biopsy in men without previous prostate biopsies. Eur Urol 66(1):22–29
68. Abd-Alazeez M et al (2014) Performance of multiparametric MRI in men at risk of prostate cancer before the first biopsy: a paired validating cohort study using template prostate mapping biopsies as the reference standard. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 17(1):40–46
69. de Rooij M et al (2014) Accuracy of multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer detection: a meta-analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 202(2):343–351
70. Kumar V et al (2012) Prebiopsy magnetic resonance spectroscopy and imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Int J Urol 19(7):602–613
71. Thompson JE et al (2014) Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging guided diagnostic biopsy detects significant prostate cancer and could reduce unnecessary biopsies and over detection: a prospective study. J Urol 192(1):67–74
72. Kirkham AP, Emberton M, Allen C (2006) How good is MRI at detecting and characterising cancer within the prostate? Eur Urol 50(6):1163–1174, discussion 1175
73. Delongchamps NB et al (2011) 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(9):1411–1418
74. Arumainayagam N et al (2013) Multiparametric MR imaging for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: a validation cohort study with transperineal template prostate mapping as the reference standard. Radiology 268(3):761–769
75. Itatani R et al (2014) Negative predictive value of multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer detection: outcome of 5-year follow-up in men with negative findings on initial MRI studies. Eur J Radiol 83(10):1740–1745
76. Portalez D et al (2012) Validation of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology scoring system for prostate cancer diagnosis on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in a cohort of repeat biopsy patients. Eur Urol 62(6):986–996
77. Kuru TH et al (2013) Histology core-specific evaluation of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) standardised scoring system of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) of the prostate. BJU Int 112(8):1080–1087
78. Roethke MC et al (2014) Evaluation of the ESUR PI-RADS scoring system for multiparametric MRI of the prostate with targeted MR/TRUS fusion-guided biopsy at 3.0 Tesla. Eur Radiol 24(2):344–352
79. Schimmoller L et al (2013) Inter-reader agreement of the ESUR score for prostate MRI using in-bore MRI-guided biopsies as the reference standard. Eur Radiol 23(11):3185–3190
80. Rosenkrantz AB et al (2013) Prostate cancer localization using multiparametric MR imaging: comparison of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) and Likert scales. Radiology 269(2):482–492
81. Futterer JJ et al (2015) Can clinically significant prostate cancer be detected with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging? A systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol 68(6):1045–1053
82. Hamoen EH et al (2015) Use of the prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) for prostate cancer detection with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging: a diagnostic meta-analysis. Eur Urol 67(6):1112–1121
83. Padhani AR et al (2000) Dynamic contrast enhanced MRI of prostate cancer: correlation with morphology and tumour stage, histological grade and PSA. Clin Radiol 55(2):99–109
84. Oto A et al (2011) Diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of prostate cancer: correlation of quantitative MR parameters with Gleason score and tumor angiogenesis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 197(6):1382–1390
85. Desouza NM et al (2007) Magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer: the value of apparent diffusion coefficients for identifying malignant nodules. Br J Radiol 80(950):90–95
86. Van As N et al (2008) Correlation of diffusion-weighted MRI with whole mount radical prostatectomy specimens. Br J Radiol 81(966):456–462
87. Yoshimitsu K et al (2008) Usefulness of apparent diffusion coefficient map in diagnosing prostate carcinoma: correlation with stepwise histopathology. J Magn Reson Imaging 27(1):132–139
88. Chen M et al (2008) Prostate cancer detection: comparison of T2-weighted imaging, diffusion-weighted imaging, proton magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging, and the three techniques combined. Acta Radiol 49(5):602–610
89. Hambrock T et al (2012) 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(1):177–184
90. Wang L et al (2008) Assessment of biologic aggressiveness of prostate cancer: correlation of MR signal intensity with Gleason grade after radical prostatectomy. Radiology 246(1):168–176
91. Kobus T et al (2011) In vivo assessment of prostate cancer aggressiveness using magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging at 3 T with an endorectal coil. Eur Urol 60(5):1074–1080
92. Ellis JH et al (1994) MR imaging and sonography of early prostatic cancer: pathologic and imaging features that influence identification and diagnosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 162(4):865–872
93. Shimizu T et al (2009) Prostate cancer detection: the value of performing an MRI before a biopsy. Acta Radiol 50(9):1080–1088
94. Stamey TA et al (1993) Localized prostate cancer. Relationship of tumor volume to clinical significance for treatment of prostate cancer. Cancer 71(3 Suppl):933–938
95. Ploussard G et al (2011) The contemporary concept of significant versus insignificant prostate cancer. Eur Urol 60(2):291–303
96. Ahmed HU et al (2009) Is it time to consider a role for MRI before prostate biopsy? Nat Rev Clin Oncol 6(4):197–206
97. Le JD et al (2015) Multifocality and prostate cancer detection by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging: correlation with whole-mount histopathology. Eur Urol 67(3):569–576
98. Schoots IG et al (2015) Magnetic resonance imaging in active surveillance of prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol 67(4):627–636
99. Rouse P et al (2011) Multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging to rule-in and rule-out clinically important prostate cancer in men at risk: a cohort study. Urol Int 87(1):49–53
100. Horwich A et al (2010) Prostate cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 21(Suppl 5):v129–v133
101. Kumar R et al (2008) Potential of magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging in predicting absence of prostate cancer in men with serum prostate-specific antigen between 4 and 10 ng/ml: a follow-up study. Urology 72(4):859–863
102. Yerram NK et al (2012) Low suspicion lesions on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging predict for the absence of high-risk prostate cancer. BJU Int 110(11 Pt B):E783–E788
103. Numao N et al (2013) Usefulness of pre-biopsy multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and clinical variables to reduce initial prostate biopsy in men with suspected clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 190(2):502–508
104. de Rooij M et al (2014) Cost-effectiveness of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and MR-guided targeted biopsy versus systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy in diagnosing prostate cancer: a modelling study from a health care perspective. Eur Urol 66(3):430–436
105. Panebianco V et al (2015) Pitfalls in interpreting mp-MRI of the prostate: a pictorial review with pathologic correlation. Insights Imaging 6(6):611–630
106. Moore CM et al (2013) Image-guided prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance imaging-derived targets: a systematic review. Eur Urol 63(1):125–140
107. Schoots IG et al (2015) Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy may enhance the diagnostic accuracy of significant prostate cancer detection compared to standard transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 68(3):438–450
108. Tonttila PP et al (2015) Prebiopsy multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer diagnosis in biopsy-naive men with suspected prostate cancer based on elevated prostate-specific antigen values: results from a randomized prospective blinded controlled trial. Eur Urol. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2015.05.024
109. Quon JS et al (2015) False positive and false negative diagnoses of prostate cancer at multi-parametric prostate MRI in active surveillance. Insights Imaging 6(4):449–463
110. Haffner J et al (2011) 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(8 Pt 2):E171–E178
111. Arsov C et al (2012) Repeat transrectal ultrasound biopsies with additional targeted cores according to results of functional prostate MRI detects high-risk prostate cancer in patients with previous negative biopsy and increased PSA - a pilot study. Anticancer Res 32(3):1087–1092
112. Park BK et al (2011) 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(5):W876–W881
113. Sonn GA et al (2013) Targeted biopsy in the detection of prostate cancer using an office based magnetic resonance ultrasound fusion device. J Urol 189(1):86–91
114. van Hove A et al (2014) Comparison of image-guided targeted biopsies versus systematic randomized biopsies in the detection of prostate cancer: a systematic literature review of well-designed studies. World J Urol 32(4):847–858
115. Abd-Alazeez M et al (2014) The accuracy of multiparametric MRI in men with negative biopsy and elevated PSA level—can it rule out clinically significant prostate cancer? Urol Oncol 32(1):45, e17-22
116. De Visschere PJ et al (2015) What kind of prostate cancers do we miss on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging? Eur Radiol