Cargando…

Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Evaluation of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer

Aim  In this prospective study, we evaluate the role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) in the assessment of clinically significant prostate cancer at 1.5 T without endorectal coil (ERC). Materials and Methods  Forty-five men with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer (prostate-s...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ingole, Sarang M., Mehta, Rajeev U., Kazi, Zubair N., Bhuyar, Rutuja V.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Ltd. 2021
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8299509/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34316113
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1730093
_version_ 1783726285268189184
author Ingole, Sarang M.
Mehta, Rajeev U.
Kazi, Zubair N.
Bhuyar, Rutuja V.
author_facet Ingole, Sarang M.
Mehta, Rajeev U.
Kazi, Zubair N.
Bhuyar, Rutuja V.
author_sort Ingole, Sarang M.
collection PubMed
description Aim  In this prospective study, we evaluate the role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) in the assessment of clinically significant prostate cancer at 1.5 T without endorectal coil (ERC). Materials and Methods  Forty-five men with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer (prostate-specific antigen [PSA] level > 4 ng/mL, hard prostate on digital rectal examination, and suspicious area at transrectal ultrasound [TRUS]) were evaluated using the mp-MRI protocol over a period of 24 months. All cases were interpreted using the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2 guidelines and correlated with histopathology. Statistical Analysis Used  A chi-squared test was used for analysis of nominal/categorical variables and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test for continuous variables. Results  The mean age was 67 years and the mean PSA was 38.2 ng/mL. Eighty percent had prostate cancer and 20% were benign (11% benign prostatic hyperplasia [BPH] and 9% chronic prostatitis). Eighty-six percent of all malignancies were in the peripheral zone. The PI-RADS score for T2-weighted (T2W) imaging showed good sensitivity (81%) but low specificity (67%). The PI-RADS score for diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) with sensitivity of 92% and specificity of 78% had a better accuracy overall than T2W imaging alone. The mean apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value (×10 (–6) mm (2) /s) was 732 ± 160 in prostate cancer, 1,009 ± 161 in chronic prostatitis, 1,142 ± 82 in BPH, and 663 in a single case of granulomatous prostatitis. Low ADC values (<936) have shown good correlation (area under curve [AUC]: 0.87) with the presence of cancer foci. Inverse correlation was observed between Gleason scores and ADC values. Dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) imaging has shown 100% sensitivity/negative predictive value (NPV), but moderate specificity (67%) in predicting malignancy. The final PI-RADS score had 100% sensitivity and NPV with good overall positive predictive value (PPV) of 95%. Conclusions  T2W imaging and DWI remain the mainstays in diagnosis of prostate cancer with mp-MRI. DCE-MRI can be a problem-solving tool in case of equivocal findings. Because assessment with mp-MRI can be subjective, use of the newly developed PI-RADS version 2 scoring system is helpful in accurate interpretation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8299509
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Ltd.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82995092021-07-26 Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Evaluation of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Ingole, Sarang M. Mehta, Rajeev U. Kazi, Zubair N. Bhuyar, Rutuja V. Indian J Radiol Imaging Aim  In this prospective study, we evaluate the role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) in the assessment of clinically significant prostate cancer at 1.5 T without endorectal coil (ERC). Materials and Methods  Forty-five men with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer (prostate-specific antigen [PSA] level > 4 ng/mL, hard prostate on digital rectal examination, and suspicious area at transrectal ultrasound [TRUS]) were evaluated using the mp-MRI protocol over a period of 24 months. All cases were interpreted using the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2 guidelines and correlated with histopathology. Statistical Analysis Used  A chi-squared test was used for analysis of nominal/categorical variables and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test for continuous variables. Results  The mean age was 67 years and the mean PSA was 38.2 ng/mL. Eighty percent had prostate cancer and 20% were benign (11% benign prostatic hyperplasia [BPH] and 9% chronic prostatitis). Eighty-six percent of all malignancies were in the peripheral zone. The PI-RADS score for T2-weighted (T2W) imaging showed good sensitivity (81%) but low specificity (67%). The PI-RADS score for diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) with sensitivity of 92% and specificity of 78% had a better accuracy overall than T2W imaging alone. The mean apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value (×10 (–6) mm (2) /s) was 732 ± 160 in prostate cancer, 1,009 ± 161 in chronic prostatitis, 1,142 ± 82 in BPH, and 663 in a single case of granulomatous prostatitis. Low ADC values (<936) have shown good correlation (area under curve [AUC]: 0.87) with the presence of cancer foci. Inverse correlation was observed between Gleason scores and ADC values. Dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) imaging has shown 100% sensitivity/negative predictive value (NPV), but moderate specificity (67%) in predicting malignancy. The final PI-RADS score had 100% sensitivity and NPV with good overall positive predictive value (PPV) of 95%. Conclusions  T2W imaging and DWI remain the mainstays in diagnosis of prostate cancer with mp-MRI. DCE-MRI can be a problem-solving tool in case of equivocal findings. Because assessment with mp-MRI can be subjective, use of the newly developed PI-RADS version 2 scoring system is helpful in accurate interpretation. Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Ltd. 2021-01 2021-05-23 /pmc/articles/PMC8299509/ /pubmed/34316113 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1730093 Text en Indian Radiological Association. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Ingole, Sarang M.
Mehta, Rajeev U.
Kazi, Zubair N.
Bhuyar, Rutuja V.
Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Evaluation of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer
title Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Evaluation of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer
title_full Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Evaluation of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer
title_fullStr Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Evaluation of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer
title_full_unstemmed Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Evaluation of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer
title_short Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Evaluation of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer
title_sort multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in evaluation of clinically significant prostate cancer
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8299509/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34316113
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1730093
work_keys_str_mv AT ingolesarangm multiparametricmagneticresonanceimaginginevaluationofclinicallysignificantprostatecancer
AT mehtarajeevu multiparametricmagneticresonanceimaginginevaluationofclinicallysignificantprostatecancer
AT kazizubairn multiparametricmagneticresonanceimaginginevaluationofclinicallysignificantprostatecancer
AT bhuyarrutujav multiparametricmagneticresonanceimaginginevaluationofclinicallysignificantprostatecancer