Prostate Cancer: Can Multiparametric MR Imaging Help Identify Patients Who Are Candidates for Active Surveillance?

被引:176
作者
Turkbey, Baris [1 ]
Mani, Haresh [2 ]
Aras, Omer [1 ]
Ho, Jennifer [3 ]
Hoang, Anthony [4 ]
Rastinehad, Ardeshir R. [4 ]
Agarwal, Harsh [5 ]
Shah, Vijay [6 ]
Bernardo, Marcelino [1 ,7 ]
Pang, Yuxi [8 ]
Daar, Dagane [1 ,7 ]
McKinney, Yolanda L. [1 ]
Linehan, W. Marston [4 ]
Kaushal, Aradhana [3 ]
Merino, Maria J. [2 ]
Wood, Bradford J. [9 ,10 ]
Pinto, Peter A. [4 ]
Choyke, Peter L. [1 ]
机构
[1] NCI, Mol Imaging Program, NIH, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
[2] NCI, Pathol Lab, NIH, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
[3] NCI, Radiat Oncol Branch, NIH, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
[4] NCI, Urol Oncol Branch, NIH, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
[5] Philips Res North Amer, Briarcliff Manor, NY USA
[6] VirtualScopics, Rochester, NY USA
[7] NCI, Dept Imaging Phys, SAIC Frederick, Frederick, MD 21701 USA
[8] Philips Healthcare, Cleveland, OH USA
[9] NCI, Ctr Intervent Oncol, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
[10] NIH, Ctr Clin, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY; MEN; RISK; CRITERIA; PREDICTION; OUTCOMES; ANTIGEN; UPDATE;
D O I
10.1148/radiol.13121325
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Purpose: To determine whether multiparametric magnetic resonance (MR) imaging can help identify patients with prostate cancer who would most appropriately be candidates for active surveillance (AS) according to current guidelines and to compare the results with those of conventional clinical assessment scoring systems, including the D'Amico, Epstein, and Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) systems, on the basis of findings at prostatectomy. Materials and Methods: This institutional review board-approved HIPAA-compliant retrospectively designed study included 133 patients (mean age, 59.3 years) with a mean prostate-specific antigen level of 6.73 ng/mL (median, 4.39 ng/mL) who underwent multiparametric MR imaging at 3.0 T before radical prostatectomy. Informed consent was obtained from all patients. Patients were then retrospectively classified as to whether they would have met AS eligibility criteria or were better served by surgery. AS eligibility criteria for prostatectomy specimens were a dominant tumor smaller than 0.5 mL without Gleason 4 or 5 patterns or extracapsular or seminal vesicle invasion. Conventional clinical assessment scores (the D'Amico, Epstein, and CAPRA scoring systems) were compared with multiparametric MR imaging findings for predicting AS candidates. The level of significance of difference between scoring systems was determined by using the chi(2) test for categoric variables with the level of significance set at P<.05. Results: Among 133 patients, 14 were eligible for AS on the basis of prostatectomy results. The sensitivity, positive predictive value (PPV), and overall accuracy, respectively, were 93%, 25%, and 70% for the D'Amico system, 64%, 45%, and 88% for the Epstein criteria, and 93%, 20%, and 59% for the CAPRA scoring system for predicting AS candidates (P<.005 for all, chi(2) test), while multiparametric MR imaging had a sensitivity of 93%, a PPV of 57%, and an overall accuracy of 92% (P<.005). Conclusion: Multiparametric MR imaging provides useful additional information to existing clinicopathologic scoring systems of prostate cancer and improves the assignment of treatment (eg, AS or active treatment). (C) RSNA, 2013
引用
收藏
页码:144 / 152
页数:9
相关论文
共 27 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], UROL ONCOL
  • [2] ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012
    Barentsz, Jelle O.
    Richenberg, Jonathan
    Clements, Richard
    Choyke, Peter
    Verma, Sadhna
    Villeirs, Geert
    Rouviere, Olivier
    Logager, Vibeke
    Futterer, Jurgen J.
    [J]. EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2012, 22 (04) : 746 - 757
  • [3] Insignificant Prostate Cancer and Active Surveillance: From Definition to Clinical Implications
    Bastian, Patrick J.
    Carter, Ballentine H.
    Bjartell, Anders
    Seitz, Michael
    Stanislaus, Peter
    Montorsi, Francesco
    Stief, Christian G.
    Schroeder, Fritz
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2009, 55 (06) : 1321 - 1332
  • [4] Pathological Outcomes of Men Eligible for Active Surveillance After Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy: Are Results Predictable?
    Behbahani, Turang Ed
    Ellinger, Joerg
    Caratozzolo, Daniel Garcia
    Mueller, Stefan C.
    [J]. CLINICAL GENITOURINARY CANCER, 2012, 10 (01) : 32 - 36
  • [5] Expectant management of prostate cancer with curative intent: An update of the Johns Hopkins experience
    Carter, H. Ballentine
    Kettermann, Anna
    Warlick, Christopher
    Metter, E. Jeffrey
    Landis, Patricia
    Walsh, Patrick C.
    Epstein, Jonathan I.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2007, 178 (06) : 2359 - 2364
  • [6] The changing face of low-risk prostate cancer: Trends in clinical presentation and primary management
    Cooperberg, MR
    Lubeck, DP
    Meni, MV
    Mehta, SS
    Carroll, PR
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2004, 22 (11) : 2141 - 2149
  • [7] Radical Prostatectomy Findings in Patients in Whom Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer Fails
    Duffield, Amy S.
    Lee, Thomas K.
    Miyamoto, Hiroshi
    Carter, H. Ballantine
    Epstein, Jonathan I.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2009, 182 (05) : 2274 - 2278
  • [8] Etzioni R, 2002, J NATL CANCER I, V94, P981
  • [9] Endorectal T2-weighted MRI does not differentiate between favorable and adverse pathologic features in men with prostate cancer who would qualify for active surveillance
    Guzzo, Thomas J.
    Resnick, Matthew J.
    Canter, Daniel J.
    Bivalacqua, Trinity J.
    Rosen, Mark A.
    Bergey, Meredith R.
    Magerfleisch, Laurie
    Tomazewski, John E.
    Wein, Alan J.
    Malkowicz, S. Bruce
    [J]. UROLOGIC ONCOLOGY-SEMINARS AND ORIGINAL INVESTIGATIONS, 2012, 30 (03) : 301 - 305
  • [10] Validation of Epstein criteria of insignificant prostate cancer in Middle East patients
    Hekal, Ihab A.
    El-Tabey, Nasr A.
    Nabeeh, Mohamed Adel
    El-Assmy, Ahmed
    Abd El-Hameed, Mohamed
    Nabeeh, Adel
    Ibrahiem, Elhousseiny I.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL UROLOGY AND NEPHROLOGY, 2010, 42 (03) : 667 - 671