MRI grading for the prediction of prostate cancer aggressiveness

被引:30
作者
Boschheidgen, M. [1 ]
Schimmoeller, L. [1 ]
Arsov, C. [2 ]
Ziayee, F. [1 ]
Morawitz, J. [1 ]
Valentin, B. [1 ]
Radke, K. L. [1 ]
Giessing, M. [2 ]
Esposito, I [3 ]
Albers, P. [2 ]
Antoch, G. [1 ]
Ullrich, T. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Dusseldorf, Med Fac, Dept Diagnost & Intervent Radiol, Moorenstr 5, D-40225 Dusseldorf, Germany
[2] Univ Dusseldorf, Med Fac, Dept Urol, D-40225 Dusseldorf, Germany
[3] Univ Dusseldorf, Med Fac, Dept Pathol, D-40225 Dusseldorf, Germany
关键词
Prostatic neoplasms; Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging; Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging; Neoplasm grading; Magnetic resonance imaging; interventional; MEN;
D O I
10.1007/s00330-021-08332-8
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
Objectives T o evaluate the value of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) for the prediction of prostate cancer (PCA) aggressiveness. Methods In this single center cohort study, consecutive patients with histologically confirmed PCA were retrospectively enrolled. Four different ISUP grade groups (1, 2, 3, 4-5) were defined and fifty patients per group were included. Several clinical (age, PSA, PSAD, percentage of PCA infiltration) and mpMRI parameters (ADC value, signal increase on high b-value images, diameter, extraprostatic extension [EPE], cross-zonal growth) were evaluated and correlated within the four groups. Based on combined descriptors, MRI grading groups (mG1-mG3) were defined to predict PCA aggressiveness. Results In total, 200 patients (mean age 68 years, median PSA value 8.1 ng/ml) were analyzed. Between the four groups, statistically significant differences could be shown for age, PSA, PSAD, and for MRI parameters cross-zonal growth, high b-value signal increase, EPE, and ADC (p < 0.01). All examined parameters revealed a significant correlation with the histopathologic biopsy ISUP grade groups (p < 0.01), except PCA diameter (p = 0.09). A mixed linear model demonstrated the strongest prediction of the respective ISUP grade group for the MRI grading system (p < 0.01) compared to single parameters. Conclusions MpMRI yields relevant pre-biopsy information about PCA aggressiveness. A combination of quantitative and qualitative parameters (MRI grading groups) provided the best prediction of the biopsy ISUP grade group and may improve clinical pathway and treatment planning, adding useful information beyond PI-RADS assessment category. Due to the high prevalence of higher grade PCA in patients within mG3, an early re-biopsy seems indicated in cases of negative or post-biopsy low-grade PCA.
引用
收藏
页码:2351 / 2359
页数:9
相关论文
共 32 条
  • [1] Apparent diffusion coefficient ratio correlates significantly with prostate cancer gleason score at final pathology
    Boesen, Lars
    Chabanova, Elizaveta
    Logager, Vibeke
    Balslev, Ingegerd
    Thomsen, Henrik S.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2015, 42 (02) : 446 - 453
  • [2] Radiomic Machine Learning for Characterization of Prostate Lesions with MRI: Comparison to ADC Values
    Bonekamp, David
    Kohl, Simon
    Wiesenfarth, Manuel
    Schelb, Patrick
    Radtke, Jan Philipp
    Goetz, Michael
    Kickingereder, Philipp
    Yaqubi, Kaneschka
    Hitthaler, Bertram
    Gaehlert, Nils
    Kuder, Tristan Anselm
    Deister, Fenja
    Freitag, Martin
    Hohenfellner, Markus
    Hadaschik, Boris A.
    Schlemmer, Heinz-Peter
    Maier-Hein, Klaus H.
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2018, 289 (01) : 128 - 137
  • [3] Does Suspicion of Prostate Cancer on Integrated T2 and Diffusion-weighted MRI Predict More Adverse Pathology on Radical Prostatectomy?
    Borofsky, Michael S.
    Rosenkrantz, Andrew B.
    Abraham, Nitya
    Jain, Rajat
    Taneja, Samir S.
    [J]. UROLOGY, 2013, 81 (06) : 1279 - 1283
  • [4] Active Surveillance for Low-risk Prostate Cancer: The European Association of Urology Position in 2018
    Briganti, Alberto
    Fossati, Nicola
    Catto, James W. F.
    Cornford, Philip
    Montorsi, Francesco
    Mottet, Nicolas
    Wirth, Manfred
    Van Poppel, Hendrik
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2018, 74 (03) : 357 - 368
  • [5] Cohen J., 1988, STAT POWER ANAL BEHA, P75
  • [6] Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer
    D'Amico, AV
    Whittington, R
    Malkowicz, SB
    Schultz, D
    Blank, K
    Broderick, GA
    Tomaszewski, JE
    Renshaw, AA
    Kaplan, I
    Beard, CJ
    Wein, A
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1998, 280 (11): : 969 - 974
  • [7] ESUR/ESUI consensus statements on multi-parametric MRI for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: quality requirements for image acquisition, interpretation and radiologists' training
    de Rooij, Maarten
    Israel, Bas
    Tummers, Marcia
    Ahmed, Hashim U.
    Barrett, Tristan
    Giganti, Francesco
    Hamm, Bernd
    Logager, Vibeke
    Padhani, Anwar
    Panebianco, Valeria
    Puech, Philippe
    Richenberg, Jonathan
    Rouviere, Olivier
    Salomon, Georg
    Schoots, Ivo
    Veltman, Jeroen
    Villeirs, Geert
    Walz, Jochen
    Barentsz, Jelle O.
    [J]. EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2020, 30 (10) : 5404 - 5416
  • [8] Prostate Cancer Aggressiveness: Assessment with Whole-Lesion Histogram Analysis of the Apparent Diffusion Coefficient
    Donati, Olivio F.
    Mazaheri, Yousef
    Afaq, Asim
    Vargas, Hebert A.
    Zheng, Junting
    Moskowitz, Chaya S.
    Hricak, Hedvig
    Akin, Oguz
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2014, 271 (01) : 143 - 152
  • [9] Prostate cancer risk stratification with magnetic resonance imaging
    Felker, Ely R.
    Margolis, Daniel J.
    Nassiri, Nima
    Marks, Leonard S.
    [J]. UROLOGIC ONCOLOGY-SEMINARS AND ORIGINAL INVESTIGATIONS, 2016, 34 (07) : 311 - 319
  • [10] 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
    Hambrock, Thomas
    Hoeks, Caroline
    Hulsbergen-van de Kaa, Christina
    Scheenen, Tom
    Futterer, Jurgen
    Bouwense, Stefan
    van Oort, Inge
    Schroder, Fritz
    Huisman, Henkjan
    Barentsz, Jelle
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2012, 61 (01) : 177 - 184