2
|
Regis L, Celma A, Planas J, Lopez R, Roche S, Lorente D, Placer J, Trilla E, Morote J. The role of negative magnetic resonance imaging: can we safely avoid biopsy in P.I.-R.A.D.S. 2 as in P.I.-R.A.D.S. 1? Scand J Urol 2019; 53:21-25. [DOI: 10.1080/21681805.2018.1551243] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/27/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Lucas Regis
- Department of Urology, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain
| | - Ana Celma
- Department of Urology, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain
| | - Jacques Planas
- Department of Urology, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain
| | - Ricardo Lopez
- Department of Urology, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain
| | - Sarai Roche
- Institute of Imaging Diagnosis, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain
| | - David Lorente
- Department of Urology, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain
| | - Jose Placer
- Department of Urology, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain
| | - Enrique Trilla
- Department of Urology, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain
| | - Juan Morote
- Department of Urology, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Park SY, Zacharias C, Harrison C, Fan RE, Kunder C, Hatami N, Giesel F, Ghanouni P, Daniel B, Loening AM, Sonn GA, Iagaru A. Gallium 68 PSMA-11 PET/MR Imaging in Patients with Intermediate- or High-Risk Prostate Cancer. Radiology 2018; 288:495-505. [PMID: 29786490 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2018172232] [Citation(s) in RCA: 79] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/18/2023]
Abstract
Purpose To report the results of dual-time-point gallium 68 (68Ga) prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-11 positron emission tomography (PET)/magnetic resonance (MR) imaging prior to prostatectomy in patients with intermediate- or high-risk cancer. Materials and Methods Thirty-three men who underwent conventional imaging as clinically indicated and who were scheduled for radical prostatectomy with pelvic lymph node dissection were recruited for this study. A mean dose of 4.1 mCi ± 0.7 (151.7 MBq ± 25.9) of 68Ga-PSMA-11 was administered. Whole-body images were acquired starting 41-61 minutes after injection by using a GE SIGNA PET/MR imaging unit, followed by an additional pelvic PET/MR imaging acquisition at 87-125 minutes after injection. PET/MR imaging findings were compared with findings at multiparametric MR imaging (including diffusion-weighted imaging, T2-weighted imaging, and dynamic contrast material-enhanced imaging) and were correlated with results of final whole-mount pathologic examination and pelvic nodal dissection to yield sensitivity and specificity. Dual-time-point metabolic parameters (eg, maximum standardized uptake value [SUVmax]) were compared by using a paired t test and were correlated with clinical and histopathologic variables including prostate-specific antigen level, Gleason score, and tumor volume. Results Prostate cancer was seen at 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET in all 33 patients, whereas multiparametric MR imaging depicted Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) 4 or 5 lesions in 26 patients and PI-RADS 3 lesions in four patients. Focal uptake was seen in the pelvic lymph nodes in five patients. Pathologic examination confirmed prostate cancer in all patients, as well as nodal metastasis in three. All patients with normal pelvic nodes in PET/MR imaging had no metastases at pathologic examination. The accumulation of 68Ga-PSMA-11 increased at later acquisition times, with higher mean SUVmax (15.3 vs 12.3, P < .001). One additional prostate cancer was identified only at delayed imaging. Conclusion This study found that 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET can be used to identify prostate cancer, while MR imaging provides detailed anatomic guidance. Hence, 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MR imaging provides valuable diagnostic information and may inform the need for and extent of pelvic node dissection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sonya Youngju Park
- From the Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (S.Y.P., C.Z., C.H., N.H., A.I.) and Departments of Urology (R.E.F., G.A.S.), Pathology (C.K.), and Radiology (P.G., B.D., A.M.L.), Stanford University Medical Center, 300 Pasteur Dr, Room H-2200, Stanford, CA 94305; and Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany (F.G.)
| | - Claudia Zacharias
- From the Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (S.Y.P., C.Z., C.H., N.H., A.I.) and Departments of Urology (R.E.F., G.A.S.), Pathology (C.K.), and Radiology (P.G., B.D., A.M.L.), Stanford University Medical Center, 300 Pasteur Dr, Room H-2200, Stanford, CA 94305; and Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany (F.G.)
| | - Caitlyn Harrison
- From the Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (S.Y.P., C.Z., C.H., N.H., A.I.) and Departments of Urology (R.E.F., G.A.S.), Pathology (C.K.), and Radiology (P.G., B.D., A.M.L.), Stanford University Medical Center, 300 Pasteur Dr, Room H-2200, Stanford, CA 94305; and Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany (F.G.)
| | - Richard E Fan
- From the Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (S.Y.P., C.Z., C.H., N.H., A.I.) and Departments of Urology (R.E.F., G.A.S.), Pathology (C.K.), and Radiology (P.G., B.D., A.M.L.), Stanford University Medical Center, 300 Pasteur Dr, Room H-2200, Stanford, CA 94305; and Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany (F.G.)
| | - Christian Kunder
- From the Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (S.Y.P., C.Z., C.H., N.H., A.I.) and Departments of Urology (R.E.F., G.A.S.), Pathology (C.K.), and Radiology (P.G., B.D., A.M.L.), Stanford University Medical Center, 300 Pasteur Dr, Room H-2200, Stanford, CA 94305; and Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany (F.G.)
| | - Negin Hatami
- From the Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (S.Y.P., C.Z., C.H., N.H., A.I.) and Departments of Urology (R.E.F., G.A.S.), Pathology (C.K.), and Radiology (P.G., B.D., A.M.L.), Stanford University Medical Center, 300 Pasteur Dr, Room H-2200, Stanford, CA 94305; and Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany (F.G.)
| | - Frederik Giesel
- From the Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (S.Y.P., C.Z., C.H., N.H., A.I.) and Departments of Urology (R.E.F., G.A.S.), Pathology (C.K.), and Radiology (P.G., B.D., A.M.L.), Stanford University Medical Center, 300 Pasteur Dr, Room H-2200, Stanford, CA 94305; and Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany (F.G.)
| | - Pejman Ghanouni
- From the Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (S.Y.P., C.Z., C.H., N.H., A.I.) and Departments of Urology (R.E.F., G.A.S.), Pathology (C.K.), and Radiology (P.G., B.D., A.M.L.), Stanford University Medical Center, 300 Pasteur Dr, Room H-2200, Stanford, CA 94305; and Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany (F.G.)
| | - Bruce Daniel
- From the Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (S.Y.P., C.Z., C.H., N.H., A.I.) and Departments of Urology (R.E.F., G.A.S.), Pathology (C.K.), and Radiology (P.G., B.D., A.M.L.), Stanford University Medical Center, 300 Pasteur Dr, Room H-2200, Stanford, CA 94305; and Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany (F.G.)
| | - Andreas M Loening
- From the Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (S.Y.P., C.Z., C.H., N.H., A.I.) and Departments of Urology (R.E.F., G.A.S.), Pathology (C.K.), and Radiology (P.G., B.D., A.M.L.), Stanford University Medical Center, 300 Pasteur Dr, Room H-2200, Stanford, CA 94305; and Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany (F.G.)
| | - Geoffrey A Sonn
- From the Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (S.Y.P., C.Z., C.H., N.H., A.I.) and Departments of Urology (R.E.F., G.A.S.), Pathology (C.K.), and Radiology (P.G., B.D., A.M.L.), Stanford University Medical Center, 300 Pasteur Dr, Room H-2200, Stanford, CA 94305; and Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany (F.G.)
| | - Andrei Iagaru
- From the Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (S.Y.P., C.Z., C.H., N.H., A.I.) and Departments of Urology (R.E.F., G.A.S.), Pathology (C.K.), and Radiology (P.G., B.D., A.M.L.), Stanford University Medical Center, 300 Pasteur Dr, Room H-2200, Stanford, CA 94305; and Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany (F.G.)
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Moldovan PC, Van den Broeck T, Sylvester R, Marconi L, Bellmunt J, van den Bergh RCN, Bolla M, Briers E, Cumberbatch MG, Fossati N, Gross T, Henry AM, Joniau S, van der Kwast TH, Matveev VB, van der Poel HG, De Santis M, Schoots IG, Wiegel T, Yuan CY, Cornford P, Mottet N, Lam TB, Rouvière O. What Is the Negative Predictive Value of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Excluding Prostate Cancer at Biopsy? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis from the European Association of Urology Prostate Cancer Guidelines Panel. Eur Urol 2017; 72:250-266. [PMID: 28336078 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.02.026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 270] [Impact Index Per Article: 38.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/08/2017] [Accepted: 02/16/2017] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
CONTEXT It remains unclear whether patients with a suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa) and negative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) can safely obviate prostate biopsy. OBJECTIVE To systematically review the literature assessing the negative predictive value (NPV) of mpMRI in patients with a suspicion of PCa. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION The Embase, Medline, and Cochrane databases were searched up to February 2016. Studies reporting prebiopsy mpMRI results using transrectal or transperineal biopsy as a reference standard were included. We further selected for meta-analysis studies with at least 10-core biopsies as the reference standard, mpMRI comprising at least T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted imaging, positive mpMRI defined as a Prostate Imaging Reporting Data System/Likert score of ≥3/5 or ≥4/5, and results reported at patient level for the detection of overall PCa or clinically significant PCa (csPCa) defined as Gleason ≥7 cancer. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS A total of 48 studies (9613 patients) were eligible for inclusion. At patient level, the median prevalence was 50.4% (interquartile range [IQR], 36.4-57.7%) for overall cancer and 32.9% (IQR, 28.1-37.2%) for csPCa. The median mpMRI NPV was 82.4% (IQR, 69.0-92.4%) for overall cancer and 88.1% (IQR, 85.7-92.3) for csPCa. NPV significantly decreased when cancer prevalence increased, for overall cancer (r=-0.64, p<0.0001) and csPCa (r=-0.75, p=0.032). Eight studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria for meta-analysis. Seven reported results for overall PCa. When the overall PCa prevalence increased from 30% to 60%, the combined NPV estimates decreased from 88% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 77-99%) to 67% (95% CI, 56-79%) for a cut-off score of 3/5. Only one study selected for meta-analysis reported results for Gleason ≥7 cancers, with a positive biopsy rate of 29.3%. The corresponding NPV for a cut-off score of ≥3/5 was 87.9%. CONCLUSIONS The NPV of mpMRI varied greatly depending on study design, cancer prevalence, and definitions of positive mpMRI and csPCa. As cancer prevalence was highly variable among series, risk stratification of patients should be the initial step before considering prebiopsy mpMRI and defining those in whom biopsy may be omitted when the mpMRI is negative. PATIENT SUMMARY This systematic review examined if multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan can be used to reliably predict the absence of prostate cancer in patients suspected of having prostate cancer, thereby avoiding a prostate biopsy. The results suggest that whilst it is a promising tool, it is not accurate enough to replace prostate biopsy in such patients, mainly because its accuracy is variable and influenced by the prostate cancer risk. However, its performance can be enhanced if there were more accurate ways of determining the risk of having prostate cancer. When such tools are available, it should be possible to use an MRI scan to avoid biopsy in patients at a low risk of prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul C Moldovan
- Hospices Civils de Lyon, Department of Urinary and Vascular Radiology, Hôpital Edouard Herriot, Lyon, France
| | - Thomas Van den Broeck
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Laboratory of Molecular Endocrinology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Richard Sylvester
- European Association of Urology Guidelines Office, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Lorenzo Marconi
- Department of Urology, Coimbra University Hospital, Coimbra, Portugal
| | - Joaquim Bellmunt
- Bladder Cancer Center, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA; Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | - Michel Bolla
- Department of Radiation Therapy, CHU Grenoble, Grenoble, France
| | | | | | - Nicola Fossati
- Division of Oncology/Unit of Urology, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Tobias Gross
- Department of Urology, University of Bern, Inselspital, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Ann M Henry
- Leeds Cancer Centre, St. James's University Hospital and University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Steven Joniau
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Laboratory of Molecular Endocrinology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | | | | | - Henk G van der Poel
- Department of Urology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Ivo G Schoots
- Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MCUniversity Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Thomas Wiegel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Cathy Yuhong Yuan
- Division of Gastroenterology and Cochrane UGPD Group, Department of Medicine, Health Sciences Centre, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
| | - Philip Cornford
- Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK
| | - Nicolas Mottet
- Department of Urology, University Hospital, St. Etienne, France
| | - Thomas B Lam
- Academic Urology Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK; Department of Urology, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Olivier Rouvière
- Hospices Civils de Lyon, Department of Urinary and Vascular Radiology, Hôpital Edouard Herriot, Lyon, France; Université Lyon 1, faculté de médecine Lyon Est, Lyon, France.
| |
Collapse
|