1
|
Berg FM, Correia ETO, Abenojar EC, Basilion JP, Rosol TJ, Baroni RH, Exner AA, Bittencourt LK. Multispecies comparative prostate anatomy by imaging: Implications for experimental models of prostatic disease. Prostate 2024; 84:682-693. [PMID: 38477025 DOI: 10.1002/pros.24685] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/05/2023] [Revised: 01/20/2024] [Accepted: 02/19/2024] [Indexed: 03/14/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND There is an increasing interest in using preclinical models for development and assessment of medical devices and imaging techniques for prostatic disease care. Still, a comprehensive assessment of the prostate's radiological anatomy in primary preclinical models such as dogs, rabbits, and mice utilizing human anatomy as a reference point remains necessary with no optimal model for each purpose being clearly defined in the literature. Therefore, this study compares the anatomical characteristics of different animal models to the human prostatic gland from the imaging perspective. METHODS We imaged five Beagle laboratory dogs, five New Zealand White rabbits, and five mice, all sexually mature males, under Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) approval. Ultrasonography (US) was performed using the Vevo® F2 for mice (57 MHz probe). Rabbits and dogs were imaged using the Siemens® Acuson S3000 (17 MHz probe) and endocavitary (8 MHz) probes, respectively. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was also conducted with a 7T scanner in mice and 3T scanner in rabbits and dogs. RESULTS Canine transrectal US emerged as the optimal method for US imaging, depicting a morphologically similar gland to humans but lacking echoic zonal differentiation. MRI findings in canines indicated a homogeneously structured gland similar to the human peripheral zone on T2-weighted images (T2W) and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC). In rabbits, US imaging faced challenges due to the pubic symphysis, whereas MRI effectively visualized all structures with the prostate presenting a similar aspect to the human peripheral gland on T2W and ADC maps. Murine prostate assessment revealed poor visualization of the prostate glands in ultrasound due to its small size, while 7T MRI delineated the distinct prostates and its lobes, with the lateral and dorsal prostate resembling the peripheral zone and the anterior prostate the central zone of the human gland. CONCLUSION Dogs stand out as superior models for advanced preclinical studies in prostatic disease research. However, mice present as a good model for early stage studies and rabbits are a cost-effective alternative and serve as valuable tools in specific research domains when canine research is not feasible.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Felipe M Berg
- Department of Radiology, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Eduardo T O Correia
- Department of Radiology, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Eric C Abenojar
- Department of Radiology, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - James P Basilion
- Department of Radiology, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Thomas J Rosol
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine, Ohio University, Athens, Ohio, USA
| | - Ronaldo H Baroni
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Agata A Exner
- Department of Radiology, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Agnello L, Vidali M, Salvaggio G, Agnello F, Lo Sasso B, Gambino CM, Ciaccio M. Prostate Health Index (PHI) as a triage tool for reducing unnecessary magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients at risk of prostate cancer. Clin Biochem 2024; 127-128:110759. [PMID: 38583655 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2024.110759] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/19/2023] [Revised: 03/27/2024] [Accepted: 03/28/2024] [Indexed: 04/09/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The aim of this study is to assess the usefulness of the Prostate Health Index (PHI) as a triage tool for selecting patients at risk of prostate cancer (PCa) who should undergo multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (mpMRI). MATERIAL AND METHODS We enrolled 204 patients with suspected PCa. For each patient, a blood sample was collected before mpMRI to measure PHI. Findings on mpMRI were assessed according to the Prostate Imaging Reporting & Data System version 2.0 (PI-RADSv2) category scale. RESULTS According to PI-RADSv2, patients were classified into two groups: PI-RADS < 3 (48 %) and ≥ 3 (52 %). PHI showed the best performance for predicting PI-RADS ≥ 3 [AUC: 0,747 (0,679-0,815), 0,680(0,607-0,754), and 0,613 (0,535-0,690) for PHI, PSA ratio, and total PSA, respectively]. The best PHI cut-off was 30, with a sensitivity of 90%. At the univariate logistic regression, total PSA (p = 0.007), PSA ratio (p = 0.001), [-2]proPSA (p = 0.019) and PHI (p < 0.001) were associated with PI-RADS ≥ 3; however, at the multivariate analysis, only PHI (p < 0.001) was found to be an independent predictor of PI-RADS ≥ 3. CONCLUSION PHI could represent a reliable noninvasive tool for selecting patients to undergo mpMRI.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Luisa Agnello
- Department of Biomedicine, Neurosciences and Advanced Diagnostics, Institute of Clinical Biochemistry, Clinical Molecular Medicine, and Clinical Laboratory Medicine, University of Palermo, 90127 Palermo, Italy
| | - Matteo Vidali
- Foundation IRCCS Ca' Grande Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, 20122 Milan, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Salvaggio
- Department of Biomedicine, Neurosciences and Advanced Diagnostics, Unit of Radiology, University of Palermo, 90127 Palermo, Italy
| | - Francesco Agnello
- Department of Biomedicine, Neurosciences and Advanced Diagnostics, Unit of Radiology, University of Palermo, 90127 Palermo, Italy
| | - Bruna Lo Sasso
- Department of Biomedicine, Neurosciences and Advanced Diagnostics, Institute of Clinical Biochemistry, Clinical Molecular Medicine, and Clinical Laboratory Medicine, University of Palermo, 90127 Palermo, Italy; Department of Laboratory Medicine, University Hospital "P. Giaccone", 90127 Palermo, Italy
| | - Caterina Maria Gambino
- Department of Biomedicine, Neurosciences and Advanced Diagnostics, Institute of Clinical Biochemistry, Clinical Molecular Medicine, and Clinical Laboratory Medicine, University of Palermo, 90127 Palermo, Italy; Department of Laboratory Medicine, University Hospital "P. Giaccone", 90127 Palermo, Italy
| | - Marcello Ciaccio
- Department of Biomedicine, Neurosciences and Advanced Diagnostics, Institute of Clinical Biochemistry, Clinical Molecular Medicine, and Clinical Laboratory Medicine, University of Palermo, 90127 Palermo, Italy; Department of Laboratory Medicine, University Hospital "P. Giaccone", 90127 Palermo, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Virarkar MK, Gruschkus SK, Ravizzini GC, Vulasala SSR, Javadi S, Bhosale P. Assessing the effectiveness of MRI, 18F-fluciclovine PET, SUV max, and PSA in detecting local recurrence of prostate cancer after prostatectomy. Pol J Radiol 2024; 89:e196-e203. [PMID: 38783912 PMCID: PMC11112415 DOI: 10.5114/pjr.2024.139007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/18/2023] [Accepted: 02/12/2024] [Indexed: 05/25/2024] Open
Abstract
Purpose The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the discriminatory utility of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), 18F-fluciclovine positron emission tomography (PET), maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and combinations of these diagnostic modalities for detecting local prostate cancer recurrence in the setting of rising PSA after radical prostatectomy. Material and methods Patients were characterised for clinical features such as Gleason score, PSA at surgery, PSA at follow-up, follow-up MRI result, follow-up PET result, follow-up SUVmax, and follow-up disease status. The utility of diagnostic parameters for detecting disease recurrence at the prostatectomy bed was assessed using receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis to determine the area under the curve (AUC) for each model. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive/negative predictive values were also calculated. Optimal cut-off points for continuous variables were determined based on maximum Youden's J statistics. Results The study found that MRI had the highest concordance (96%), sensitivity (100%), specificity (91%), positive predictive value (93%), and negative predictive value (100%) among the diagnostic modalities. The AUC for MRI was 0.9545, indicating a high discriminatory ability for detecting prostate cancer local recurrence. When combined, PET and SUVmax (cut-off value of 2.85) showed an improved performance compared to using them individually, with an AUC of 0.8925. Conclusions The analysis suggests that MRI is the most effective imaging modality for detecting local prostate cancer recurrence, with 18F-fluciclovine PET and SUVmax also showing promising combined results. PSA has moderate discriminatory utility at follow-up but can still provide valuable information in detecting prostate cancer recurrence. Further research and recent references are needed to support these findings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mayur K. Virarkar
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Jacksonville, USA
| | - Stephen K. Gruschkus
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Gregory C. Ravizzini
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Division of Diagnostic Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Sai Swarupa R. Vulasala
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Jacksonville, USA
| | - Sanaz Javadi
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, Division of Diagnostic Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Priya Bhosale
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, Division of Diagnostic Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Santucci D, Vertulli D, Esperto F, Eolo Trodella L, Ramella S, Papalia R, Scarpa RM, de Felice C, Francesco Grasso R, Beomonte Zobel B, Faiella E. Role of psa levels and pathological stadiation before radiation therapy in predicting mp-MRI results in patients with prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Actas Urol Esp 2024; 48:140-149. [PMID: 37981171 DOI: 10.1016/j.acuroe.2023.11.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/08/2022] [Accepted: 04/28/2022] [Indexed: 11/21/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate PSA value in mp-MRI results prediction, analyzing patients with high (GS≥8, pT≥3, pN1) and low grade (GS<8, pT<3, pN0) Prostate Cancer (PCa). MATERIALS AND METHODS One hundred eighty-eight patients underwent 1.5-Tmp-MRI after Radical Prostatectomy (RP) and before Radiotherapy (RT). They were divided into 2 groups: A and B, for patients with biochemical recurrence (BCR) and without BCR but with high local recurrence risk. Considering Gleason Score (GS), pT and pN as independent grouping variables, ROC analyses of PSA levels at primary PCa diagnosis and PSA before RT were performed in order to identify the optimal cut-off to predict mp-MRI result. RESULTS Group A and B showed higher AUC for PSA before RT than PSA at PCa diagnosis, in low and high grade tumors. For low grade tumors the best AUC was 0.646 and 0.685 in group A and B; for high grade the best AUC was 0.705 and 1 in group A and B, respectively. For low grade tumors the best PSA cut-off was 0.565-0.58ng/mL in group A (sensitivity, specificity: 70.5%, 66%), and 0.11-0.13ng/mL in B (sensitivity, specificity: 62.5%, 84.6%). For high grade tumors, the best PSA cut-off obtained was 0.265-0.305ng/mL in group A (sensitivity, specificity: 95%, 42.1%), and 0.13-0.15ng/mL in B (sensitivity, specificity: 100%). CONCLUSION Mp-MRI should be performed as added diagnostic tool always when a BCR is detected, especially in high grade PCa. In patients without BCR, mp-MRI results, although poorly related to pathological stadiation, still have a good diagnostic performance, mostly when PSA>0.1-0.15ng/mL.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D Santucci
- Departamento de Radiología, Universidad Campus Bio-Medico, Roma, Italy
| | - D Vertulli
- Departamento de Radiología, Universidad Campus Bio-Medico, Roma, Italy
| | - F Esperto
- Departamento de Urología, Universidad Campus Bio-Medico, Roma, Italy
| | - L Eolo Trodella
- Departamento de Radioterapia, Universidad Campus Bio-Medico, Roma, Italy
| | - S Ramella
- Departamento de Radioterapia, Universidad Campus Bio-Medico, Roma, Italy
| | - R Papalia
- Departamento de Urología, Universidad Campus Bio-Medico, Roma, Italy
| | - R M Scarpa
- Departamento de Urología, Universidad Campus Bio-Medico, Roma, Italy
| | - C de Felice
- Departamento de Radiología, Universidad de Sapienza, Roma, Italy
| | | | - B Beomonte Zobel
- Departamento de Radiología, Universidad Campus Bio-Medico, Roma, Italy
| | - E Faiella
- Departamento de Radiología, Universidad Campus Bio-Medico, Roma, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Khan A, Moore CM, Minhaj Siddiqui M. Prostate MRI and image quality: The urologist's perspective. Eur J Radiol 2024; 170:111255. [PMID: 38101197 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2023.111255] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/24/2023] [Accepted: 12/05/2023] [Indexed: 12/17/2023]
Abstract
The development of different imaging modalities of the prostate has significantly improved tumor detection, patient risk stratification, and quality of care.Among these, multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) has emerged as the most sensitive tool.It is useful in the diagnosis, localization, risk stratification, and staging of clinically significant prostate cancer, PCa. As a result, mp-MRI of the prostate is recommended as the initial diagnostic test for men with suspected PCa. A multidisciplinary approach is crucial in the diagnosis and management of prostate cancer and mp-MRI plays a fundamental role in this scenario.While many aspects of image quality certainly fall within the purview of radiology, it is important to recognize that urologists must also be attentive to imaging quality when utilizing mp-MRI to facilitate PCa management. We present our viewpoint as urologists on how image quality impacts the management of men diagnosed with PCa andattempt to identify the factors that impact mp-MRI image quality, consequences of poor image quality, and finally suggestions for improvements.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amir Khan
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Maryland, School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Caroline M Moore
- Division of Surgical and Interventional Sciences, University College London, London, UK.
| | - M Minhaj Siddiqui
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Maryland, School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Pecoraro M, Dehghanpour A, Das JP, Woo S, Panebianco V. Evaluation of Prostate Cancer Recurrence with MR Imaging and Prostate Imaging for Recurrence Reporting Scoring System. Radiol Clin North Am 2024; 62:135-159. [PMID: 37973239 DOI: 10.1016/j.rcl.2023.06.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/19/2023]
Abstract
Detection of prostate cancer recurrence after whole-gland treatment with curative intent is critical to identify patients who may benefit from local salvage therapy. Among the different imaging modalities used in clinical practice, MR imaging is the most accurate in identifying local prostate cancer recurrence; indeed, it is an excellent technique for local recurrence detection superior to PET/CT, even at low PSA, but provides no information about extra-pelvic lymph nodes or bone metastasis. In 2021, a group of experts developed the Prostate Imaging for local Recurrence Reporting scoring system to standardize acquisition, interpretation, and reporting of prostate cancer recurrence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Martina Pecoraro
- Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University, Policlinico Umberto I, Viale Regina Elena 324, Rome 00161, Italy
| | - Ailin Dehghanpour
- Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University, Policlinico Umberto I, Viale Regina Elena 324, Rome 00161, Italy
| | - Jeeban Paul Das
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Sungmin Woo
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Valeria Panebianco
- Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University, Policlinico Umberto I, Viale Regina Elena 324, Rome 00161, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Tayebi S, Verma S, Sidana A. Real-Time and Delayed Imaging of Tissue and Effects of Prostate Tissue Ablation. Curr Urol Rep 2023; 24:477-489. [PMID: 37421582 DOI: 10.1007/s11934-023-01175-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/19/2023] [Indexed: 07/10/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW Prostate ablation is increasingly being utilized for the management of localized prostate cancer. There are several energy modalities with varying mechanism of actions which are currently used for prostate ablation. Prostate ablations, whether focal or whole gland, are performed under ultrasound and/or MRI guidance for appropriate treatment plan execution and monitoring. A familiarity with different intraoperative imaging findings and expected tissue response to these ablative modalities is paramount. In this review, we discuss the intraoperative, early, and delayed imaging findings in prostate from the effects of prostate ablation. RECENT FINDINGS The monitoring of ablation both during and after the therapy became increasingly important due to the precise targeting of the target tissue. Recent findings suggest that real-time imaging techniques such as MRI or ultrasound can provide anatomical and functional information, allowing for precise ablation of the targeted tissue and increasing the effectiveness and precision of prostate cancer treatment. While intraprocedural imaging findings are variable, the follow-up imaging demonstrates similar findings across various energy modalities. MRI and ultrasound are two of the frequently used imaging techniques for intraoperative monitoring and temperature mapping of important surrounding structures. Follow-up imaging can provide valuable information about ablated tissue, including the success of the ablation, presence of residual cancer or recurrence after the ablation. It is critical and helpful to understand the imaging findings during the procedure and at different follow-up time periods to evaluate the procedure and its outcome.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shima Tayebi
- Division of Urology, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| | - Sadhna Verma
- Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| | - Abhinav Sidana
- Division of Urology, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
- Division of Urology, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, 231 Albert Sabin Way, ML 0589, Cincinnati, OH, 45267, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Duenweg SR, Bobholz SA, Barrett MJ, Lowman AK, Winiarz A, Nath B, Stebbins M, Bukowy J, Iczkowski KA, Jacobsohn KM, Vincent-Sheldon S, LaViolette PS. T2-Weighted MRI Radiomic Features Predict Prostate Cancer Presence and Eventual Biochemical Recurrence. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:4437. [PMID: 37760407 PMCID: PMC10526331 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15184437] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/30/2023] [Revised: 08/23/2023] [Accepted: 08/31/2023] [Indexed: 09/29/2023] Open
Abstract
Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most diagnosed non-cutaneous cancer in men. Despite therapies such as radical prostatectomy, which is considered curative, distant metastases may form, resulting in biochemical recurrence (BCR). This study used radiomic features calculated from multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (MP-MRI) to evaluate their ability to predict BCR and PCa presence. Data from a total of 279 patients, of which 46 experienced BCR, undergoing MP-MRI prior to surgery were assessed for this study. After surgery, the prostate was sectioned using patient-specific 3D-printed slicing jigs modeled using the T2-weighted imaging (T2WI). Sectioned tissue was stained, digitized, and annotated by a GU-fellowship trained pathologist for cancer presence. Digitized slides and annotations were co-registered to the T2WI and radiomic features were calculated across the whole prostate and cancerous lesions. A tree regression model was fitted to assess the ability of radiomic features to predict BCR, and a tree classification model was fitted with the same radiomic features to classify regions of cancer. We found that 10 radiomic features predicted eventual BCR with an AUC of 0.97 and classified cancer at an accuracy of 89.9%. This study showcases the application of a radiomic feature-based tool to screen for the presence of prostate cancer and assess patient prognosis, as determined by biochemical recurrence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Savannah R. Duenweg
- Department of Biophysics, Medical College of Wisconsin, 8701 Watertown Plank Rd., Milwaukee, WI 53226, USA; (S.R.D.); (M.S.)
| | - Samuel A. Bobholz
- Department of Radiology, Medical College of Wisconsin, 8701 Watertown Plank Rd., Milwaukee, WI 53226, USA
| | - Michael J. Barrett
- Department of Radiology, Medical College of Wisconsin, 8701 Watertown Plank Rd., Milwaukee, WI 53226, USA
| | - Allison K. Lowman
- Department of Radiology, Medical College of Wisconsin, 8701 Watertown Plank Rd., Milwaukee, WI 53226, USA
| | - Aleksandra Winiarz
- Department of Biophysics, Medical College of Wisconsin, 8701 Watertown Plank Rd., Milwaukee, WI 53226, USA; (S.R.D.); (M.S.)
| | - Biprojit Nath
- Department of Biophysics, Medical College of Wisconsin, 8701 Watertown Plank Rd., Milwaukee, WI 53226, USA; (S.R.D.); (M.S.)
| | - Margaret Stebbins
- Department of Biophysics, Medical College of Wisconsin, 8701 Watertown Plank Rd., Milwaukee, WI 53226, USA; (S.R.D.); (M.S.)
| | - John Bukowy
- Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Milwaukee School of Engineering, 1025 N Broadway, Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA
| | - Kenneth A. Iczkowski
- Department of Pathology, Medical College of Wisconsin, 8701 Watertown Plank Rd., Milwaukee, WI 53226, USA;
| | - Kenneth M. Jacobsohn
- Department of Urology, Medical College of Wisconsin, 8701 Watertown Plank Rd., Milwaukee, WI 53226, USA
| | - Stephanie Vincent-Sheldon
- Department of Radiology, Medical College of Wisconsin, 8701 Watertown Plank Rd., Milwaukee, WI 53226, USA
| | - Peter S. LaViolette
- Department of Biophysics, Medical College of Wisconsin, 8701 Watertown Plank Rd., Milwaukee, WI 53226, USA; (S.R.D.); (M.S.)
- Department of Radiology, Medical College of Wisconsin, 8701 Watertown Plank Rd., Milwaukee, WI 53226, USA
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Medical College of Wisconsin, 8701 Watertown Plank Rd., Milwaukee, WI 53226, USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Scialpi M, Martorana E, Trippa F, Di Marzo A, Battista Scalera G, Cristina Aisa M, D’Andrea A, Maria Mancioli F, Nicola R, Scialpi P, Di Blasi A. Prostate Imaging for Local Recurrence Reporting and Data System for Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Proposal. UROLOGY RESEARCH & PRACTICE 2023; 49:233-240. [PMID: 37877824 PMCID: PMC10544277 DOI: 10.5152/tud.2023.22228] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/25/2022] [Accepted: 06/05/2023] [Indexed: 10/26/2023]
Abstract
We investigated a novel dedicated Prostate Imaging for Local Recurrence Reporting and Data System (PI-RRADS) in biochemical recurrence after radiotherapy (RT) and rad- ical prostatectomy (RP) evaluating biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) exams, at 3T MRI of 55 patients. Associating bpMRI and biochemical recurrence data, we calculated bpMRI diagnostic accuracy. Four probability categories, from 1 (very low) to 4 (very high), were distinguished. In 20 patients with radiotherapy, 25% and 75% of lesions were reported as PI-RRADS 3, and 4, respectively. In 35 patients with radi- cal prostatectomy, 7.7% of lesions were included in PI-RRADS 1-2, whereas 40.4% and 51.9% in PI-RRADS 3 and 4 categories, respectively. Excellent agreement and significant correlation between bpMRI and biochemical recurrence were found. BpMRI showed sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, false-posi- tive value, false-negative value, and total diagnostic accuracy of 96.15%, 86.7%, 97.4 %, 81.25%, 13.3%, 3.8% and 94.6%, respectively. BpMRI-based PI-RRADS allows the detection and localization local recurrence in biochemical recurrence after RT and RP contributing in clinical management and treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michele Scialpi
- Department of Medicine and Surgery, Division of Diagnostic Imaging, Santa Maria della Misericordia Hospital, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy
| | | | - Fabio Trippa
- Radiation Oncology Centre, Ospedale Santa Maria, Terni, Italy
| | | | | | - Maria Cristina Aisa
- Department of Medicine and Surgery, Division of Obstetric and Gynaecology, Santa Maria della Misericordia Hospital, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy
| | | | | | - Refky Nicola
- Department of Radiology, Syracuse, SUNY Upstate Medical, State University of New York Upstate Medical University, USA
| | - Pietro Scialpi
- Division of Urology, Portogruaro Hospital, Venice, Italy
| | - Aldo Di Blasi
- Division of Radiology, Tivoli Hospital, Tivoli, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Archer P, Marvaso G, Detti B, Colombo F, Francolini G, Vandendorpe B, Thananayagam MA, Baty M, De Crevoisier R, Alongi F, Nicosia L, Scher N, Toledano A, Di Muzio N, Fodor A, Zilli T, Franzese C, Scorsetti M, Shelan M, Triggiani L, Aymes E, Le Deley MC, Jereczek-Fossa BA, Pasquier D. Salvage Stereotactic Reirradiation for Local Recurrence in the Prostatic Bed After Prostatectomy: A Retrospective Multicenter Study. Eur Urol Oncol 2023; 6:303-310. [PMID: 37012102 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2023.03.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/25/2022] [Revised: 03/01/2023] [Accepted: 03/11/2023] [Indexed: 04/04/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Management of local recurrence of prostate cancer (PCa) in the prostatic bed after radical prostatectomy (RP) and radiotherapy remains challenging. OBJECTIVE To assess the efficacy and safety of salvage stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) reirradiation in this setting and evaluate prognostic factors. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS We conducted a large multicenter retrospective series that included 117 patients who were treated with salvage SBRT for local recurrence in the prostatic bed after RP and radiotherapy in 11 centers across three countries. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Progression-free survival (PFS; biochemical, clinical, or both) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Biochemical recurrence was defined as prostate-specific antigen nadir +0.2 ng/ml, confirmed by a second increasing measure. The cumulative incidence of late toxicities was estimated using the Kalbfleisch-Prentice method by considering recurrence or death as a competing event. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS The median follow-up was 19.5 mo. The median SBRT dose was 35 Gy. The median PFS was 23.5 mo (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 17.6-33.2). In the multivariable models, the volume of the recurrence and its contact with the urethrovesical anastomosis were significantly associated with PFS (hazard ratio [HR]/10 cm3 = 1.46; 95% CI, 1.08-1.96; p = 0.01 and HR = 3.35; 95% CI, 1.38-8.16; p = 0.008, respectively). The 3-yr cumulative incidence of grade ≥2 late GU or GI toxicity was 18% (95% CI, 10-26). In the multivariable analysis, a recurrence in contact with the urethrovesical anastomosis and D2% of the bladder were significantly associated with late toxicities of any grade (HR = 3.65; 95% CI, 1.61-8.24; p = 0.002 and HR/10 Gy = 1.88; 95% CI, 1.12-3.16; p = 0.02, respectively). CONCLUSIONS Salvage SBRT for local recurrence in the prostate bed may offer encouraging control and acceptable toxicity. Therefore, further prospective studies are warranted. PATIENT SUMMARY We found that salvage stereotactic body radiotherapy after surgery and radiotherapy allows for encouraging control and acceptable toxicity in locally relapsed prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul Archer
- Academic Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France
| | - Giulia Marvaso
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Beatrice Detti
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy
| | - Francesca Colombo
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Giulio Francolini
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy
| | | | | | - Manon Baty
- Department of Radiotherapy, Centre Eugène Marquis, Rennes, France
| | | | - Filippo Alongi
- Advanced Radiation Oncology Department, IRCCS Ospedale Sacro Cuore Don Calabria, Negrar di Valpolicella, Italy; University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy
| | - Luca Nicosia
- Advanced Radiation Oncology Department, IRCCS Ospedale Sacro Cuore Don Calabria, Negrar di Valpolicella, Italy
| | - Nathaniel Scher
- Department of Radiotherapy, Hartmann Institute of Radiotherapy, Levallois-Perret, France; Integrative Oncology, Rafael Institute, Levallois-Perret, France
| | - Alain Toledano
- Department of Radiotherapy, Hartmann Institute of Radiotherapy, Levallois-Perret, France; Integrative Oncology, Rafael Institute, Levallois-Perret, France
| | - Nadia Di Muzio
- Department of Radiation Oncology, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; Faculty of Medicine, Vita-Salute S. Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Andrei Fodor
- Department of Radiation Oncology, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Thomas Zilli
- Radiation Oncology, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland; Faculty of Medicine, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Ciro Franzese
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele-Milan, Italy; Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Marta Scorsetti
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele-Milan, Italy; Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Mohamed Shelan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Luca Triggiani
- Radiation Oncology Department, University and Spedali Civili, Brescia, Italy
| | - Estelle Aymes
- Methodology and Biostatistic Unit, Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France
| | | | - Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - David Pasquier
- Academic Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France; Univ. Lille, Centre de recherche en informatique, Signal et automatique de Lille, Cristal UMR 9189, Lille, France.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Di Giuliano F, Picchi E, Pucci N, Minosse S, Ferrazzoli V, Pizzicannella G, Angeloni C, Nasso D, Chiaravalloti A, Garaci F, Floris R. Comparison between diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance and positron-emission tomography in the evaluation of treated lymphomas with mediastinal involvement. THE EGYPTIAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE 2022. [DOI: 10.1186/s43055-022-00825-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Abstract
Background
The persistence of residual tissue after treatment is frequent in patients with mediastinal lymphomas and it is often characterized by 18F-Flurodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography (18F-FDG PET) uptake. This study aims to investigate the usefulness of diffusion-weighted whole-body imaging with background body signal suppression (DWIBS) sequence in residual tissues of treated mediastinal lymphomas and to compare it with 18F-FDG PET-CT.
Results
We included 21 patients with mediastinal Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphomas who showed residual masses on PET-CT imaging at end of treatment and underwent DWIBS-Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI). SUVmax and Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (ADC) values of residual masses were assessed quantitatively, including measurement of mean ADC. 15 patients showed radiotracer uptake at 18F-FDG PET-CT, among them only 3 had positive DWIBS-MRI with low ADC values (median value: 0.90 mm2/s). The mediastinal biopsy in these 3 “double positive” patients confirmed pathological residual tissue. All the patients with positive 18F-FDG PET-CT but negative DWIBS-MRI (n = 18) with high ADC values (median value: 2.05 mm2/s) were confirmed negative by biopsy.
Conclusions
DWIBS-MRI examination combined with ADC measurement allowed to discriminate pathological and non-pathological residual tissue in patients with treated mediastinal lymphoma. These preliminary results seem to pave the way for a leading role of the MRI which could be a useful alternative to the 18F-FDG PET/CT.
Collapse
|
12
|
Carpagnano FA, Eusebi L, Giannubilo W, Fenu F, Safi M, Bartelli F, Guglielmi G. Prostate Multiparametric MRI: Evaluation of Recurrence and Post-treatment Changes. CURRENT RADIOLOGY REPORTS 2022. [DOI: 10.1007/s40134-022-00404-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Purpose of Review
This article reviews all the most common therapeutic strategies of prostate cancer, systemic or local, and all the following morpho-structural alterations, with the aim of helping the radiologist to recognize the signs of recurrence by using mp-MRI.
Recent Findings
According to the most recent evidences, prostate mp-MRI has now become a strong, non-invasive, and valid tool to evaluate all patient treated for prostatic carcinoma across the time, especially in the suspicion of biochemical recurrence.
Summary
The minimal signs of focal recurrence can put a strain on radiologists, especially if they are novice with multi-parametric prostate MRI. Familiarizing themselves with the outcomes of treatment, local or systemic, and its characteristics to MR imaging is indispensable to avoid diagnostic pitfalls and, subsequently, unnecessary reinterventions.
Collapse
|
13
|
Baskin A, Charondo LB, Balakrishnan A, Cowan JE, Cooperberg MR, Carroll PR, Nguyen H, Shinohara K. Medium Term Outcomes of Focal Cryoablation for Intermediate and High Risk Prostate Cancer: MRI and PSA are Not Predictive of Residual or Recurrent Disease. Urol Oncol 2022; 40:451.e15-451.e20. [DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2022.06.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2022] [Revised: 05/18/2022] [Accepted: 06/14/2022] [Indexed: 10/17/2022]
|
14
|
|
15
|
Dundee P, Furrer MA, Corcoran NM, Peters J, Pan H, Ballok Z, Ryan A, Guerrieri M, Costello AJ. Defining Prostatic Vascular Pedicle Recurrence and the Anatomy of Local Recurrence of Prostate Cancer on Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography. EUR UROL SUPPL 2022; 41:116-122. [PMID: 35813255 PMCID: PMC9257633 DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2022.05.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 05/19/2022] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The term local recurrence in prostate cancer is considered to mean persistent local disease in the prostatic bed, most commonly at the site of the vesicourethral anastomosis (VUA). Since the introduction of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and magnetic resonance imaging for assessment of early biochemical recurrence (BCR), we have found histologically confirmed prostate cancer in the prostatic vascular pedicle (PVP). If a significant proportion of local recurrences are distant to the VUA, it may be possible to alter adjuvant and salvage radiation fields in order to reduce the potential morbidity of radiation in selected patients. Objective To describe PVP local recurrence and to map the anatomic pattern of prostate bed recurrence on PSMA PET/CT. Design, setting, and participants This was a retrospective multicentre study of 185 patients imaged with PSMA PET/CT following radical prostatectomy (RP) between January 2016 and November 2018. All patient data and clinical outcomes were prospectively collected. Recurrences were documented according to anatomic location. For patients presenting with local recurrence, the precise location of the recurrence within the prostate bed was documented. Intervention PSMA PET/CT for BCR following RP. Results and limitations A total of 43 local recurrences in 41/185 patients (22%) were identified. Tumour recurrence at the PVP was found in 26 (63%), VUA in 15 (37%), and within a retained seminal vesicle and along the anterior rectal wall in the region of the neurovascular bundle in one (2.4%) each. Histological and surgical evidence of PVP recurrence was acquired in two patients. The study is limited by its retrospective nature with inherent selection bias. This is an observational study reporting on the anatomy of local recurrence and does not include follow-up for patient outcomes. Conclusions Our study showed that prostate cancer can recur in the PVP and is distant to the VUA more commonly than previously thought. This may have implications for RP technique and for the treatment of selected patients in the local recurrence setting. Patient summary We investigated more precise identification of the location of tumour recurrence after removal of the prostate for prostate cancer. We describe a new definition of local recurrence in an area called the prostatic vascular pedicle. This new concept may alter the treatment recommended for recurrent disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Philip Dundee
- Department of Urology, The University of Melbourne, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Grattan Street Parkville, Australia 3052
- The Australian Medical Robotics Academy, North Melbourne, Australia
- Australian Prostate Cancer Centre, North Melbourne, Australia
- Epworth Healthcare, Melbourne, Australia
- Corresponding author. Department of Urology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia. Tel. +61 3 9342 7294.
| | - Marc A. Furrer
- Department of Urology, The University of Melbourne, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Grattan Street Parkville, Australia 3052
- The Australian Medical Robotics Academy, North Melbourne, Australia
- Epworth Healthcare, Melbourne, Australia
- Department of Urology, University Hospital of Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Niall M. Corcoran
- Department of Urology, The University of Melbourne, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Grattan Street Parkville, Australia 3052
- Australian Prostate Cancer Centre, North Melbourne, Australia
| | - Justin Peters
- Department of Urology, The University of Melbourne, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Grattan Street Parkville, Australia 3052
- The Australian Medical Robotics Academy, North Melbourne, Australia
- Australian Prostate Cancer Centre, North Melbourne, Australia
- Epworth Healthcare, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Henry Pan
- Department of Urology, University Hospital of Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | | | - Andrew Ryan
- Healthcare Imaging Services, Melbourne, Australia
| | | | - Anthony J. Costello
- Department of Urology, The University of Melbourne, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Grattan Street Parkville, Australia 3052
- The Australian Medical Robotics Academy, North Melbourne, Australia
- Australian Prostate Cancer Centre, North Melbourne, Australia
- Epworth Healthcare, Melbourne, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Pecoraro M, Turkbey BI, Purysko AS, Girometti R, Giannarini G, Villeirs G, Roberto M, Catalano C, Padhani AR, Barentsz JO, Panebianco V. Diagnostic Accuracy and Observer Agreement of the MRI Prostate Imaging for Recurrence Reporting Assessment Score. Radiology 2022; 304:342-350. [PMID: 35536130 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.212252] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
Background Prostate cancer local recurrence location and extent must be determined in an accurate and timely manner. Because of the lack of a standardized MRI approach after whole-gland treatment, a panel of international experts recently proposed the Prostate Imaging for Recurrence Reporting (PI-RR) assessment score. Purpose To determine the diagnostic accuracy of PI-RR for detecting local recurrence in patients with biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radiation therapy (RT) or radical prostatectomy (RP) and to evaluate the interreader variability of PI-RR scoring. Materials and Methods This retrospective observational study included patients who underwent multiparametric MRI between September 2016 and May 2021 for BCR after RT or RP. MRI scans were analyzed, and a PI-RR score was assigned independently by four radiologists. The reference standard was defined using histopathologic findings, follow-up imaging, or clinical response to treatment. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy were calculated to assess PI-RR performance for each reader. The intraclass correlation coefficient was used to determine interreader agreement. Results A total of 100 men were included: 48 patients after RT (median age, 76 years [IQR, 70-82 years]) and 52 patients after RP (median age, 70 years [IQR, 66-74 years]). After RT, with PI-RR of 3 or greater as a cutoff (assigned when recurrence is uncertain), diagnostic performance ranges were 71%-81% sensitivity, 74%-93% specificity, 71%-89% PPV, 79%-86% NPV, and 77%-88% accuracy across the four readers. After RP, with PI-RR of 3 or greater as a cutoff, performance ranges were 59%-83% sensitivity, 87%-100% specificity, 88%-100% PPV, 66%-80% NPV, and 75%-85% accuracy. The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.87 across the four readers for both the RT and RP groups. Conclusion MRI scoring with the Prostate Imaging for Recurrence Reporting assessment provides structured, reproducible, and accurate evaluation of local recurrence after definitive therapy for prostate cancer. © RSNA, 2022 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Haider in this issue.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Martina Pecoraro
- From the Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University/Policlinico Umberto I, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161 Rome, Italy (M.P., M.R., C.C., V.P.); National Cancer Institute, Center for Cancer Research, Bethesda, Md (B.I.T.); Imaging Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (A.S.P.); Institute of Radiology (R.G.) and Unit of Urology (G.G.), Santa Maria della Misericordia Academic Medical Center, Udine, Italy; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium (G.V.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, England (A.R.P.); and Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands (J.O.B.)
| | - Baris I Turkbey
- From the Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University/Policlinico Umberto I, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161 Rome, Italy (M.P., M.R., C.C., V.P.); National Cancer Institute, Center for Cancer Research, Bethesda, Md (B.I.T.); Imaging Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (A.S.P.); Institute of Radiology (R.G.) and Unit of Urology (G.G.), Santa Maria della Misericordia Academic Medical Center, Udine, Italy; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium (G.V.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, England (A.R.P.); and Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands (J.O.B.)
| | - Andrei S Purysko
- From the Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University/Policlinico Umberto I, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161 Rome, Italy (M.P., M.R., C.C., V.P.); National Cancer Institute, Center for Cancer Research, Bethesda, Md (B.I.T.); Imaging Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (A.S.P.); Institute of Radiology (R.G.) and Unit of Urology (G.G.), Santa Maria della Misericordia Academic Medical Center, Udine, Italy; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium (G.V.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, England (A.R.P.); and Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands (J.O.B.)
| | - Rossano Girometti
- From the Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University/Policlinico Umberto I, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161 Rome, Italy (M.P., M.R., C.C., V.P.); National Cancer Institute, Center for Cancer Research, Bethesda, Md (B.I.T.); Imaging Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (A.S.P.); Institute of Radiology (R.G.) and Unit of Urology (G.G.), Santa Maria della Misericordia Academic Medical Center, Udine, Italy; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium (G.V.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, England (A.R.P.); and Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands (J.O.B.)
| | - Gianluca Giannarini
- From the Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University/Policlinico Umberto I, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161 Rome, Italy (M.P., M.R., C.C., V.P.); National Cancer Institute, Center for Cancer Research, Bethesda, Md (B.I.T.); Imaging Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (A.S.P.); Institute of Radiology (R.G.) and Unit of Urology (G.G.), Santa Maria della Misericordia Academic Medical Center, Udine, Italy; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium (G.V.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, England (A.R.P.); and Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands (J.O.B.)
| | - Geert Villeirs
- From the Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University/Policlinico Umberto I, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161 Rome, Italy (M.P., M.R., C.C., V.P.); National Cancer Institute, Center for Cancer Research, Bethesda, Md (B.I.T.); Imaging Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (A.S.P.); Institute of Radiology (R.G.) and Unit of Urology (G.G.), Santa Maria della Misericordia Academic Medical Center, Udine, Italy; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium (G.V.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, England (A.R.P.); and Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands (J.O.B.)
| | - Michela Roberto
- From the Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University/Policlinico Umberto I, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161 Rome, Italy (M.P., M.R., C.C., V.P.); National Cancer Institute, Center for Cancer Research, Bethesda, Md (B.I.T.); Imaging Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (A.S.P.); Institute of Radiology (R.G.) and Unit of Urology (G.G.), Santa Maria della Misericordia Academic Medical Center, Udine, Italy; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium (G.V.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, England (A.R.P.); and Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands (J.O.B.)
| | - Carlo Catalano
- From the Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University/Policlinico Umberto I, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161 Rome, Italy (M.P., M.R., C.C., V.P.); National Cancer Institute, Center for Cancer Research, Bethesda, Md (B.I.T.); Imaging Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (A.S.P.); Institute of Radiology (R.G.) and Unit of Urology (G.G.), Santa Maria della Misericordia Academic Medical Center, Udine, Italy; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium (G.V.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, England (A.R.P.); and Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands (J.O.B.)
| | - Anwar R Padhani
- From the Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University/Policlinico Umberto I, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161 Rome, Italy (M.P., M.R., C.C., V.P.); National Cancer Institute, Center for Cancer Research, Bethesda, Md (B.I.T.); Imaging Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (A.S.P.); Institute of Radiology (R.G.) and Unit of Urology (G.G.), Santa Maria della Misericordia Academic Medical Center, Udine, Italy; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium (G.V.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, England (A.R.P.); and Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands (J.O.B.)
| | - Jelle O Barentsz
- From the Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University/Policlinico Umberto I, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161 Rome, Italy (M.P., M.R., C.C., V.P.); National Cancer Institute, Center for Cancer Research, Bethesda, Md (B.I.T.); Imaging Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (A.S.P.); Institute of Radiology (R.G.) and Unit of Urology (G.G.), Santa Maria della Misericordia Academic Medical Center, Udine, Italy; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium (G.V.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, England (A.R.P.); and Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands (J.O.B.)
| | - Valeria Panebianco
- From the Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Sapienza University/Policlinico Umberto I, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161 Rome, Italy (M.P., M.R., C.C., V.P.); National Cancer Institute, Center for Cancer Research, Bethesda, Md (B.I.T.); Imaging Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (A.S.P.); Institute of Radiology (R.G.) and Unit of Urology (G.G.), Santa Maria della Misericordia Academic Medical Center, Udine, Italy; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium (G.V.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, England (A.R.P.); and Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands (J.O.B.)
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Salerno KE, Turkbey B, Lindenberg L, Mena E, Schott EE, Brennan AK, Roy S, Shankavaram U, Patel K, Cooley-Zgela T, McKinney Y, Wood BJ, Pinto PA, Choyke P, Citrin DE. Detection of failure patterns using advanced imaging in patients with biochemical recurrence following low-dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer. Brachytherapy 2022; 21:442-450. [PMID: 35523680 DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2022.03.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/11/2021] [Revised: 01/26/2022] [Accepted: 03/29/2022] [Indexed: 11/02/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S) This study describes the pattern of failure in patients with biochemical (BCR) recurrence after low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy as a component of definitive treatment for prostate cancer. METHODS Patients with BCR after LDR brachytherapy ± external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) were enrolled on prospective IRB approved advanced imaging protocols. Patients underwent 3T multiparametric MRI (mpMRI); a subset underwent prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-based PET/CT. Pathologic confirmation was obtained unless contraindicated. RESULTS Between January 2011 and April 2021, 51 patients with BCR after brachytherapy (n = 36) or brachytherapy + EBRT (n = 15) underwent mpMRI and were included in this analysis. Of 38 patients with available dosimetry, only two had D90<90%. The prostate and seminal vesicles were a site of failure in 66.7% (n = 34) and 39.2% (n = 20), respectively. PET/CT (n = 32 patients) more often identified lesions pelvic lymph nodes (50%; n = 16) and distant metastases (18.8%; n = 6), than mpMRI. Isolated nodal disease (9.8%; n = 5) and distant metastases (n = 1) without local recurrence were uncommon. Recurrence within the prostate was located in the transition zone in 48.5%, central or midline in 45.5%, and anterior in 36.4% of patients. CONCLUSION In this cohort of patients with BCR after LDR brachytherapy ± EBRT, the predominant recurrence pattern was local (prostate ± seminal vesicles) with frequent occurrence in the anterior prostate and transition zone. mpMRI and PSMA PET/CT provided complementary information to localize sites of recurrence, with PSMA PET/CT often confirming mpMRI findings and identifying occult nodal or distant metastases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kilian E Salerno
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Erica E Schott
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Alexandra K Brennan
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Soumyajit Roy
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD; Department of Radiation Oncology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL
| | - Uma Shankavaram
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Krishnan Patel
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Theresa Cooley-Zgela
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Yolanda McKinney
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Bradford J Wood
- Center for Interventional Oncology, NIH Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Peter A Pinto
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Peter Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Deborah E Citrin
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Citrin DE, Schott E, Salerno K, Ning H, Pinto PA, Wood BJ, Lindenberg L, Mena E, Turkbey B. Successful Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Postbrachytherapy Prostate Recurrence and Penile Bulb Metastasis. Adv Radiat Oncol 2022; 7:100860. [PMID: 35647400 PMCID: PMC9133405 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2021.100860] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/11/2021] [Accepted: 11/08/2021] [Indexed: 12/01/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Deborah E. Citrin
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Erica Schott
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Kilian Salerno
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Holly Ning
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Peter A. Pinto
- Urologic Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | | | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Gaudiano C, Ciccarese F, Bianchi L, Corcioni B, De Cinque A, Giunchi F, Schiavina R, Fiorentino M, Brunocilla E, Golfieri R. The role of MRI in the detection of local recurrence: Added value of multiparametric approach and Signal Intensity/Time Curve analysis. Arch Ital Urol Androl 2022; 94:25-31. [PMID: 35352521 DOI: 10.4081/aiua.2022.1.25] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/14/2021] [Accepted: 08/25/2021] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The aim of the study was to evaluate the accuracy of multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (mpMRI) in the detection of local recurrence of prostate cancer (PCa) with the evaluation of the added value of signal Intensity/Time (I/T) curves. MATERIALS AND METHODS A retrospective analysis of 22 patients undergoing mpMRI from 2015 to 2020 was carried out, with the following inclusion criteria: performing transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy within 3 months in the case of positive or doubtful findings and undergoing biopsy and/or clinical follow-up for 24 months in the case of negative results. The images were reviewed, and the lesions were catalogued according to morphological, diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and dynamic contrast- enhanced (DCE) features. RESULTS The presence of local recurrence was detected in 11/22 patients (50%). Greater diameter, hyperintensity on DWI, positive contrast enhancement and type 2/3 signal I/T curves were more frequently observed in patients with local recurrence (all p < 0.05). Of all the sequences, DCE was the most accurate; however, the combination of DCE and DWI showed the best results, with a sensitivity of 100%, a specificity of 82%, a negative predictive value of 100% and a positive predictive value of 85%. CONCLUSIONS The utility of MRI in the detection of local recurrence is tied to the multiparametric approach, with all sequences providing useful information. A combination of DCE and DWI is particularly effective. Moreover, specificity could be additionally improved using analysis of the signal I/T curves.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Caterina Gaudiano
- Department of Radiology, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna.
| | - Federica Ciccarese
- Department of Radiology, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna.
| | - Lorenzo Bianchi
- Department of Urology, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna.
| | - Beniamino Corcioni
- Department of Radiology, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna.
| | - Antonio De Cinque
- Department of Radiology, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna.
| | - Francesca Giunchi
- Department of Pathology, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna.
| | - Riccardo Schiavina
- Department of Urology, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna.
| | | | - Eugenio Brunocilla
- Department of Urology, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna.
| | - Rita Golfieri
- Department of Radiology, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna.
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Patterns of Prostate Cancer Recurrence After Brachytherapy Determined by Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen-Positron Emission Tomography and Computed Tomography Imaging. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022; 112:1126-1134. [PMID: 34986383 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.12.164] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/19/2021] [Revised: 11/12/2021] [Accepted: 12/24/2021] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The aim of this study was to characterize the patterns of prostate cancer recurrence after brachytherapy (BT) using 2-(3-[1-carboxy-5-([6-18F-fluoropyridine-3-carbonyl]-amino)-pentyl]-ureido)-pentanedioic acid ([18F]DCFPyL) prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) and computed tomography (CT) imaging. METHODS AND MATERIALS Patients were selected from an ongoing prospective institutional trial investigating the use of [18F]DCFPyL PSMA PET and CT in recurrent prostate cancer (NCT02899312). This report included patients who underwent BT (either monotherapy or boost) and experienced a biochemical failure (BF) defined by the Phoenix definition (prostate-specific antigen [PSA] > 2 ng/mL above nadir). RESULTS Between March 2017 and April 2020, 670 patients underwent [18F]DCFPyL PSMA PET and CT imaging. Of these 670 patients, 93 were treated with BT; 73 underwent monotherapy, and 20 underwent BT boost (19 low-dose rate and 1 high-dose rate). To report on patterns of recurrence outcomes, 86 patients (median prescan PSA 6.0) with a positive [18F]DCFPyL PSMA PET and CT scan and true BF were included. The most common location of relapse was local; 62.8% had a component of local failure (defined as prostate and/or seminal vesicles), and 46.5% had isolated local failure only, with no other sites of involvement. Regional failure occurred in 40.7% of patients, and 36.0% had metastatic failure. Isolated local recurrence was seen in 54.3% of monotherapy patients versus only in 12.5% of boost patients. Metastatic failure was seen in 28.6% of monotherapy patients versus 68.8% of the boost patients. Local recurrences (69.0%) were found within the same prostate biopsy sextant involved with the tumor at diagnosis, and 76.0% of patients with seminal vesicle recurrences had prostate-base involvement at diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS Contrary to previous evidence, our study suggests that in prostate BT patients with biochemical recurrence, the most common site of failure is local for the patients treated with monotherapy and metastatic for patients treated with a combination of external beam radiation and BT boost.
Collapse
|
21
|
Mäkelä P, Anttinen M, Suomi V, Steiner A, Saunavaara J, Sainio T, Horte A, Taimen P, Boström P, Blanco Sequeiros R. Acute and subacute prostate MRI findings after MRI-guided transurethral ultrasound ablation of prostate cancer. Acta Radiol 2021; 62:1687-1695. [PMID: 33251811 DOI: 10.1177/0284185120976931] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided transurethral ultrasound ablation (TULSA) is an emerging method for treatment of localized prostate cancer (PCa). TULSA-related subacute MRI findings have not been previously characterized. PURPOSE To evaluate acute and subacute MRI findings after TULSA treatment in a treat-and-resect setting. MATERIAL AND METHODS Six men with newly diagnosed MRI-visible and biopsy-concordant clinically significant PCa were enrolled and completed the study. Eight lesions classified as PI-RADS 3-5 were focally ablated using TULSA. One- and three-week follow-up MRI scans were performed between TULSA and robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. RESULTS TULSA-related hemorrhage was detected as a subtle T1 hyperintensity and more apparent T2 hypointensity in the MRI. Both prostate volume and non-perfused volume (NPV) markedly increased after TULSA at one week and three weeks after treatment, respectively. Lesion apparent diffusion coefficient values increased one week after treatment and decreased nearing the baseline values at the three-week MRI follow-up. CONCLUSION The optimal timing of MRI follow-up seems to be at the earliest at three weeks after treatment, when the post-procedural edema has decreased and the NPV has matured. Diffusion-weighted imaging has little or no added diagnostic value in the subacute setting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pietari Mäkelä
- Department of Radiology, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland
| | - Mikael Anttinen
- Department of Urology, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland
| | - Visa Suomi
- Department of Medical Physics, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland
| | - Aida Steiner
- Department of Radiology, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland
| | - Jani Saunavaara
- Department of Medical Physics, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland
| | - Teija Sainio
- Department of Medical Physics, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland
| | - Antero Horte
- Department of Urology, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland
| | - Pekka Taimen
- Institute of Biomedicine, University of Turku, Turku, Finland
- Department of Pathology, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland
| | - Peter Boström
- Department of Urology, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland
| | | |
Collapse
|
22
|
Wilkie JR, Lipson R, Johnson MC, Williams C, Moghanaki D, Elliott D, Owen D, Atluri N, Jolly S, Chapman CH. Use and Outcomes of SBRT for Early Stage NSCLC Without Pathologic Confirmation in the Veterans Health Care Administration. Adv Radiat Oncol 2021; 6:100707. [PMID: 34409207 PMCID: PMC8361048 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2021.100707] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/20/2020] [Revised: 03/01/2021] [Accepted: 03/18/2021] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) use has increased among patients without pathologic confirmation (PC) of lung cancer. Empirical SBRT without PC raises concerns about variation in workup and patient selection, but national trends have not been well described. In this study, we assessed patterns of empirical SBRT use, workup, and causes of death among a large national non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cohort. Methods and Materials We identified 2221 patients treated with SBRT for cT1-T2aN0M0 NSCLC in the Veterans Affairs health care system from 2008 to 2015. We reviewed their pretreatment workup and assessed associations between absence of PC and clinical and demographic factors. We compared causes of death between PC and non-PC groups and used Cox proportional hazards modeling to compare overall survival and lung cancer specific survival (LCSS) between these groups. Results Treatment without PC varied from 0% to 61% among Veterans Affairs medical centers, with at least 5 cases of stage I NSCLC. Overall, 14.9% of patients were treated without PC and 8.8% did not have a biopsy attempt. Ten percent of facilities were responsible for almost two-thirds (62%) of cases of treatment without PC. Of non-PC patients, 95.5% had positron emission tomography scans, 40.6% had biopsy procedures attempted, and 12.7% underwent endobronchial ultrasound. Non-PC patients were more likely to have cT1 tumors and live outside the histoplasmosis belt. Age, sex, smoking status, and Charlson comorbidity index were similar between groups. Lung cancer was the most common cause of death in both groups. Overall survival was similar between groups, whereas non-PC patients had better LCSS (hazard ratio = 0.77, P = .031). Conclusions Empirical SBRT use varied widely among institutions and appropriate radiographic workup was consistently used in this national cohort. Future studies should investigate determinants of variation and reasons for higher LCSS among non-PC patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joel R. Wilkie
- Center for Clinical Management Research, Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | - Rachel Lipson
- Center for Clinical Management Research, Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | | | - Christina Williams
- Cooperative Studies Program Epidemiology Center-Durham, Durham Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Durham, North Carolina
- Department of Medicine, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Drew Moghanaki
- Atlanta Veterans Affairs Health Care System, East Point, Georgia
- Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - David Elliott
- Center for Clinical Management Research, Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | - Dawn Owen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
- Mayo Clinic Rochester, Department of Radiation Oncology, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | | - Shruti Jolly
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | - Christina Hunter Chapman
- Center for Clinical Management Research, Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
- Corresponding author: Christina Hunter Chapman, MD, MS
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Oerther B, Engel H, Bamberg F, Sigle A, Gratzke C, Benndorf M. Cancer detection rates of the PI-RADSv2.1 assessment categories: systematic review and meta-analysis on lesion level and patient level. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2021; 25:256-263. [PMID: 34230616 PMCID: PMC9184264 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-021-00417-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 62] [Impact Index Per Article: 20.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/05/2021] [Revised: 06/05/2021] [Accepted: 06/22/2021] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System, version 2.1 (PI-RADSv2.1) standardizes reporting of multiparametric MRI of the prostate. Assigned assessment categories are a risk stratification algorithm, higher categories indicate a higher probability of clinically significant cancer compared to lower categories. PI-RADSv2.1 does not define these probabilities numerically. We conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the cancer detection rates (CDR) of the PI-RADSv2.1 assessment categories on lesion level and patient level. METHODS Two independent reviewers screen a systematic PubMed and Cochrane CENTRAL search for relevant articles (primary outcome: clinically significant cancer, index test: prostate MRI reading according to PI-RADSv2.1, reference standard: histopathology). We perform meta-analyses of proportions with random-effects models for the CDR of the PI-RADSv2.1 assessment categories for clinically significant cancer. We perform subgroup analysis according to lesion localization to test for differences of CDR between peripheral zone lesions and transition zone lesions. RESULTS A total of 17 articles meet the inclusion criteria and data is independently extracted by two reviewers. Lesion level analysis includes 1946 lesions, patient level analysis includes 1268 patients. On lesion level analysis, CDR are 2% (95% confidence interval: 0-8%) for PI-RADS 1, 4% (1-9%) for PI-RADS 2, 20% (13-27%) for PI-RADS 3, 52% (43-61%) for PI-RADS 4, 89% (76-97%) for PI-RADS 5. On patient level analysis, CDR are 6% (0-20%) for PI-RADS 1, 9% (5-13%) for PI-RADS 2, 16% (7-27%) for PI-RADS 3, 59% (39-78%) for PI-RADS 4, 85% (73-94%) for PI-RADS 5. Higher categories are significantly associated with higher CDR (P < 0.001, univariate meta-regression), no systematic difference of CDR between peripheral zone lesions and transition zone lesions is identified in subgroup analysis. CONCLUSIONS Our estimates of CDR demonstrate that PI-RADSv2.1 stratifies lesions and patients as intended. Our results might serve as an initial evidence base to discuss management strategies linked to assessment categories.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benedict Oerther
- Department of Radiology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Germany, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Hannes Engel
- Department of Radiology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Germany, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Fabian Bamberg
- Department of Radiology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Germany, Freiburg, Germany
| | - August Sigle
- Department of Urology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Germany, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Christian Gratzke
- Department of Urology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Germany, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Matthias Benndorf
- Department of Radiology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Germany, Freiburg, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Yadav K, Sureka B, Elhence P, Choudhary GR, Pandey H. Pitfalls in Prostate Cancer Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Indian J Med Paediatr Oncol 2021. [DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1730757] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/21/2022] Open
Abstract
AbstractImage-guided prostate biopsies are changing the outlook of prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis, with the degree of suspicion on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) being a strong predictor of targeted biopsy outcome. It is important not only to detect these suspicious lesions but also to be aware of the potential pitfalls in mp-MRI prostate imaging. The aim of this pictorial essay is to show a wide spectrum of representative cases, which are frequently misdiagnosed as PIRADS ⅘ while reporting mp-MRI of the prostate. We provide some valuable recommendations to avoid these fallacies and improve mp-MRI of prostate evaluation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kuldeep Yadav
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
| | - Binit Sureka
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
| | - Poonam Elhence
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
| | - Gautam Ram Choudhary
- Department of Urology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
| | - Himanshu Pandey
- Department of Urology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Venkatesan AM, Mudairu-Dawodu E, Duran C, Stafford RJ, Yan Y, Wei W, Kundra V. Detecting recurrent prostate Cancer using multiparametric MRI, influence of PSA and Gleason grade. Cancer Imaging 2021; 21:3. [PMID: 33407861 PMCID: PMC7789281 DOI: 10.1186/s40644-020-00373-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/12/2020] [Accepted: 12/16/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The utility of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) in detecting suspected local recurrence post radical prostatectomy (RP) may be associated with PSA and Gleason grade. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the likelihood of detecting locally recurrent prostate cancer utilizing mpMRI in patients with suspected recurrence following radical prostatectomy (RP) parsed by PSA and Gleason grade. Methods One hundred ninety five patients with suspected local recurrence were imaged on a 1.5 T MRI with torso array and endorectal coil in this retrospective study. mpMRI interpretations were stratified by PSA and lower (Gleason < 7) vs. higher grade tumors (Gleason 8–10). Recursive partitioning was used to determine whether mpMRI interpretations could be classified as positive or negative. Results The majority of mpMRI interpretations in patients with lower Gleason grade tumors and PSA < 0.5 ng/mL were negative (68/78, 87.2%, p = 0.004). The majority of mpMRI interpretations in patients with higher Gleason grade tumors and PSA > 1.5 ng/mL were positive (8/9, 88.9%, p = 0.003). Findings were corroborated by recursive partitioning, which identified a PSA = 0.5 ng/ml in patients with lower grade tumors and a PSA = 1.5 ng/mL in patients with higher grade tumors as differentiating negative and positive mpMRIs. Conclusion In the setting of suspected recurrence after RP, mpMRI results are associated with PSA and Gleason grade, both of which can help guide when mpMRI may find utility. mpMRI is likely to be low diagnostic yield and negative for recurrence (87%) in the setting of lower Gleason grade tumors and PSA < 0.5 ng/mL. mpMRI is likely to be of low diagnostic value and positive for recurrence (89%) in the setting of PSA > 1.5 ng/mL and higher grade tumors; in this case, mpMRI findings may be more useful for directing biopsy and local therapy. Between these extremes, PSA > 0.5 ng/mL and lower grade tumors or PSA < 1.5 ng/mL and higher grade tumors, mpMRI results are less predictable, suggesting greater diagnostic value for detecting recurrence post prostatectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aradhana M Venkatesan
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Division of Diagnostic Radiology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Eniola Mudairu-Dawodu
- West Houston Radiology Associates, 21216 North West Freeway, Suite 2200, Cypress, TX, USA
| | - Cihan Duran
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Imaging, UT Houston, 6411 Fannin Street, Suite J2.222, Houston, TX, USA.
| | - R Jason Stafford
- Department of Imaging Physics, Division of Diagnostic Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Yuanqing Yan
- Department of Biostatistics, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Wei Wei
- Department of Biostatistics, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Vikas Kundra
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Division of Diagnostic Radiology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.,Department of Cancer Systems Imaging, Division of Diagnostic Radiology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
MR safety considerations for patients undergoing prostate MRI. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2020; 45:4097-4108. [PMID: 32902658 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-020-02730-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/06/2020] [Revised: 08/15/2020] [Accepted: 08/30/2020] [Indexed: 10/23/2022]
Abstract
Over the past decade, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of patients undergoing prostate MRI scans. Patients presenting for prostate MRI are an ageing population and may present with a variety of passive or active implants and devices. These implants and devices can be MR safe or MR conditional or MR unsafe. Patients with certain MR-conditional active implants and devices can safely obtain prostate MRI in a specified MR environment within specific MR imaging parameters. Prostate MRI and PET-MRI in patients with passive implants such as hip prostheses, fiducial markers for SBRT, brachytherapy seeds and prostatectomy bed clips have unique concerns for image optimization that can cause geometric distortion of the diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) sequence. We discuss strategies to overcome these susceptibility artifacts. Prostate MRI in patients with MR conditional active implants such as cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) also require modification of imaging parameters and magnet strength. In this setting, a diagnostic quality prostate MRI can be performed at a lower magnet strength (1.5 T) along with modification of imaging parameters to ensure patient safety. Imaging strategies to minimize susceptibility artifact and decrease the specific absorption rate (SAR) in both settings are described. Knowledge of MR safety considerations and imaging strategies specific to prostate MRI and PET-MRI in patients with implants and devices is essential to ensure diagnostic-quality MR images and patient safety.
Collapse
|
27
|
Paparo F, Peirano A, Matos J, Bacigalupo L, Rossi U, Mussetto I, Bottoni G, Ugolini M, Introini C, Ruggieri FG, Rollandi GA, Piccardo A. Diagnostic value of retrospectively fused 64CuCl 2 PET/MRI in biochemical relapse of prostate cancer: comparison with fused 18F-Choline PET/MRI, 64CuCl2 PET/CT, 18F-Choline PET/CT, and mpMRI. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2020; 45:3896-3906. [PMID: 32451674 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-020-02591-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE To assess the diagnostic value of retrospectively fused PET/MRI by comparing the detection rates (DRs) of fused 64CuCl2 PET/MRI vs. fused 18F-Choline PET/MRI in patients with suspected prostatic cancer (PCa) recurrence. The secondary objective was to compare the DRs of fused PET/MRI vs. those of the separate imaging modalities. METHODS We retrospectively evaluated 50 PCa patients with biochemical relapse after radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiotherapy (RT). All patients underwent 64CuCl2 PET/CT, 18F-Choline PET/CT, and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) within 15 days. Fused 64CuCl2-PET/MRI and fused 18F-Choline PET/MRI images were obtained by retrospective co-registration of MRI and PET images. Experienced readers interpreted the images, and the DRs of each imaging modality were assessed. RESULTS In the patient-based analysis, overall DRs of fused 64CuCl2 PET/MRI, fused 18F-Choline PET/MRI, 64CuCl2 PET/CT, 18F-Choline PET/CT, and mpMRI were 88%, 68%, 82%, 56%, and 74%, respectively. In the lesion-based analysis, overall DRs of fused 64CuCl2 PET/MRI, fused 18F-Choline PET/MRI, 64CuCl2 PET/CT, 18 F-Choline PET/CT, and mpMRI were 95%, 66%, 87%, 58%, and 71%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Retrospectively fused PET/MRI is able to overcome the limitations of the separate interpretation of the individual imaging modalities. Fused 64CuCl2 PET/MRI provided the highest diagnostic performance in the detection of PCa local relapse.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesco Paparo
- Unit of Radiology, Department of Diagnostic Imaging, E.O. Galliera Hospital, Genoa, Italy
| | - Alice Peirano
- DISSAL - Department of Health Sciences, University of Genoa, Via Antonio Pastore, 1, 16132, Genoa, GE, Italy
| | - João Matos
- DISSAL - Department of Health Sciences, University of Genoa, Via Antonio Pastore, 1, 16132, Genoa, GE, Italy.
| | - Lorenzo Bacigalupo
- Unit of Radiology, Department of Diagnostic Imaging, E.O. Galliera Hospital, Genoa, Italy
| | - Umberto Rossi
- Unit of Interventional Radiology, Department of Diagnostic Imaging, E.O. Galliera Hospital, Genoa, Italy
| | - Ilaria Mussetto
- Unit of Radiology, Department of Diagnostic Imaging, E.O. Galliera Hospital, Genoa, Italy
| | - Gianluca Bottoni
- Unit of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Diagnostic Imaging, E.O. Galliera Hospital, Genoa, Italy
| | - Martina Ugolini
- Medical Physics Unit, Department of Diagnostic Imaging, E.O. Galliera Hospital, Genoa, Italy
| | - Carlo Introini
- Prostate Unit, Department of Urology, E.O. Galliera Hospital, Genoa, Italy
| | - Filippo Grillo Ruggieri
- Unit of Radiotherapy, Department of Diagnostic Imaging, E.O. Galliera Hospital, Genoa, Italy
| | - Gian Andrea Rollandi
- Unit of Radiology, Department of Diagnostic Imaging, E.O. Galliera Hospital, Genoa, Italy
| | - Arnoldo Piccardo
- Unit of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Diagnostic Imaging, E.O. Galliera Hospital, Genoa, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate after focal therapy with high-intensity focused ultrasound. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2020; 45:3882-3895. [PMID: 32447414 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-020-02577-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
For clinically significant, locally confined prostate cancer, whole-gland radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy are established effective treatment strategies that, however, come at a cost of significant morbidity related to urinary and sexual side effects. The concept of risk stratification paired with a better understanding of prognostic factors has led to the development of alternative management options including active surveillance and focal therapy for appropriately selected patients with localized disease. High-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) is one such minimally invasive, image-guided treatment option for prostate cancer. Due to the relative novelty of HIFU and the increased use of magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer, many radiologists are not yet familiar with imaging findings related to HIFU, their temporal evolution as well as imaging appearance of recurrent disease after this type of focal therapy. HIFU induces sharply demarcated, localized coagulative necrosis of a tumor through thermal energy delivered via an endorectal or transurethral ultrasound transducer. In this pictorial review, we aim at providing relevant background information that will guide the reader through the general principles of HIFU in the prostate, as well as demonstrate the imaging appearance of expected post-HIFU changes versus recurrent tumor.
Collapse
|
29
|
Aghdam N, Pepin AN, Creswell M, Hsieh K, Smith C, Drescher N, Danner M, Ayoob M, Yung T, Lei S, Kumar D, Collins BT, Lischalk JW, Krishnan P, Suy S, Lynch J, Bandi G, Hankins RA, Collins SP. Management of Isolated Local Failures Following Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Low to Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer. Front Oncol 2020; 10:551491. [PMID: 33251131 PMCID: PMC7673419 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2020.551491] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/29/2020] [Accepted: 08/31/2020] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is a safe and effective treatment option for patients with low to intermediate risk prostate cancer (1). SBRT results in very low PSA nadirs secondary to the delivery of high biologically effective doses. Studies reporting on the diagnosis, confirmation, and management of salvageable isolated local failures (ILF) are limited. This study aims to determine the incidence and management approach of ILF after SBRT in a large single institution cohort. Method: All patients with low or intermediate risk localized prostate cancer treated with SBRT at Georgetown University Hospital were eligible for this study. Treatment was delivered using robotic SBRT with doses of 35-36.25 Gy in five fractions. ILF were diagnosed using multiparametric MRI and/or biopsy prompted by rising PSA levels after achieving long-term nadir. Patient's characteristics were extracted from a prospective institutional quality of life trial (IRB 2009-510). Type of salvage therapy and post-salvage PSA were determined on subsequent follow-up and chart review. Results: Between December 2008 to August 2018, 998 men with low to intermediate risk prostate cancer were eligible for inclusion in this analysis. Twenty-four patients (low risk, n = 5; intermediate risk, n = 19) were found to have ILF within the prostate on either MRI (n = 19) and/or biopsy (n = 20). Median pre-treatment PSA was 7.55 ng/ml. Median time to diagnosis of ILF was 72 months (24-110 months) with median PSA at the time of ILF of 2.8 ng/ml (0.7-33 ng/ml). Median PSA doubling time was 17 months (5-47 months). Thirteen patients with biopsy proven ILF proceeded with salvage therapy (cryotherapy n = 12, HIFU n = 1). Of 12 patients who underwent cryotherapy, 7 had a post-treatment PSA of <0.1 ng/ml. One patient experienced a urethral-cutaneous fistula (grade 3 toxicity). Conclusion: The incidence of isolated local recurrence is rare in our cohort. Diagnosis and management of isolated local failures post-SBRT continues to evolve. Our report highlights the importance of early utilization of MRI and confirmatory biopsy at relatively low PSA levels and long PSA doubling time (1). Additionally, undetectable PSA levels after salvage therapy supports the role of early treatment in ILF (1). Further research is needed to determine appropriate patient selection and salvage modality in this population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nima Aghdam
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Abigail N. Pepin
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
- George Washington School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Michael Creswell
- Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Kristin Hsieh
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
- Columbia University Valegos College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, NY, United States
| | - Clayton Smith
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States
| | - Nicolette Drescher
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
- Geisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine, Scranton, PA, United States
| | - Malika Danner
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Marilyn Ayoob
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Thomas Yung
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Siyuan Lei
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Deepak Kumar
- Julius L. Chambers Biomedical/Biotechnology Research Institute, North Carolina Central University, Durham, NC, United States
| | - Brian Timothy Collins
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Jonathan W. Lischalk
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Pranay Krishnan
- Department of Radiology, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Simeng Suy
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| | - John Lynch
- Department of Urology, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Guarav Bandi
- Department of Urology, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Ryan Andrew Hankins
- Department of Urology, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Sean P. Collins
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Lindenberg L, Mena E, Turkbey B, Shih JH, Reese SE, Harmon SA, Lim I, Lin F, Ton A, McKinney YL, Eclarinal P, Citrin DE, Dahut W, Madan R, Wood BJ, Krishnasamy V, Chang R, Levy E, Pinto P, Eary JF, Choyke PL. Evaluating Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer: Histologic Validation of 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT with Comparison to Multiparametric MRI. Radiology 2020; 296:564-572. [PMID: 32633674 PMCID: PMC7457947 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2020192018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/09/2019] [Revised: 04/29/2020] [Accepted: 05/12/2020] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
Background Prostate cancer recurrence is found in up to 40% of men with prior definitive (total prostatectomy or whole-prostate radiation) treatment. Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET agents such as 2-(3-{1-carboxy-5-[(6-[18F]fluoro-pyridine 3-carbonyl)-amino]-pentyl}-ureido)-pentanedioic acid (18F-DCFPyL) may improve detection of recurrence compared with multiparametric MRI; however, histopathologic validation is lacking. Purpose To determine the sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) of 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT based on histologic analysis and to compare with pelvic multiparametric MRI in men with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer. Materials and Methods Men were prospectively recruited after prostatectomy and/or radiation therapy with rising prostate-specific antigen level (median, 2.27 ng/mL; range, 0.2-27.45 ng/mL) and a negative result at conventional imaging (bone scan and/or CT). Participants underwent 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT imaging and 3.0-T pelvic multiparametric MRI. Statistical analysis included Wald and modified χ2 tests. Results A total of 323 lesions were visualized in 77 men by using 18F-DCFPyL or multiparametric MRI, with imaging detection concordance of 25% (82 of 323) when including all lesions in the MRI field of view and 53% (52 of 99) when only assessing prostate bed lesions. 18F-DCFPyL depicted more pelvic lymph nodes than did MRI (128 vs 23 nodes). Histologic validation was obtained in 80 locations with sensitivity, specificity, and PPV of 69% (25 of 36; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 51%, 88%), 91% (40 of 44; 95% CI: 74%, 98%), and 86% (25 of 29; 95% CI: 73%, 97%) for 18F-DCFPyL and 69% (24 of 35; 95% CI: 50%, 86%), 74% (31 of 42; 95% CI: 42%, 89%), and 69% (24 of 35; 95% CI: 50%, 88%) for multiparametric MRI (P = .95, P = .14, and P = .07, respectively). In the prostate bed, sensitivity, specificity, and PPV were 57% (13 of 23; 95% CI: 32%, 81%), 86% (18 of 21; 95% CI: 73%, 100%), and 81% (13 of 16; 95% CI: 59%, 100%) for 18F-DCFPyL and 83% (19 of 23; 95% CI: 59%, 100%), 52% (11 of 21; 95% CI: 29%, 74%), and 66% (19 of 29; 95% CI: 44%, 86%) for multiparametric MRI (P = .19, P = .02, and P = .17, respectively). The addition of 18F-DCFPyL to multiparametric MRI improved PPV by 38% overall (P = .02) and by 30% (P = .09) in the prostate bed. Conclusion Findings with 2-(3-{1-carboxy-5-[(6-[18F]fluoro-pyridine 3-carbonyl)-amino]-pentyl}-ureido)-pentanedioic acid (18F-DCFPyL) were histologically validated and demonstrated high specificity and positive predictive value. In the pelvis, 18F-DCFPyL depicted more lymph nodes and improved positive predictive value and specificity when added to multiparametric MRI. © RSNA, 2020 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Zukotynski and Rowe in this issue.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Liza Lindenberg
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Esther Mena
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Baris Turkbey
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Joanna H. Shih
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Sarah E. Reese
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Stephanie A. Harmon
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Ilhan Lim
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Frank Lin
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Anita Ton
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Yolanda L. McKinney
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Philip Eclarinal
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Deborah E. Citrin
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - William Dahut
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Ravi Madan
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Bradford J. Wood
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Venkatesh Krishnasamy
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Richard Chang
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Elliot Levy
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Peter Pinto
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Janet F. Eary
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Peter L. Choyke
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
MRI phenotype of the prostate: Transition zone radiomics analysis improves explanation of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) serum level compared to volume measurement alone. Eur J Radiol 2020; 129:109063. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2020.109063] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/21/2020] [Revised: 04/29/2020] [Accepted: 05/05/2020] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
|
32
|
Prospective Evaluation of 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT in Detection of High-Risk Localized Prostate Cancer: Comparison With mpMRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2020; 215:652-659. [PMID: 32755168 DOI: 10.2214/ajr.19.22042] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to assess the utility of PET with (2S)-2-[[(1S)-1-carboxy-5-[(6-(18F)fluoranylpyridine-3-carbonyl)amino]pentyl]carbamoylamino]pentanedioic acid (18F-DCFPyL), a prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted radiotracer, in the detection of high-risk localized prostate cancer as compared with multiparametric MRI (mpMRI). SUBJECTS AND METHODS. This HIPAA-compliant prospective study included 26 consecutive patients with localized high-risk prostate cancer (median age, 69.5 years [range, 53-81 years]; median prostate-specific antigen [PSA] level, 18.88 ng/mL [range, 1.03-20.00 ng/mL]) imaged with 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT and mpMRI. Images from PET/CT and mpMRI were evaluated separately, and suspicious areas underwent targeted biopsy. Lesion-based sensitivity and tumor detection rate were compared for PSMA PET and mpMRI. Standardized uptake value (SUV) and PSMA PET parameters were correlated with histopathology score, and uptake in tumor was compared with that in nonmalignant tissue. On a patient level, SUV and PSMA tumor volume were correlated with PSA density. RESULTS. Forty-four tumors (one in Gleason grade [GG] group 1, 12 in GG group 2, seven in GG group 3, nine in GG group 4, and 15 in GG group 5) were identified at histopathology. Sensitivity and tumor detection rate of 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT and mpMRI were similar (PET/CT, 90.9% and 80%; mpMRI, 86.4% and 88.4%; p = 0.58/0.17). Total lesion PSMA and PSMA tumor volume showed a relationship with GG (τ = 0.27 and p = 0.08, τ = 0.30 and p = 0.06, respectively). Maximum SUV in tumor was significantly higher than that in nonmalignant tissue (p < 0.05). Tumor burden density moderately correlated with PSA density (r = 0.47, p = 0.01). Five true-positive tumors identified on 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT were not identified on mpMRI. CONCLUSION. In patients with high-risk prostate cancer, 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT is highly sensitive in detecting intraprostatic tumors and can detect tumors missed on mpMRI. Measured uptake is significantly higher in tumor tissue, and PSMA-derived tumor burden is associated with severity of disease.
Collapse
|
33
|
Schieda N, Lim CS, Zabihollahy F, Abreu-Gomez J, Krishna S, Woo S, Melkus G, Ukwatta E, Turkbey B. Quantitative Prostate MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2020; 53:1632-1645. [PMID: 32410356 DOI: 10.1002/jmri.27191] [Citation(s) in RCA: 35] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/24/2020] [Revised: 04/24/2020] [Accepted: 04/24/2020] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Prostate MRI is reported in clinical practice using the Prostate Imaging and Data Reporting System (PI-RADS). PI-RADS aims to standardize, as much as possible, the acquisition, interpretation, reporting, and ultimately the performance of prostate MRI. PI-RADS relies upon mainly subjective analysis of MR imaging findings, with very few incorporated quantitative features. The shortcomings of PI-RADS are mainly: low-to-moderate interobserver agreement and modest accuracy for detection of clinically significant tumors in the transition zone. The use of a more quantitative analysis of prostate MR imaging findings is therefore of interest. Quantitative MR imaging features including: tumor size and volume, tumor length of capsular contact, tumor apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) metrics, tumor T1 and T2 relaxation times, tumor shape, and texture analyses have all shown value for improving characterization of observations detected on prostate MRI and for differentiating between tumors by their pathological grade and stage. Quantitative analysis may therefore improve diagnostic accuracy for detection of cancer and could be a noninvasive means to predict patient prognosis and guide management. Since quantitative analysis of prostate MRI is less dependent on an individual users' assessment, it could also improve interobserver agreement. Semi- and fully automated analysis of quantitative (radiomic) MRI features using artificial neural networks represent the next step in quantitative prostate MRI and are now being actively studied. Validation, through high-quality multicenter studies assessing diagnostic accuracy for clinically significant prostate cancer detection, in the domain of quantitative prostate MRI is needed. This article reviews advances in quantitative prostate MRI, highlighting the strengths and limitations of existing and emerging techniques, as well as discussing opportunities and challenges for evaluation of prostate MRI in clinical practice when using quantitative assessment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicola Schieda
- Department of Medical Imaging, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Christopher S Lim
- Department of Medical Imaging, Sunnybrook Health Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - Jorge Abreu-Gomez
- Department of Medical Imaging, Sunnybrook Health Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Satheesh Krishna
- Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Sungmin Woo
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Gerd Melkus
- Department of Medical Imaging, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Eran Ukwatta
- Faculty of Engineering, Guelph University, Guelph, Ontario, Canada
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute NIH, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Coppola A, Platania G, Ticca C, De Mattia C, Bortolato B, Palazzi MF, Vanzulli A. Sensitivity of CE-MRI in detecting local recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Radiol Med 2020; 125:683-690. [PMID: 32078119 DOI: 10.1007/s11547-020-01149-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/20/2018] [Accepted: 02/06/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
AIM The aim of our study was to evaluate the sensitivity of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance (CE-MR) with phased array coil in the diagnosis of local recurrence in patients with prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy and referred for salvage radiotherapy (SRT). MATERIALS AND METHODS This retrospective study included 73 patients treated with SRT after radical prostatectomy in the period between September 2006 and November 2017. All patients performed a CE-MRI with phased array coil before the start of SRT. A total of 213 patients treated at the ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda in the period between September 2006 and November 2017 with SRT after radical prostatectomy were reviewed. Seventy-three patients with a CE-MRI with phased array coil of the pelvis before the start of SRT were included in the present study. RESULTS At imaging review, recurrence local recurrent disease was diagnosed in 48 of 73 patients. By considering as reference standard the decrease in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) value after radiotherapy, we defined: 41 true positive (patients with MRI evidence of local recurrence and PSA value decreasing after SRT), 7 false positive (patients with MRI evidence of local recurrence without biochemical response after SRT), 3 true negative (patients without MRI evidence of local recurrence and stable or increased PSA value after SRT) and 22 false negative (patients without MRI evidence of local recurrence and PSA value decreasing after SRT) cases. The sensitivity values were calculated in relation to the PSA value before the start of treatment, obtaining a value of 74% for PSA above 0.2 ng/mL. CONCLUSION The sensitivity of CE-MRI in local recurrence detection after radical prostatectomy increases with increasing PSA values. CE-MRI with phased array coil can detect local recurrences after radical prostatectomy with a good sensitivity in patients with pre-RT PSA value above 0.2 ng/mL.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Cristiana Ticca
- Department of Radiology, Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Barbara Bortolato
- Unit of Radiotherapy, Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy
| | - Mauro F Palazzi
- Unit of Radiotherapy, Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy
| | - Angelo Vanzulli
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen PET/Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Planning of Salvage Radiotherapy in Patients with Prostate Cancer with Biochemical Recurrence After Radical Prostatectomy. PET Clin 2019; 14:487-498. [PMID: 31472746 DOI: 10.1016/j.cpet.2019.06.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
This article presents an overview of the current literature on PET imaging with prostate-specific membrane antigen ligands, especially focusing on the potential role of simultaneous PET/magnetic resonance imaging for the planning of salvage radiotherapy in patients with prostate cancer with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy.
Collapse
|
36
|
Girometti R, Cereser L, Bonato F, Zuiani C. Evolution of prostate MRI: from multiparametric standard to less-is-better and different-is better strategies. Eur Radiol Exp 2019; 3:5. [PMID: 30693407 PMCID: PMC6890868 DOI: 10.1186/s41747-019-0088-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/27/2018] [Accepted: 01/04/2019] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has become the standard of care to achieve accurate and reproducible diagnosis of prostate cancer. However, mpMRI is quite demanding in terms of technical rigour, patient's tolerability and safety, expertise in interpretation, and costs. This paper reviews the main technical strategies proposed as less-is-better solutions for clinical practice (non-contrast biparametric MRI, reduction of acquisition time, abbreviated protocols, computer-aided diagnosis systems), discussing them in the light of the available evidence and of the concurrent evolution of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS). We also summarised research results on those advanced techniques representing an alternative different-is-better line of the still ongoing evolution of prostate MRI (quantitative diffusion-weighted imaging, quantitative dynamic contrast enhancement, intravoxel incoherent motion, diffusion tensor imaging, diffusional kurtosis imaging, restriction spectrum imaging, radiomics analysis, hybrid positron emission tomography/MRI).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rossano Girometti
- Institute of Radiology, Department of Medicine, University of Udine - University Hospital "S. Maria della Misericordia", p.le S. Maria della Misericordia, 15-33100, Udine, Italy.
| | - Lorenzo Cereser
- Institute of Radiology, Department of Medicine, University of Udine - University Hospital "S. Maria della Misericordia", p.le S. Maria della Misericordia, 15-33100, Udine, Italy
| | - Filippo Bonato
- Institute of Radiology, Department of Medicine, University of Udine - University Hospital "S. Maria della Misericordia", p.le S. Maria della Misericordia, 15-33100, Udine, Italy
| | - Chiara Zuiani
- Institute of Radiology, Department of Medicine, University of Udine - University Hospital "S. Maria della Misericordia", p.le S. Maria della Misericordia, 15-33100, Udine, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Focal Salvage Treatment of Radiorecurrent Prostate Cancer: A Narrative Review of Current Strategies and Future Perspectives. Cancers (Basel) 2018; 10:cancers10120480. [PMID: 30513915 PMCID: PMC6316339 DOI: 10.3390/cancers10120480] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2018] [Revised: 11/25/2018] [Accepted: 11/28/2018] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Over the last decades, primary prostate cancer radiotherapy saw improving developments, such as more conformal dose administration and hypofractionated treatment regimens. Still, prostate cancer recurrences after whole-gland radiotherapy remain common, especially in patients with intermediate- to high-risk disease. The vast majority of these patients are treated palliatively with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), which exposes them to harmful side-effects and is only effective for a limited amount of time. For patients with a localized recurrent tumor and no signs of metastatic disease, local treatment with curative intent seems more rational. However, whole-gland salvage treatments such as salvage radiotherapy or salvage prostatectomy are associated with significant toxicity and are, therefore, uncommonly performed. Treatments that are solely aimed at the recurrent tumor itself, thereby better sparing the surrounding organs at risk, potentially provide a safer salvage treatment option in terms of toxicity. To achieve such tumor-targeted treatment, imaging developments have made it possible to better exclude metastatic disease and accurately discriminate the tumor. Currently, focal salvage treatment is being performed with different modalities, including brachytherapy, cryotherapy, high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). Oncologic outcomes seem comparable to whole-gland salvage series, but with much lower toxicity rates. In terms of oncologic control, these results will improve further with better understanding of patient selection. Other developments, such as high-field diagnostic MRI and live adaptive MRI-guided radiotherapy, will further improve precision of the treatment.
Collapse
|