Advertisement
No AccessJournal of UrologyAdult Urology1 Nov 2013

Utility of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Suspicion Levels for Detecting Prostate Cancer

    View All Author Information

    Purpose:

    We determine the usefulness of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in detecting prostate cancer, with a specific focus on detecting higher grade prostate cancer.

    Materials and Methods:

    Prospectively 583 patients who underwent multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and subsequent prostate biopsy at a single institution were evaluated. On multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, lesions were identified and scored as low, moderate or high suspicion for prostate cancer based on a validated scoring system. Magnetic resonance/ultrasound fusion guided biopsies of magnetic resonance imaging lesions in addition to systematic 12-core biopsies were performed. Correlations between the highest assigned multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging suspicion score and presence of cancer and biopsy Gleason score on the first fusion biopsy session were assessed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression models. Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value and positive predictive value were calculated and ROC curves were developed to assess the discriminative ability of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging as a diagnostic tool for various biopsy Gleason score cohorts.

    Results:

    Significant correlations were found between age, prostate specific antigen, prostate volume, and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging suspicion score and the presence of prostate cancer (p <0.0001). On multivariate analyses controlling for age, prostate specific antigen and prostate volume, increasing multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging suspicion was an independent prognosticator of prostate cancer detection (OR 2.2, p <0.0001). Also, incremental increases in multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging suspicion score demonstrated stronger associations with cancer detection in patients with Gleason 7 or greater (OR 3.3, p <0.001) and Gleason 8 or greater (OR 4.2, p <0.0001) prostate cancer. Assessing multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging as a diagnostic tool for all prostate cancer, biopsy Gleason score 7 or greater, and biopsy Gleason score 8 or greater separately via ROC analyses demonstrated increasing accuracy of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for higher grade disease (AUC 0.64, 0.69, and 0.72, respectively).

    Conclusions:

    Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging is a clinically useful modality to detect and characterize prostate cancer, particularly in men with higher grade disease.

    References

    • 1 : Cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin2012; 62: 10. Google Scholar
    • 2 : Prognostic value of the Gleason score in prostate cancer. BJU Int2002; 89: 538. Google Scholar
    • 3 : Low accuracy of routine ultrasound-guided systematic 12-core biopsies in prostate tumor mapping. Can J Urol2012; 19: 6366. Google Scholar
    • 4 : Concordance between Gleason scores of needle biopsies and radical prostatectomy specimens: a population-based study. BJU Int2009; 103: 1647. Google Scholar
    • 5 : Pathological outcomes of candidates for active surveillance of prostate cancer. J Urol2009; 181: 1628. LinkGoogle Scholar
    • 6 : Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion guided prostate biopsy improves cancer detection following transrectal ultrasound biopsy and correlates with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. J Urol2011; 186: 1281. LinkGoogle Scholar
    • 7 : Multiparametric 3T prostate magnetic resonance imaging to detect cancer: histopathological correlation using prostatectomy specimens processed in customized magnetic resonance imaging based molds. J Urol2011; 186: 1818. LinkGoogle Scholar
    • 8 : Targeted biopsy in the detection of prostate cancer using an office based magnetic resonance ultrasound fusion device. J Urol2013; 189: 86. LinkGoogle Scholar
    • 9 : A novel stereotactic prostate biopsy system integrating pre-interventional magnetic resonance imaging and live ultrasound fusion. J Urol2011; 186: 2214. LinkGoogle Scholar
    • 10 : Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound fusion biopsy detect prostate cancer in patients with prior negative transrectal ultrasound biopsies. J Urol2012; 188: 2152. LinkGoogle Scholar
    • 11 : Prostate cancer: value of multiparametric MR imaging at 3 T for detection–histopathologic correlation. Radiology2010; 255: 89. Google Scholar
    • 12 : Prostate cancer: can multiparametric MR imaging help identify patients who are candidates for active surveillance?. Radiology2013; 268: 144. Google Scholar
    • 13 : Prostate-specific antigen: a review of the validation of the most commonly used cancer biomarker. Cancer2004; 101: 894. Google Scholar
    • 14 : Continuing trends in pathological stage migration in radical prostatectomy specimens. Urol Oncol2004; 22: 300. Google Scholar
    • 15 : Quantifying the role of PSA screening in the US prostate cancer mortality decline. Cancer Causes Control2008; 19: 175. Google Scholar
    • 16 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force: Screening for Prostate Cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement: draft: summary of recommendation and evidence. October 7, 2011. Google Scholar
    • 17 : Screening for prostate cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med2012; 157: 120. Google Scholar
    • 18 : Pathologic and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostate cancer. JAMA1994; 271: 368. Google Scholar
    • 19 : Pathologic prostate cancer characteristics in patients eligible for active surveillance: a head-to-head comparison of contemporary protocols. Eur Urol2012; 62: 462. Google Scholar
    • 20 : D’Amico risk stratification correlates with degree of suspicion of prostate cancer on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. J Urol2011; 185: 815. LinkGoogle Scholar
    • 21 : Magnetic resonance imaging for predicting prostate biopsy findings in patients considered for active surveillance of clinically low risk prostate cancer. J Urol2012; 188: 1732. LinkGoogle Scholar
    • 22 : Clinical stage T1c prostate cancer: evaluation with endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging. Radiology2009; 253: 425. Google Scholar
    • 23 : Very distal apical prostate tumours: identification on multiparametric MRI at 3 Tesla. BJU Int2012; 110: E694. Google Scholar
    • 24 : Combined multiparametric MRI and targeted biopsies improve anterior prostate cancer detection, staging, and grading. Urology2011; 78: 1356. Google Scholar
    • 25 : Localized prostate cancer: relationship of tumor volume to clinical significance for treatment of prostate cancer. Cancer1993; 71: 933. Google Scholar
    • 26 : Correlation of magnetic resonance imaging tumor volume with histopathology. J Urol2012; 188: 1157. LinkGoogle Scholar
    Advertisement