Dataset Information

Prostate cancer managed with active surveillance: role of anatomic MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging.

ABSTRACT: To determine the role that magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging findings obtained at the time of diagnosis play in the progression of disease in patients whose prostate cancer is being managed with active surveillance and to compare the role of these findings with the role of transrectal ultrasonography (US) findings.The institutional review board approved this HIPAA-compliant retrospective study, and informed consent was obtained from all patients whose records were to be entered into the research database. All patients who had prostate cancer managed with active surveillance and who had undergone both MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging of the prostate and transrectal US at time of diagnosis were identified. Two urologists blinded to the clinical outcome in these patients independently reviewed and dichotomized the MR imaging report and the MR spectroscopic imaging report as normal or suggestive of malignancy. One experienced urologist performed all US examinations that were then dichotomized similarly. Uni- and multivariate (with use of standard clinical variables) Cox models were fitted to assess time to cancer progression, defined as Gleason score upgrading, prostate-specific antigen velocity of more than 0.75 (microg x L(-1))/y, or initiation of treatment more than 6 months after diagnosis.The final cohort included 114 patients with a median follow-up of 59 months. Patients with a lesion that was suggestive of cancer at MR imaging had a greater risk of the Gleason score being upgraded at subsequent biopsy (hazard ratio, 4.0; 95% confidence interval: 1.1, 14.9) than did patients without such a lesion. Neither MR spectroscopic imaging nor transrectal US could be used to predict cancer progression.Abnormal prostate MR imaging results suggestive of cancer may confer an increased risk of Gleason score upgrade at subsequent biopsy. Although expensive, prostate MR imaging may help in counseling potential candidates about active surveillance.

SUBMITTER: Fradet V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2897693 | biostudies-other | 2010 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo determine whether multiparametric magnetic resonance (MR) imaging can help identify patients with prostate cancer who would most appropriately be candidates for active surveillance (AS) according to current guidelines and to compare the results with those of conventional clinical assessment scoring systems, including the D'Amico, Epstein, and Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) systems, on the basis of findings at prostatectomy.Materials and methodsThis institutional review board-approved HIPAA-compliant retrospectively designed study included 133 patients (mean age, 59.3 years) with a mean prostate-specific antigen level of 6.73 ng/mL (median, 4.39 ng/mL) who underwent multiparametric MR imaging at 3.0 T before radical prostatectomy. Informed consent was obtained from all patients. Patients were then retrospectively classified as to whether they would have met AS eligibility criteria or were better served by surgery. AS eligibility criteria for prostatectomy specimens were a dominant tumor smaller than 0.5 mL without Gleason 4 or 5 patterns or extracapsular or seminal vesicle invasion. Conventional clinical assessment scores (the D'Amico, Epstein, and CAPRA scoring systems) were compared with multiparametric MR imaging findings for predicting AS candidates. The level of significance of difference between scoring systems was determined by using the χ(2) test for categoric variables with the level of significance set at P < .05.ResultsAmong 133 patients, 14 were eligible for AS on the basis of prostatectomy results. The sensitivity, positive predictive value (PPV), and overall accuracy, respectively, were 93%, 25%, and 70% for the D'Amico system, 64%, 45%, and 88% for the Epstein criteria, and 93%, 20%, and 59% for the CAPRA scoring system for predicting AS candidates (P < .005 for all, χ(2) test), while multiparametric MR imaging had a sensitivity of 93%, a PPV of 57%, and an overall accuracy of 92% (P < .005).ConclusionMultiparametric MR imaging provides useful additional information to existing clinicopathologic scoring systems of prostate cancer and improves the assignment of treatment (eg, AS or active treatment).

Project description:PurposeTo retrospectively assess whether magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging and selected molecular markers correlate with each other and with clinically insignificant and significant prostate cancer (PCa), as defined at surgical pathologic analysis.Materials and methodsThe institutional review board approved this HIPAA-compliant study and waived informed consent. Eighty-nine men (mean age, 63 years; range, 46-79 years) with biopsy-proved PCa underwent combined endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging before radical prostatectomy. Suspicion of clinically insignificant PCa was retrospectively and separately recorded for MR imaging and combined MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging by using a scale of 0-3. Clinically insignificant PCa was pathologically defined as organ-confined cancer of 0.5 cm(3) or less without poorly differentiated elements. Prostatectomy specimens underwent immunohistochemical analysis for three molecular markers: Ki-67, phospho-Akt (pAkt), and androgen receptor (AR). To examine differences in marker levels for clinically insignificant and significant cancer, a Wilcoxon rank sum test was used. To examine correlations between marker levels and MR imaging or combined MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging scores, the Spearman correlation was used.ResultsTwenty-one (24%) patients had clinically insignificant and 68 (76%) had clinically significant PCa at surgical pathologic review. All markers were significantly correlated with MR imaging and combined MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging findings (all correlation coefficients >0.5). In differentiating clinically insignificant from clinically significant PCa, areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves for Ki-67, AR, pAkt, MR imaging, and combined MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging were 0.75, 0.78, 0.80, 0.85, and 0.91, respectively.ConclusionThe use of pretreatment MR imaging or combined MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging and molecular marker analyses of biopsy samples could facilitate better treatment selection.Supplemental materialhttp://radiology.rsnajnls.org/cgi/content/full/250/3/803/DC1.

Project description:PurposeTo determine the incremental benefit of combined endorectal magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging, as compared with endorectal MR imaging alone, for sextant localization of peripheral zone (PZ) prostate cancer.Materials and methodsThis prospective multicenter study, conducted by the American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ACRIN) from February 2004 to June 2005, was institutional review board approved and HIPAA compliant. Research associates were required to follow consent guidelines approved by the Office for Human Research Protection and established by the institutional review boards. One hundred thirty-four patients with biopsy-proved prostate adenocarcinoma and scheduled to undergo radical prostatectomy were recruited at seven institutions. T1-weighted, T2-weighted, and spectroscopic MR sequences were performed at 1.5 T by using a pelvic phased-array coil in combination with an endorectal coil. Eight readers independently rated the likelihood of the presence of PZ cancer in each sextant by using a five-point scale-first on MR images alone and later on combined MR-MR spectroscopic images. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs) were calculated with sextant as the unit of analysis. The presence or absence of cancer at centralized histopathologic evaluation of prostate specimens was the reference standard. Reader-specific receiver operating characteristic curves for values obtained with MR imaging alone and with combined MR imaging-MR spectroscopic imaging were developed. The AUCs were estimated by using Mann-Whitney statistics and appropriate 95% confidence intervals.ResultsComplete data were available for 110 patients (mean age, 58 years; range, 45-72 years). MR imaging alone and combined MR imaging-MR spectroscopic imaging had similar accuracy in PZ cancer localization (AUC, 0.60 vs 0.58, respectively; P > .05). AUCs for individual readers were 0.57-0.63 for MR imaging alone and 0.54-0.61 for combined MR imaging-MR spectroscopic imaging.ConclusionIn patients who undergo radical prostatectomy, the accuracy of combined 1.5-T endorectal MR imaging-MR spectroscopic imaging for sextant localization of PZ prostate cancer is equal to that of MR imaging alone.

Project description:Many men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer can postpone definitive treatment without raising their risk of metastasis or death from disease. Active surveillance (AS) is a method of monitoring select men, with the option of switching to active treatment upon signs of progression, thereby avoiding the well-known side-effects of surgery and radiotherapy. This review analyzes the data from long-running AS cohorts to determine the safety and efficacy of AS. We conducted a narrative review of recently published data, including 14 articles from 13 AS cohorts. The cohorts used varying inclusion criteria, with reported differences in clinical T stage and Gleason Score (Grade Group), among other features. Some studies (n=5) limited their cohorts to low-risk patients, while others (n=8) also included intermediate-risk patients. The heterogeneity of the cohorts produced mixed results, with the risk of prostate cancer metastasis ranging from 0.1-1.0% at 10 years and the risk of prostate cancer mortality ranging from 0-1.9% at 10 years. However, the majority of studies reported risks of less than 0.5% at 10 years for both metastasis and death. For most cohorts, half of men remained untreated for 5-10 years, with estimates ranging from 37% receiving active treatment in the Toronto cohort to 73% in the Prostate Cancer Research International AS (PRIAS) study. Current data do not support the use of negative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to avoid scheduled biopsy. Taken together, the data collected from these AS cohorts suggests that AS is a safe approach for men with low-grade prostate cancer and some men with intermediate risk disease. AS should be more broadly implemented for eligible patients to avoid the decreases in quality of life from undergoing active treatment. Studies expanding the inclusion criteria and further defining a subset of men with favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer who might safely benefit from AS are needed to assess the long-term outcomes of using AS in intermediate-risk groups.

Dataset Information

Prostate cancer managed with active surveillance: role of anatomic MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets