Prostate Cancer: Diffusion-Weighted Imaging Versus Dynamic-Contrast Enhanced Imaging for Tumor Localization—A Meta-Analysis

Purpose The purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic performance of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) imaging for prostate cancer (PCa) detection by performing a meta-analysis of studies evaluating these techniques within the same patient cohort. Methods Evidence-based online databases were searched for studies reporting the performance of DWI and DCE in PCa detection in the same patient cohorts using histopathology as reference standard and providing sufficient data to construct 2 × 2 contingency tables. Pooled estimates of diagnostic performance were computed across included studies. Results Of 80 initial studies identified, 5 studies (total of 265 patients and 1730 prostatic regions) met criteria for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Pooled sensitivity was 58.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 53.5%–63.1%) for DWI and 55.3% (95% CI, 50.4%–60.1%) for DCE. Pooled specificity was 89.0% (95% CI, 87.2%–0.7%) for DWI and 87.9% (95% CI, 86.0%–89.6%) for DCE. At summary receiver-operating-characteristic analysis, area-under-the-curve was 0.810 (0.059) for DWI and 0.786 (0.079) for DCE. Heterogeneity across studies was high for sensitivity and specificity [inconsistency index (I2), >90%], although heterogeneity of specificity was substantially improved after excluding an outlier study in terms of diagnostic threshold (I2 = 0.0%–68.8%). Relative performance of DWI and DCE remained similar after this exclusion Conclusions There was a paucity of studies comparing DWI and DCE in the same patient cohorts, and heterogeneity among these studies was substantial. Nevertheless, performance of DWI and DCE was similar across identified studies, with both techniques showing substantially better specificity than sensitivity. Larger studies with uniform methodology are warranted to further understand relative merits of the 2 techniques.

[1]  P. Mozer,et al.  Validation of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology scoring system for prostate cancer diagnosis on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in a cohort of repeat biopsy patients. , 2012, European urology.

[2]  Cher Heng Tan,et al.  Diffusion-weighted MRI in the detection of prostate cancer: meta-analysis. , 2012, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[3]  Jiani Hu,et al.  The clinical value of diffusion-weighted imaging in combination with T2-weighted imaging in diagnosing prostate carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2012, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[4]  Baris Turkbey,et al.  Overview of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in prostate cancer diagnosis and management. , 2012, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[5]  Jian-Rong Xu,et al.  Usefulness of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. , 2012, Academic radiology.

[6]  J. Fütterer,et al.  ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012 , 2012, European Radiology.

[7]  M. Colombel,et al.  Is it possible to model the risk of malignancy of focal abnormalities found at prostate multiparametric MRI? , 2012, European Radiology.

[8]  Baris Turkbey,et al.  Multiparametric 3T prostate magnetic resonance imaging to detect cancer: histopathological correlation using prostatectomy specimens processed in customized magnetic resonance imaging based molds. , 2011, The Journal of urology.

[9]  Thomas Hambrock,et al.  Prostate cancer: multiparametric MR imaging for detection, localization, and staging. , 2011, Radiology.

[10]  T. Sone,et al.  Prostate cancer detection in patients with total serum prostate-specific antigen levels of 4-10 ng/mL: diagnostic efficacy of diffusion-weighted imaging, dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI, and T2-weighted imaging. , 2011, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[11]  Ralph Strecker,et al.  Areas suspicious for prostate cancer: MR-guided biopsy in patients with at least one transrectal US-guided biopsy with a negative finding--multiparametric MR imaging for detection and biopsy planning. , 2011, Radiology.

[12]  Yousef Mazaheri,et al.  Diffusion-weighted endorectal MR imaging at 3 T for prostate cancer: tumor detection and assessment of aggressiveness. , 2011, Radiology.

[13]  Josep Comet,et al.  Usefulness of prebiopsy multifunctional and morphologic MRI combined with free-to-total prostate-specific antigen ratio in the detection of prostate cancer. , 2011, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[14]  Dan Stoianovici,et al.  Advancements in MR imaging of the prostate: from diagnosis to interventions. , 2011, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[15]  Thomas Hambrock,et al.  Relationship between apparent diffusion coefficients at 3.0-T MR imaging and Gleason grade in peripheral zone prostate cancer. , 2011, Radiology.

[16]  François Cornud,et al.  Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for the detection and localization of prostate cancer: combination of T2‐weighted, dynamic contrast‐enhanced and diffusion‐weighted imaging , 2011, BJU international.

[17]  B. Carey,et al.  Magnetic resonance imaging for the detection, localisation, and characterisation of prostate cancer: recommendations from a European consensus meeting. , 2011, European urology.

[18]  S. Verma,et al.  Assessment of aggressiveness of prostate cancer: correlation of apparent diffusion coefficient with histologic grade after radical prostatectomy. , 2011, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[19]  Aytekin Oto,et al.  Prostate cancer: differentiation of central gland cancer from benign prostatic hyperplasia by using diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. , 2010, Radiology.

[20]  D. Portalez,et al.  Prospective comparison of T2w-MRI and dynamic-contrast-enhanced MRI, 3D-MR spectroscopic imaging or diffusion-weighted MRI in repeat TRUS-guided biopsies , 2010, European Radiology.

[21]  C. Kim,et al.  Diffusion-weighted MRI at 3 T for the evaluation of prostate cancer. , 2010, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[22]  Kazuro Sugimura,et al.  Prostate cancer detection with 3 T MRI: Comparison of diffusion‐weighted imaging and dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI in combination with T2‐weighted imaging , 2010, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[23]  Baris Turkbey,et al.  Imaging localized prostate cancer: current approaches and new developments. , 2009, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[24]  Masao Fukunaga,et al.  Prostate cancer: relationships between postbiopsy hemorrhage and tumor detectability at MR diagnosis. , 2008, Radiology.

[25]  Matthias Taupitz,et al.  Evaluation of Normal Prostate Tissue, Chronic Prostatitis, and Prostate Cancer by Quantitative Perfusion Analysis Using a Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Inversion-Prepared Dual-Contrast Gradient Echo Sequence , 2008, Investigative radiology.

[26]  Oliver Sartor,et al.  Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer: a critical appraisal of rationale and modalities. , 2007, The Journal of urology.

[27]  Javier Zamora,et al.  Meta-DiSc : a software for meta-analysis of test accuracy data , 2015 .

[28]  Wolfhard Semmler,et al.  Simple models improve the discrimination of prostate cancers from the peripheral gland by T1-weighted dynamic MRI , 2004, European Radiology.

[29]  S. Thompson,et al.  Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis , 2002, Statistics in medicine.

[30]  D P Dearnaley,et al.  Dynamic contrast enhanced MRI of prostate cancer: correlation with morphology and tumour stage, histological grade and PSA. , 2000, Clinical radiology.

[31]  Mariann F. Brown,et al.  Microvascularity in benign prostatic hyperplasia , 1995, The Prostate.

[32]  L E Moses,et al.  Combining independent studies of a diagnostic test into a summary ROC curve: data-analytic approaches and some additional considerations. , 1993, Statistics in medicine.