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 1

PURPOSE To prospectively investigate the incremental value of multiparametric magnetic resonance (MR) imaging compared with standard T2-weighted imaging for biopsy planning. MATERIALS AND METHODS The study was approved by the institutional review board; informed consent was obtained. Consecutive patients underwent T2-weighted imaging supplemented with multiparametric 1.5-T MR imaging, consisting of hydrogen 1 ((1)H) MR spectroscopy, diffusion-weighted (DW) imaging, and contrast material-enhanced MR imaging. Quantitative parameters were calculated: (choline plus creatine)-to-citrate ratio, apparent diffusion coefficient, and volume transfer constant and exchange rate constant. The prostate was divided into 20 standardized areas. Each area was classified as benign, inconclusive, or suspicious at T2-weighted imaging, followed by quantitative evaluation of all inconclusive and suspicious areas with multiparametric MR imaging. MR-guided biopsy was performed in lesions classified as suspicious for cancer with at least one of the techniques after transfer to three-dimensional T2-weighted images. Diagnostic parameters were calculated on a per-lesion and per-patient basis for all combinations of T2-weighted imaging with multiparametric MR imaging. RESULTS Fifty-four patients had a median of two prior transrectal ultrasonographic biopsies with negative findings. Each patient had a median of three suspicious lesions. Prostate cancer was demonstrated in 21 of 54 patients. Biopsy was performed in 178 lesions; 53 were positive for prostate cancer. Detection rates and test negative results, respectively, were as follows: T2-weighted imaging, 70% and 50%; T2-weighted imaging and (1)H MR spectroscopy, 81% and 32%; T2-weighted imaging and contrast-enhanced MR imaging, 83% and 29%; T2-weighted imaging and DW imaging, 85% and 30%; T2-weighted imaging, (1)H MR spectroscopy, and contrast-enhanced MR imaging, 91% and 13%; T2-weighted imaging, (1)H MR spectroscopy, and DW imaging, 94% and 15%; T2-weighted imaging, DW imaging, and contrast-enhanced MR imaging, 94% and 13%; T2-weighted imaging, (1)H MR spectroscopy, DW imaging, and contrast-enhanced MR imaging, 100% and 0%. CONCLUSION Only the combination of T2-weighted imaging with all three multiparametric techniques depicts all identifiable prostate cancers; a double combination with DW imaging and (1)H MR spectroscopy or contrast-enhanced MR imaging misses 6%, while reasonably reducing the number of areas needing biopsy.

[1]  G. Parker,et al.  Prostate cancer: evaluation of vascular characteristics with dynamic contrast-enhanced T1-weighted MR imaging--initial experience. , 2004, Radiology.

[2]  A. Evans,et al.  Prostate tissue composition and MR measurements: investigating the relationships between ADC, T2, K(trans), v(e), and corresponding histologic features. , 2010, Radiology.

[3]  Heinz-Peter Schlemmer,et al.  MRI-guided biopsy of the prostate increases diagnostic performance in men with elevated or increasing PSA levels after previous negative TRUS biopsies. , 2006, European urology.

[4]  H. Hricak,et al.  Detection of prostate cancer with MR spectroscopic imaging: an expanded paradigm incorporating polyamines. , 2007, Radiology.

[5]  R. Lucht,et al.  Microcirculation and microvasculature in breast tumors: Pharmacokinetic analysis of dynamic MR image series , 2004, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[6]  A Heerschap,et al.  Method for quantitative mapping of dynamic MRI contrast agent uptake in human tumors , 2001, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[7]  Xavier Leroy,et al.  Dynamic contrast-enhanced-magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of intraprostatic prostate cancer: correlation with radical prostatectomy specimens. , 2009, Urology.

[8]  Stephan E Maier,et al.  Biexponential characterization of prostate tissue water diffusion decay curves over an extended b-factor range. , 2006, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[9]  H. Huisman,et al.  Standardized Threshold Approach Using Three-Dimensional Proton Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopic Imaging in Prostate Cancer Localization of the Entire Prostate , 2007, Investigative radiology.

[10]  A S Whittemore,et al.  Localized prostate cancer. Relationship of tumor volume to clinical significance for treatment of prostate cancer , 1993, Cancer.

[11]  T. Sone,et al.  Age‐related and zonal anatomical changes of apparent diffusion coefficient values in normal human prostatic tissues , 2008, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[12]  Masoom A Haider,et al.  Combined T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted MRI for localization of prostate cancer. , 2007, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[13]  A. Thompson,et al.  MRI in the detection of prostate cancer: combined apparent diffusion coefficient, metabolite ratio, and vascular parameters. , 2009, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[14]  Bernd Hamm,et al.  Patients with a history of elevated prostate-specific antigen levels and negative transrectal US-guided quadrant or sextant biopsy results: value of MR imaging. , 2002, Radiology.

[15]  A. Jemal,et al.  Cancer Statistics, 2009 , 2009, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[16]  D. Beyersdorff,et al.  MR imaging-guided prostate biopsy with a closed MR unit at 1.5 T: initial results. , 2005, Radiology.

[17]  M. Orton,et al.  Robust estimation of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) in heterogeneous solid tumors , 2009, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[18]  P. Tofts,et al.  Measurement of the blood‐brain barrier permeability and leakage space using dynamic MR imaging. 1. Fundamental concepts , 1991, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[19]  Matthias Taupitz,et al.  Prostate MR imaging: tissue characterization with pharmacokinetic volume and blood flow parameters and correlation with histologic parameters. , 2009, Radiology.

[20]  S. Riederer,et al.  Optimizing the precision in T1 relaxation estimation using limited flip angles , 1987, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[21]  W. Catalona,et al.  Serial prostatic biopsies in men with persistently elevated serum prostate specific antigen values. , 1994, The Journal of urology.

[22]  B. Kiefer,et al.  Prostate biopsy in the supine position in a standard 1.5-T scanner under real time MR-imaging control using a MR-compatible endorectal biopsy device , 2006, European Radiology.

[23]  M. Bock,et al.  Automatic passive tracking of an endorectal prostate biopsy device using phase‐only cross‐correlation , 2008, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[24]  Martin O Leach,et al.  Reference tissue quantification of DCE-MRI data without a contrast agent calibration , 2007, Physics in medicine and biology.

[25]  Katsuyoshi Ito,et al.  Apparent diffusion coefficient values in peripheral and transition zones of the prostate: Comparison between normal and malignant prostatic tissues and correlation with histologic grade , 2008, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[26]  M. Knopp,et al.  Dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI using Gd‐DTPA: Interindividual variability of the arterial input function and consequences for the assessment of kinetics in tumors , 2001, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[27]  William J Catalona,et al.  Serial biopsy results in prostate cancer screening study. , 2002, The Journal of urology.

[28]  C Schwenke,et al.  Analysis of Differences in Proportions from Clustered Data with Multiple Measurements in Diagnostic Studies , 2007, Methods of Information in Medicine.

[29]  J. Presti Repeat prostate biopsy--when, where, and how. , 2009, Urologic oncology.

[30]  T. Stamey,et al.  Zonal Distribution of Prostatic Adenocarcinoma: Correlation with Histologic Pattern and Direction of Spread , 1988, The American journal of surgical pathology.

[31]  Thomas Hambrock,et al.  Thirty-Two-Channel Coil 3T Magnetic Resonance-Guided Biopsies of Prostate Tumor Suspicious Regions Identified on Multimodality 3T Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Technique and Feasibility , 2008, Investigative Radiology.

[32]  A. Jackson,et al.  Experimentally‐derived functional form for a population‐averaged high‐temporal‐resolution arterial input function for dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI , 2006, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[33]  M. Knopp,et al.  Estimating kinetic parameters from dynamic contrast‐enhanced t1‐weighted MRI of a diffusable tracer: Standardized quantities and symbols , 1999, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[34]  C. Abbou,et al.  EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. , 2009, European urology.

[35]  Mark Rijpkema,et al.  Combined quantitative dynamic contrast‐enhanced MR imaging and 1H MR spectroscopic imaging of human prostate cancer , 2004, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[36]  P. Carroll,et al.  Three-dimensional H-1 MR spectroscopic imaging of the in situ human prostate with high (0.24-0.7-cm3) spatial resolution. , 1996, Radiology.

[37]  Fernando J. Kim,et al.  Combined T 2-weighted and diffusion-weighted MRI for localization of prostate cancer , 2007 .

[38]  Jason A Koutcher,et al.  Prostate cancer: identification with combined diffusion-weighted MR imaging and 3D 1H MR spectroscopic imaging--correlation with pathologic findings. , 2008, Radiology.

[39]  Evis Sala,et al.  Transition zone prostate cancers: features, detection, localization, and staging at endorectal MR imaging. , 2006, Radiology.