Combined PET/MRI Improves Diagnostic Accuracy in Patients with Prostate Cancer: A Prospective Diagnostic Trial

Purpose: The pretherapeutic assessment of prostate cancer is challenging and still holds the risk of over- or undertreatment. This prospective trial investigates positron emission tomography (PET) with [18F]fluoroethylcholine (FEC) combined with endorectal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the assessment of primary prostate cancer. Experimental design: Patients with prostate cancer based on needle biopsy findings, scheduled for radical prostatectomy, were assessed by FEC-PET and MRI in identical positioning. After prostatectomy, imaging results were compared with histologic whole-mount sections, and the PET/MRI lesion-based semiquantitative FEC uptake was compared with biopsy Gleason scores and postoperative histology. Results: PET/MRI showed a patient-based sensitivity of 95% (36/38; 95% confidence interval (CI), 82%–99%). The analysis of 128 prostate lesions demonstrated a sensitivity/specificity/positive predictive value/negative predictive value/accuracy of 67%/35%/59%/44%/54% (P = 0.8295) for MRI and 85%/45%/68%/69%/68% (P = 0.0021) for PET, which increased to 84%/80%/85%/78%/82% (P < 0.0001) by combined FEC-PET/MRI in lesions >5 mm (n = 98). For lesions in patients with Gleason >6 tumors (n = 43), MRI and PET achieved 73%/31%/71%/33%/60% (P = 1.0000) and 90%/62%/84%/73%/81% (P = 0.0010), which were improved to 87%/92%/96%/75%/88% (P < 0.0001) by combined PET/MRI. Applying semiquantitative PET analysis, carcinomas with Gleason scores >6 were distinguished from those with Gleason ≤6 with a specificity of 90% and a positive predictive value of 83% (P = 0.0011; needle biopsy 71%/60%, P = 0.1071). Conclusions: In a prospective diagnostic trial setting, combined FEC-PET/MRI achieved very high sensitivity in the detection of the dominant malignant lesion of the prostate, and markedly improved upon PET or MRI alone. Noninvasive Gleason score assessment was more precise than needle biopsy in this patient cohort. Hence, FEC-PET/MRI merits further investigation in trials of randomized, multiarm design. Clin Cancer Res; 20(12); 3244–53. ©2014 AACR.

[1]  A. Afshar-Oromieh,et al.  Potenziale der PET/MRT in der Diagnostik des Prostatakarzinoms , 2013, Der Radiologe.

[2]  L. Bachmann,et al.  The role of 11C-choline and 18F-fluorocholine positron emission tomography (PET) and PET/CT in prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2013, European urology.

[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]  Timothy J Wilt,et al.  Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer. , 2012, The New England journal of medicine.

[5]  H. Ahmed,et al.  Focal therapy for localised unifocal and multifocal prostate cancer: a prospective development study , 2012, The Lancet. Oncology.

[6]  R. Shah,et al.  Introducing Parametric Fusion PET/MRI of Primary Prostate Cancer , 2012, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[7]  D. Bostwick,et al.  Understanding the pathological features of focality, grade and tumour volume of early‐stage prostate cancer as a foundation for parenchyma‐sparing prostate cancer therapies: active surveillance and focal targeted therapy , 2011, BJU international.

[8]  J. Epstein Prognostic significance of tumor volume in radical prostatectomy and needle biopsy specimens. , 2011, The Journal of urology.

[9]  Ziding Feng,et al.  Prediction of patient‐specific risk and percentile cohort risk of pathological stage outcome using continuous prostate‐specific antigen measurement, clinical stage and biopsy Gleason score , 2011, BJU international.

[10]  M. Schwaiger,et al.  The Sensitivity of [11C]Choline PET/CT to Localize Prostate Cancer Depends on the Tumor Configuration , 2011, Clinical Cancer Research.

[11]  T. Ziese,et al.  German cancer statistics 2004 , 2010, BMC Cancer.

[12]  P. Waldenberger,et al.  18F choline PET/CT in the preoperative staging of prostate cancer in patients with intermediate or high risk of extracapsular disease: a prospective study of 130 patients. , 2010, Radiology.

[13]  Peter H Gann,et al.  Prostate specific antigen best practice statement: 2009 update. , 2009, The Journal of urology.

[14]  Xunbo Jin,et al.  C-11 Choline PET/CT Imaging for Differentiating Malignant From Benign Prostate Lesions , 2008, Clinical nuclear medicine.

[15]  S. Reske [11C]Choline uptake with PET/CT for the initial diagnosis of prostate cancer: relation to PSA levels, tumour stage and anti-androgenic therapy , 2008, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[16]  V. Bettinardi,et al.  [11C]Choline uptake with PET/CT for the initial diagnosis of prostate cancer: relation to PSA levels, tumour stage and anti-androgenic therapy , 2008, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[17]  Tristan Barrett,et al.  Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of prostate cancer at 3 T: a study of pharmacokinetic parameters. , 2007, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

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

[19]  A. D'Amico,et al.  Guideline for the management of clinically localized prostate cancer: 2007 update. , 2007, The Journal of urology.

[20]  M. Graefen,et al.  Role of nomograms for prostate cancer in 2007 , 2007, World Journal of Urology.

[21]  Sven Perner,et al.  Imaging prostate cancer with 11C-choline PET/CT. , 2006, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[22]  Yuri Kitamura,et al.  Conventional MRI capabilities in the diagnosis of prostate cancer in the transition zone. , 2006, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[23]  M. Zerbib,et al.  Negative prostatic biopsies in patients with a high risk of prostate cancer. Is the combination of endorectal MRI and magnetic resonance spectroscopy imaging (MRSI) a useful tool? A preliminary study. , 2005, European urology.

[24]  M. Terris,et al.  Prostate Biopsy Volume Indices do not Predict for Significant Gleason Upgrading , 2005, American journal of clinical oncology.

[25]  J. Pruim,et al.  In vivo uptake of [11C]choline does not correlate with cell proliferation in human prostate cancer , 2005, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[26]  Vladimir Bilim,et al.  Dynamic contrast‐enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE‐MRI) is a useful modality for the precise detection and staging of early prostate cancer , 2005, The Prostate.

[27]  W S Ng,et al.  Endorectal magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy for the detection of tumor foci in men with prior negative transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsy. , 2004, The Journal of urology.

[28]  G. Cable,et al.  Meta-analysis of prostate-specific antigen and digital rectal examination as screening tests for prostate carcinoma. , 2003, The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice.

[29]  Jelle O. Barentsz,et al.  Local staging of prostate cancer using magnetic resonance imaging: a meta-analysis , 2002, European Radiology.

[30]  T. Hara,et al.  Development of (18)F-fluoroethylcholine for cancer imaging with PET: synthesis, biochemistry, and prostate cancer imaging. , 2002, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[31]  M Bolla,et al.  EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. , 2001, European urology.

[32]  E J Halpern,et al.  Using gray-scale and color and power Doppler sonography to detect prostatic cancer. , 2000, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[33]  C. Sundaram,et al.  Biopsy Gleason score: how does it correlate with the final pathological diagnosis in prostate cancer? , 1997, British journal of urology.

[34]  Thomas Hambrock,et al.  Transition zone prostate cancer: detection and localization with 3-T multiparametric MR imaging. , 2013, Radiology.

[35]  A. Jemal,et al.  Cancer statistics, 2012 , 2012, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[36]  M Bolla,et al.  EAU guidelines on prostate cancer . Part I : screening , diagnosis , and treatment of clinically localised disease , 2012 .

[37]  Y. Sekido,et al.  Hepatocyte Growth Factor Reduces Susceptibility to an Irreversible Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Inhibitor in EGFR-T790M Mutant Lung Cancer , 2010 .

[38]  N. Dubrawsky Cancer statistics , 1989, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.