The purpose of this study is to compare the blind interpretations of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sequences, diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), mapping, and magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) of the prostate, in comparison to prostate biopsy to identify a valid dominant intraprostatic lesion (DIL) for dose escalation using high-dose rate brachytherapy.
FREE DAILY AND WEEKLY NEWSLETTERS OFFERED BY CONTENT OF INTEREST
Did you find this article relevant? Subscribe to UroToday-GUOncToday!
The fields of GU Oncology and Urology are advancing rapidly including new treatments, enrolling clinical trials, screening and surveillance recommendations along with updated guidelines. Join us as one of our subscribers who rely on UroToday as their must-read source for the latest news and data on drugs. Sign up today for blogs, video conversations, conference highlights and abstracts from peer-review publications by disease and condition delivered to your inbox and read on the go.
MRI/MRS were performed on 20 patients with intermediate risk adenocarcinoma of the prostate. T1W, T2W, DWI-ADC, and MRS sequences were performed at 1.5 T with pelvic and endorectal coils. An experienced radiologist rated the presence of cancer in each sextant by using a dichotomic approach, first on MR standard acquisitions (T1W and T2W), then on DWI-ADC mapping, and later on MRS images. Areas under the receiver's operating characteristic curve were calculated using a sextant as the unit of analysis. The transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy results were used as the reference standard. A table summarizing the MRI/MRS findings was made and compared to the corresponding area in the prostate biopsy report. A perfect match was defined to be the presence of cancer in the same sextant of the MRI/MRS exam and the prostate biopsy.
The interpretation of the MRI/MRS exams per sextant was compared to the diagnostic biopsy report. MRI readings were compared with the biopsy as a surrogate for the complete pathology specimen of the prostate. A sensitivity (Sn) of 98.6% (95% confidence interval, 92.2% - 99.9%) and specificity (Sp) of 60.8% (46.1% - 74.2%) were found. The positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV) were 77.3% (67.1% - 85.5%) and 96.9% (83.8% - 99.9%), respectively. When MRS readings were compared with biopsy, we found a Sn of 96.4% (87.7% - 99.6%) and Sp of 54.8% (38.7% - 70.2%). The PPV and NPV were 74% (62.4% - 83.6%) and 92% (74% - 99%), respectively. DWI-ADC mapping results were also compared with biopsy. We found a Sn and Sp of 93.7% (84.5% - 98.2%) and 82.1% (66.5% - 92.5%), respectively, and a PPV and NPV of 89.4% (79.4% - 95.6%) and 88.9% (73.9% - 96.9%), respectively. Finally, after combining MRI, MRS, and DWI-ADC mapping, compared with biopsy, we obtained a Sn, Sp, PPV, and NPV of 100% (94.8% - 100%), 49% (34.8% - 63.4%), 72.6% (62.5% - 81.3%), and 100% (86.3% - 100%), respectively.
The combination of MRI/MRS is a sensitive tool for both the structural and metabolic evaluation of prostate cancer location. MRI/MRS exams are useful to delineate a DIL for high-dose-rate (HDR) intraprostatic boost.
Cureus. 2016 Sep 21*** epublish ***
Eric Vigneault, Khaly Mbodji, Louis G Racine, Eric Chevrette, Marie C Lavallee, André-Guy Martin, Philippe Despres, Luc Beaulieu
Radiation-Oncology, Hotel Dieu de Quebc., Centre de recherche du CHU de Québec, CHU de Québec - Université Laval., Département d'imagerie médicale, CHU de Québec - Université Laval., Département de radio-oncologie, CHU de Québec - Université Laval., Département de radio-oncologie, Département de physique, de génie physique et d'optique, CHU de Québec - Université Laval.