Impact of qualitative, semi-quantitative, and quantitative analyses of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnet resonance imaging on prostate cancer detection.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
20
12
2020
accepted:
22
03
2021
entrez:
5
4
2021
pubmed:
6
4
2021
medline:
21
9
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Dynamic contrast enhanced imaging (DCE) as an integral part of multiparametric prostate magnet resonance imaging (mpMRI) can be evaluated using qualitative, semi-quantitative, or quantitative assessment methods. Aim of this study is to analyze the clinical benefits of these evaluations of DCE regarding clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection and grading. 209 DCE data sets of 103 consecutive patients with mpMRI (T2, DWI, and DCE) and subsequent MRI-(in-bore)-biopsy were retrospectively analyzed. Qualitative DCE evaluation according to PI-RADS v2.1, semi-quantitative (curve type; DCE score according to PI-RADS v1), and quantitative Tofts analyses (Ktrans, kep, and ve) as well as PI-RADS v1 and v2.1 overall classification of 209 lesions (92 PCa, 117 benign lesions) were performed. Of each DCE assessment method, cancer detection, discrimination of csPCa, and localization were assessed and compared to histopathology findings. All DCE analyses (p<0.01-0.05), except ve (p = 0.02), showed significantly different results for PCa and benign lesions in the peripheral zone (PZ) with area under the curve (AUC) values of up to 0.92 for PI-RADS v2.1 overall classification. In the transition zone (TZ) only the qualitative DCE evalulation within PI-RADS (v1 and v2.1) could distinguish between PCa and benign lesions (p<0.01; AUC = 0.95). None of the DCE parameters could differentiate csPCa from non-significant (ns) PCa (p ≥ 0.1). Qualitative analysis of DCE within mpMRI according to PI-RADS version 2.1 showed excellent results regarding (cs)PCa detection. Semi-quantitative and quantitative parameters provided no additional improvements. DCE alone wasn't able to discriminate csPCa from nsPCa.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33819295
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0249532
pii: PONE-D-20-39963
pmc: PMC8021163
doi:
Substances chimiques
Contrast Media
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0249532Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016 Jan;206(1):92-9
pubmed: 26700339
Abdom Radiol (NY). 2020 Jul;45(7):2225-2234
pubmed: 31549211
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2015 Aug;42(2):477-87
pubmed: 25410482
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015 Apr;204(4):W439-48
pubmed: 25794093
Lancet. 2017 Feb 25;389(10071):815-822
pubmed: 28110982
Magn Reson Imaging. 2015 Dec;33(10):1236-1245
pubmed: 26297961
Eur Urol. 2015 Oct;68(4):713-20
pubmed: 26116294
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007 Oct;189(4):849
pubmed: 17885055
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013 Sep;201(3):W471-8
pubmed: 23971479
Clin Radiol. 2013 Jun;68(6):e323-30
pubmed: 23528164
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2018 Aug;211(2):379-382
pubmed: 29894218
Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2014 Jun;11(6):346-53
pubmed: 24840072
Eur Urol. 2016 Jan;69(1):16-40
pubmed: 26427566
Acta Oncol. 2019 Aug;58(8):1118-1126
pubmed: 30994052
Top Magn Reson Imaging. 2008 Dec;19(6):273-84
pubmed: 19512849
Can J Urol. 2008 Feb;15(1):3866-71
pubmed: 18304396
Eur Radiol. 2012 Apr;22(4):746-57
pubmed: 22322308
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2018 Aug;211(2):369-378
pubmed: 29894216
Eur Urol. 2019 Sep;76(3):340-351
pubmed: 30898406
Am J Surg Pathol. 2016 Feb;40(2):244-52
pubmed: 26492179
J Urol. 2014 Nov;192(5):1374-9
pubmed: 24866597
Transl Androl Urol. 2017 Jun;6(3):499-509
pubmed: 28725592
Radiology. 2015 May;275(2):448-57
pubmed: 25559231
Physiol Chem Phys Med NMR. 1984;16(2):167-72
pubmed: 6505043