Prostate cancer: Is inapparent tumor at endorectal MR and MR spectroscopic imaging a favorable prognostic finding in patients who select active surveillance?

被引:36
|
作者
Cabrera, Alvin R. [1 ]
Coakley, Fergus V. [1 ]
Westphalen, Antonio C. [1 ]
Lu, Ying [1 ]
Zhao, Shoujun [1 ]
Shinohara, Katsuto [2 ]
Carroll, Peter R. [2 ]
Kurhanewicz, John [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif San Francisco, Dept Radiol, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA
[2] Univ Calif San Francisco, Dept Urol, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1148/radiol.2472070770
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Purpose: To retrospectively determine whether inapparent tumor at endorectal magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging is a favorable prognostic finding in prostate cancer patients who select active surveillance for management. Materials and Methods: Committee on Human Research approval was obtained and compliance with HIPAA regulations was observed, with waiver of requirement for written consent. Ninety-two men (mean age, 64 years; range, 43-85 years) were retrospectively identified who had biopsy-proved prostate cancer, who had undergone baseline endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging, and who had selected active surveillance for management. Their mean baseline serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level was 5.5 ng/mL, and the median Gleason score was 6. Two readers with 10 and 3 years of experience independently reviewed all MR images and determined whether tumor was apparent on the basis of evaluation of established morphologic and metabolic findings. Another investigator compiled data about baseline clinical stage, biopsy findings, and serum PSA measurements. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to investigate the relationship between the clinical parameters and tumor apparency at MR imaging and the biochemical outcome. Results: At baseline MR imaging, readers 1 and 2 considered 54 and 26 patients, respectively, to have inapparent tumor (fair interobserver agreement; kappa = 0.30). During a mean follow-up of 4.8 years, 52 patients had a stable PSA level and 40 had an increasing PSA level. In multivariate analysis, no significant association was found between the baseline clinical stage, Gleason score, serum PSA level, or the presence of apparent tumor at endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging for either reader and the biochemical outcome (P>.05 for all). Conclusion: Endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging findings of tumor apparency or inapparency in prostate cancer patients who select active surveillance for management do not appear to be of prognostic value.
引用
收藏
页码:444 / 450
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Prostate cancer detection: magnetic resonance (MR) spectroscopic imaging
    Joan C. Vilanova
    Joaquim Barceló
    Abdominal Imaging, 2007, 32 : 253 - 261
  • [42] Prostate cancer detection:: magnetic resonance (MR) spectroscopic imaging
    Vilanova, Joan C.
    Barcelo, Joaquim
    ABDOMINAL IMAGING, 2007, 32 (02): : 253 - 261
  • [43] Organ-confined prostate cancer: Effect of prior trans rectal biopsy on endorectal MRI and MR spectroscopic imaging
    Qayyum, A
    Coakley, FV
    Lu, Y
    Olpin, JD
    Wu, L
    Yeh, BM
    Carroll, PR
    Kurhanewicz, J
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2004, 183 (04) : 1079 - 1083
  • [45] PROSTATE CANCER: VALUE OF INAPPARENT TUMOUR AT ENDORECTAL MR (1,5 TESLA PPA) IN EVALUATING LOCAL EXTENSION
    Luyckx, F.
    Chauveau, P.
    Hallouin, P.
    Barre, C.
    Aillet, G.
    Bouchot, O.
    Rigaud, J.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY SUPPLEMENTS, 2010, 9 (02) : 232 - 232
  • [46] Is endorectal coil necessary for the staging of clinically localized prostate cancer? Comparison of non-endorectal versus endorectal MR imaging
    Lee, Seung Hwan
    Park, Kyung Kgi
    Choi, Kyung Hwa
    Lim, Beom Jin
    Kim, Joo Hee
    Lee, Seung Wook
    Chung, Byung Ha
    WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2010, 28 (06) : 667 - 672
  • [47] Seminal Vesicle Invasion in Prostate Cancer: Evaluation by Using Multiparametric Endorectal MR Imaging
    Soylu, Fatma Nur
    Peng, Yahui
    Jiang, Yulei
    Wang, Shiyang
    Schmid-Tannwald, Christine
    Sethi, Ila
    Eggener, Scott
    Antic, Tatjana
    Oto, Aytekin
    RADIOLOGY, 2013, 267 (03) : 797 - 806
  • [48] COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF ENDORECTAL MR-IMAGING FOR STAGING OF PROSTATE-CANCER
    LANGLOTZ, CP
    SCHNALL, MD
    MALKOWICZ, SB
    RADIOLOGY, 1995, 197 : 254 - 254
  • [49] ENDORECTAL COIL MR IMAGING OF PROSTATE-CANCER - PREDICTION OF NEUROVASCULAR BUNDLE INVOLVEMENT
    KING, BF
    FALLON, MJ
    RIFE, CC
    FARROW, GM
    HATTERY, RR
    RADIOLOGY, 1992, 185 : 276 - 276
  • [50] Brachytherapy for prostate cancer: Endorectal MR imaging of local treatment-related changes
    Coakley, FV
    Hricak, H
    Wefer, AE
    Speight, JL
    Kurhanewicz, J
    Roach, M
    RADIOLOGY, 2001, 219 (03) : 817 - 821