Hebert Alberto Vargas

Diffusion-weighted Endorectal MR Imaging at 3 T for Prostate Cancer: Tumor Detection and Assessment of Aggressiveness

PURPOSE To assess the incremental value of diffusion-weighted (DW) magnetic resonance (MR) imaging over T2-weighted MR imaging at 3 T for prostate cancer detection and to investigate the use of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) to characterize tumor aggressiveness, with whole-mount step-section pathologic analysis as the reference standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS The Internal Review Board approved this HIPAA-compliant retrospective study and waived informed consent. Fifty-one patients with prostate cancer (median age, 58 years; range, 46-74 years) underwent T2-weighted MR imaging and DW MR imaging (b values: 0 and 700 sec/mm(2) [n = 20] or 0 and 1000 sec/mm(2) [n = 31]) followed by prostatectomy. The prostate was divided into 12 regions; two readers provided a score for each region according to their level of suspicion for the presence of cancer on a five-point scale, first using T2-weighted MR imaging alone and then using T2-weighted MR imaging and the ADC map in conjunction. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs) were estimated to evaluate performance. Generalized estimating equations were used to test the ADC difference between benign and malignant prostate regions and the association between ADCs and tumor Gleason scores. RESULTS For tumor detection, the AUCs for readers 1 and 2 were 0.79 and 0.76, respectively, for T2-weighted MR imaging and 0.79 and 0.78, respectively, for T2-weighted MR imaging plus the ADC map. Mean ADCs for both cancerous and healthy prostatic regions were lower when DW MR imaging was performed with a b value of 1000 sec/mm(2) rather than 700 sec/mm(2). Regardless of the b value used, there was a significant difference in the mean ADC between malignant and benign prostate regions. A lower mean ADC was significantly associated with a higher tumor Gleason score (mean ADCs of [1.21, 1.10, 0.87, and 0.69] × 10(-3) mm(2)/sec were associated with Gleason score of 3 + 3, 3 + 4, 4 + 3, and 8 or higher, respectively; P = .017). CONCLUSION Combined DW and T2-weighted MR imaging had similar performance to T2-weighted MR imaging alone for tumor detection; however, DW MR imaging provided additional quantitative information that significantly correlated with prostate cancer aggressiveness.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Predicting Prostate Biopsy Findings in Patients Considered for Active Surveillance of Clinically Low Risk Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE A barrier to the acceptance of active surveillance for men with prostate cancer is the risk of underestimating the cancer burden on initial biopsy. We assessed the value of endorectal magnetic resonance imaging in predicting upgrading on confirmatory biopsy in men with low risk prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS A total of 388 consecutive men (mean age 60.6 years, range 33 to 89) with clinically low risk prostate cancer (initial biopsy Gleason score 6 or less, prostate specific antigen less than 10 ng/ml, clinical stage T2a or less) underwent endorectal magnetic resonance imaging before confirmatory biopsy. Three radiologists independently and retrospectively scored tumor visibility on endorectal magnetic resonance imaging using a 5-point scale (1-definitely no tumor to 5-definitely tumor). Inter-reader agreement was assessed with weighted kappa statistics. Associations between magnetic resonance imaging scores and confirmatory biopsy findings were evaluated using measures of diagnostic performance and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS On confirmatory biopsy, Gleason score was upgraded in 79 of 388 (20%) patients. Magnetic resonance imaging scores of 2 or less had a high negative predictive value (0.96-1.0) and specificity (0.95-1.0) for upgrading on confirmatory biopsy. A magnetic resonance imaging score of 5 was highly sensitive for upgrading on confirmatory biopsy (0.87-0.98). At multivariate analysis patients with higher magnetic resonance imaging scores were more likely to have disease upgraded on confirmatory biopsy (odds ratio 2.16-3.97). Inter-reader agreement and diagnostic performance were higher for the more experienced readers (kappa 0.41-0.61, AUC 0.76-0.79) than for the least experienced reader (kappa 0.15-0.39, AUC 0.61-0.69). Magnetic resonance imaging performed similarly in predicting low risk and very low risk (Gleason score 6, less than 3 positive cores, less than 50% involvement in all cores) prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS Adding endorectal magnetic resonance imaging to the initial clinical evaluation of men with clinically low risk prostate cancer helps predict findings on confirmatory biopsy and assess eligibility for active surveillance.

Prostate Cancer Aggressiveness: Assessment with Whole-Lesion Histogram Analysis of the Apparent Diffusion Coefficient

PURPOSE To evaluate the relationship between prostate cancer aggressiveness and histogram-derived apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) parameters obtained from whole-lesion assessment of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of the prostate and to determine which ADC metric may help best differentiate low-grade from intermediate- or high-grade prostate cancer lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS The institutional review board approved this retrospective HIPAA-compliant study of 131 men (median age, 60 years) who underwent diffusion-weighted MR imaging before prostatectomy for prostate cancer. Clinically significant tumors (tumor volume > 0.5 mL) were identified at whole-mount step-section histopathologic examination, and Gleason scores of the tumors were recorded. A volume of interest was drawn around each significant tumor on ADC maps. The mean, median, and 10th and 25th percentile ADCs were determined from the whole-lesion histogram and correlated with the Gleason score by using the Spearman correlation coefficient (ρ). The ability of each parameter to help differentiate tumors with a Gleason score of 6 from those with a Gleason score of at least 7 was assessed by using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (Az). RESULTS In total, 116 clinically significant lesions (89 in the peripheral zone, 27 in the transition zone) were identified in 85 of the 131 patients (65%). Forty-six patients did not have a clinically significant lesion. For mean ADC, median ADC, 10th percentile ADC, and 25th percentile ADC, the Spearman ρ values for correlation with Gleason score were -0.31, -0.30, -0.36, and -0.35, respectively, whereas the Az values for differentiating lesions with a Gleason score of 6 from those with a Gleason score of at least 7 were 0.704, 0.692, 0.758, and 0.723, respectively. The Az of 10th percentile ADC was significantly higher than that of the mean ADC for all lesions and peripheral zone lesions (P = .0001). CONCLUSION When whole-lesion histograms were used to derive ADC parameters, 10th percentile ADC correlated with Gleason score better than did other ADC parameters, suggesting that 10th percentile ADC may prove to be optimal for differentiating low-grade from intermediate- or high-grade prostate cancer with diffusion-weighted MR imaging.

MR Imaging of Treated Prostate Cancer

Many management options are available to patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer. Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging plays an important role in initial staging of prostate cancer, but it also aids in tumor detection when there is clinical or biochemical suspicion of residual or recurrent disease after treatment. The purpose of this review is to describe the normal appearances of the prostatic region after different kinds of treatment for prostate cancer and to discuss how these appearances differ from those of recurrent and residual disease. Several MR imaging techniques used in evaluating patients with prostate cancer are described, including conventional MR imaging sequences (mainly T1- and T2-weighted sequences), MR spectroscopic imaging, diffusion-weighted imaging, and dynamic contrast agent-enhanced MR imaging. Clinical considerations, together with the different approaches for interpreting serum prostate-specific antigen values in the posttreatment setting, are also presented. All forms of treatment alter the MR imaging features of the prostatic region to a greater or lesser extent, and it is important to be able to recognize expected posttreatment appearances and distinguish them from the features of recurrent or residual cancer to aid subsequent clinical management.

Performance Characteristics of MR Imaging in the Evaluation of Clinically Low-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Prospective Study

PURPOSE To prospectively evaluate diagnostic performance of T2-weighted magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging in detecting lesions stratified by pathologic volume and Gleason score in men with clinically determined low-risk prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS The institutional review board approved this prospective, HIPAA-compliant study. Written informed consent was obtained from 183 men with clinically low-risk prostate cancer (cT1-cT2a, Gleason score≤6 at biopsy, prostate-specific antigen [PSA] level<10 ng/mL [10 μg/L]) undergoing MR imaging before prostatectomy. By using a scale of 1-5 (score 1, definitely no tumor; score 5, definitely tumor), two radiologists independently scored likelihood of tumor per sextant on T2-weighted images. Two spectroscopists jointly recorded locations of lesions with metabolic features consistent with tumor on MR spectroscopic images. Whole-mount step-section histopathologic analysis constituted the reference standard. Diagnostic performance at sextant level (T2-weighted imaging) and detection sensitivities (T2-weighted imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging) for lesions of 0.5 cm3 or larger were calculated. RESULTS For T2-weighted imaging, areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves for sextant-level detection were 0.77 (reader 1) and 0.82 (reader 2). For lesions of ≥0.5 cm3 and, 1<cm3, sensitivities were significantly lower when the lesion Gleason score was ≤6 (0.44 [reader 1] and 0.61 [reader 2]) rather than when the Gleason score was ≥7 (0.73, P=.02 [reader 1]; and 0.84, P=.05 [reader 2]). For lesions of ≥1 cm3, lesion Gleason score did not significantly affect sensitivity (0.83 [reader 1] and 1.00 [reader 2] for Gleason score≤6 vs 0.82 and 0.92 for Gleason score≥7; P≥.07). MR spectroscopic imaging sensitivity was low and was not significantly affected by pathologic lesion volume or Gleason score. CONCLUSION In men with clinically low-risk prostate cancer, detection of lesions of <1 cm3 with T2-weighted imaging is significantly dependent on lesion Gleason score; detection of lesions of ≥1 cm3 is significantly better than detection of smaller lesions and is not affected by lesion Gleason score. The role of MR spectroscopic imaging alone in this population is limited.

Multiparametric Prostate MR Imaging with T2-weighted, Diffusion-weighted, and Dynamic Contrast-enhanced Sequences: Are All Pulse Sequences Necessary to Detect Locally Recurrent Prostate Cancer after Radiation Therapy?

PURPOSE To compare diagnostic accuracy of T2-weighted magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with that of multiparametric (MP) MR imaging combining T2-weighted imaging with diffusion-weighted (DW) MR imaging, dynamic contrast material-enhanced (DCE) MR imaging, or both in the detection of locally recurrent prostate cancer (PCa) after radiation therapy (RT). MATERIALS AND METHODS This retrospective HIPAA-compliant study was approved by the institutional review board; informed consent was waived. Fifty-three men (median age, 70 years) suspected of having post-RT recurrence of PCa underwent MP MR imaging, including DW and DCE sequences, within 6 months after biopsy. Two readers independently evaluated the likelihood of PCa with a five-point scale for T2-weighted imaging alone, T2-weighted imaging with DW imaging, T2-weighted imaging with DCE imaging, and T2-weighted imaging with DW and DCE imaging, with at least a 4-week interval between evaluations. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were calculated. Interreader agreement was assessed, and quantitative parameters (apparent diffusion coefficient [ADC], volume transfer constant [K(trans)], and rate constant [k(ep)]) were assessed at sextant- and patient-based levels with generalized estimating equations and the Wilcoxon rank sum test, respectively. RESULTS At biopsy, recurrence was present in 35 (66%) of 53 patients. In detection of recurrent PCa, T2-weighted imaging with DW imaging yielded higher AUCs (reader 1, 0.79-0.86; reader 2, 0.75-0.81) than T2-weighted imaging alone (reader 1, 0.63-0.67; reader 2, 0.46-0.49 [P ≤ .014 for all]). DCE sequences did not contribute significant incremental value to T2-weighted imaging with DW imaging (reader 1, P > .99; reader 2, P = .35). Interreader agreement was higher for combinations of MP MR imaging than for T2-weighted imaging alone (κ = 0.34-0.63 vs κ = 0.17-0.20). Medians of quantitative parameters differed significantly (P < .0001 to P = .0233) between benign tissue and PCa (ADC, 1.64 × 10(-3) mm(2)/sec vs 1.13 × 10(-3) mm(2)/sec; K(trans), 0.16 min(-1) vs 0.33 min(-1); k(ep), 0.36 min(-1) vs 0.62 min(-1)). CONCLUSION MP MR imaging has greater accuracy in the detection of recurrent PCa after RT than T2-weighted imaging alone, with no additional benefit if DCE is added to T2-weighted imaging and DW imaging.

Renal Cortical Tumors: Use of Multiphasic Contrast-enhanced MR Imaging to Differentiate Benign and Malignant Histologic Subtypes

PURPOSE To investigate the use of quantitative multiphasic contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in differentiating between common benign and malignant histologic subtypes of renal cortical tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS The institutional review board waived informed consent and approved this retrospective HIPAA-compliant study of 138 patients who underwent preoperative contrast-enhanced MR imaging during the period of January 2004-December 2008. At surgery, 152 renal tumors were identified (77 clear cell, 22 papillary, 18 chromophobe, and 10 unclassified carcinomas; 16 oncocytomas; nine angiomyolipomas). Three readers independently identified and measured the most-enhanced area in each tumor and placed corresponding regions of interest in similar positions on images from the precontrast, corticomedullary, nephrographic, and excretory phases. The percentage change in signal intensity (%SI change) between precontrast imaging and each postcontrast phase was calculated. Interreader agreement was evaluated by using the overall concordance correlation coefficient (OCC). A linear mixed-effects model was used to estimate and compare the trajectories of the means of log %SI change across all phases between the six histologic subtypes. RESULTS Interreader agreement was substantial to almost perfect (OCC, 0.77-0.88). The %SI change differed significantly between clear cell carcinomas and papillary and chromophobe carcinomas in all phases of enhancement (P < .0001-.0120). In addition, %SI change was significantly higher in angiomyolipomas than in clear cell carcinomas, but only in the corticomedullary phase (P = .0231). Enhancement did not differ significantly between clear cell carcinoma and oncocytoma in any phase (P = .2081-.6000). CONCLUSION Quantitative multiphase contrast-enhanced MR imaging offers a widely available, reproducible method to characterize several histologic subtypes of renal cortical tumors, although it does not aid differentiation between clear cell carcinomas and oncocytomas.

Transition Zone Prostate Cancer: Incremental Value of Diffusion-weighted Endorectal MR Imaging in Tumor Detection and Assessment of Aggressiveness

PURPOSE To evaluate the incremental value of using diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in addition to T2-weighted imaging for the detection of prostate cancer in the transition zone and the assessment of tumor aggressiveness. MATERIALS AND METHODS This retrospective HIPAA-compliant institutional review board-approved study included 156 consecutive patients (median age, 59.2 years) who underwent MR imaging before radical prostatectomy. Two readers who were blinded to patient data independently recorded their levels of suspicion on a five-point scale of the presence of transition zone tumors on the basis of T2-weighted imaging alone and then, 4 weeks later, diffusion-weighted imaging and T2-weighted imaging together. Apparent diffusion coefficients (ADCs) were measured in transition zone cancers and glandular and stromal benign prostatic hyperplasia. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves were used to evaluate detection accuracy, and generalized linear models were used to test ADC differences between benign and malignant prostate regions. Whole-mount step-section histopathologic examination was the reference standard. RESULTS In overall tumor detection, addition of diffusion-weighted imaging to T2-weighted imaging improved the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves for readers 1 and 2 from 0.60 and 0.60 to 0.75 and 0.71, respectively, at the patient level (P = .004 for reader 1 and P = .027 for reader 2) and from 0.64 and 0.63 to 0.73 and 0.68, respectively, at the sextant level (P = .001 for reader 1 and P = .100 for reader 2). Least squares mean ADCs (× 10(-3) mm(2)/sec) in glandular and stromal benign prostatic hyperplasia were 1.44 and 1.09, respectively. Mean ADCs were inversely associated with tumor Gleason scores (1.10, 0.98, 0.87, and 0.75 for Gleason scores of 3 + 3, 3 + 4, 4 + 3, and ≥ 4 + 4, respectively). CONCLUSION Use of diffusion-weighted imaging in addition to T2-weighted imaging improved detection of prostate cancer in the transition zone, and tumor ADCs were inversely associated with tumor Gleason scores in the transition zone.

Normal Central Zone of the Prostate and Central Zone Involvement by Prostate Cancer: Clinical and MR Imaging Implications

PURPOSE To describe the anatomic features of the central zone of the prostate on T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted (DW) magnetic resonance (MR) images and evaluate the diagnostic performance of MR imaging in detection of central zone involvement by prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS The institutional review board waived informed consent and approved this retrospective, HIPAA-compliant study of 211 patients who underwent T2-weighted and DW MR imaging of the prostate before radical prostatectomy. Whole-mount step-section pathologic findings were the reference standard. Two radiologists independently recorded the visibility, MR signal intensity, size, and symmetry of the central zone and scored the likelihood of central zone involvement by cancer on T2-weighted MR images and on T2-weighted MR images plus apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps generated from the DW MR images. Descriptive summary statistics were calculated for central zone imaging features. Sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve were used to evaluate reader performance in detecting central zone involvement. RESULTS For readers 1 and 2, the central zone was visible, at least partially, in 177 (84%) and 170 (81%) of 211 patients, respectively. The most common imaging appearance of the central zone was symmetric, homogeneous low signal intensity. Cancers involving the central zone had higher prostate-specific antigen values, Gleason scores, and rates of extracapsular extension and seminal vesicle invasion compared with cancers not involving the central zone (P < .05). Area under the curve, sensitivity, and specificity in detecting central zone involvement were 0.70, 0.30, and 0.96 for reader 1 and 0.65, 0.35, and 0.93 for reader 2, and these values did not differ significantly between T2-weighted imaging and T2-weighted imaging plus ADC maps. CONCLUSION The central zone was visualized in most patients. Cancers involving the central zone were associated with more aggressive disease than those without central zone involvement.

Value of the Hemorrhage Exclusion Sign on T1-weighted Prostate MR Images for the Detection of Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE To retrospectively determine the prevalence and positive predictive value (PPV) of the hemorrhage exclusion sign on T1-weighted magnetic resonance (MR) images in conjunction with findings on T2-weighted images in the detection of prostate cancer, with use of whole-mount step-section pathologic specimens from prostatectomy as the reference standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS The institutional review board approved this retrospective study, which was compliant with HIPAA, and the requirement to obtain informed consent was waived. Two hundred ninety-two patients with biopsy-proved prostate cancer underwent endorectal MR imaging followed by prostatectomy. The hemorrhage exclusion sign was defined as the presence of a well-defined area of low signal intensity surrounded by areas of high signal intensity on T1-weighted images. Two readers independently assessed the presence and extent of postbiopsy changes and the hemorrhage exclusion sign. The presence of a corresponding area of homogeneous low signal intensity on T2-weighted images was also recorded. The prevalence and PPV of the hemorrhage exclusion sign were calculated. RESULTS Readers 1 and 2 found postbiopsy changes in the peripheral zone in 184 (63%) and 189 (64.7%) of the 292 patients, respectively. In these patients, the hemorrhage exclusion sign was observed in 39 of 184 patients (21.2%) by reader 1 and 36 of 189 patients (19.0%) by reader 2. A corresponding area of homogeneous low signal intensity was seen on T2-weighted images in the same location as the hemorrhage exclusion sign in 23 of 39 patients (59%) by reader 1 and 19 of 36 patients (53%) by reader 2. The PPV of the hemorrhage exclusion sign alone was 56% (22 of 39 patients) for reader 1 and 50% (18 of 36 patients) for reader 2 but increased to 96% (22 of 23 patients) and 95% (18 of 19 patients) when the sign was identified in an area of homogeneous low signal intensity on T2-weighted images. CONCLUSION Postbiopsy change is a known pitfall in the interpretation of T2-weighted images. The authors have shown that a potential benefit of postbiopsy change is the presence of excluded hemorrhage, which, in conjunction with a corresponding area of homogeneous low signal intensity at T2-weighted imaging, is highly accurate for cancer identification.