Katarzyna J. Macura

PI-RADS Prostate Imaging – Reporting and Data System: 2015, Version 2

The Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System Version 2 (PI-RADS™ v2) is the product of an international collaboration of the American College of Radiology (ACR), European Society of Uroradiology (ESUR), and AdMetech Foundation. It is designed to promote global standardization and diminish variation in the acquisition, interpretation, and reporting of prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) examination, and it is based on the best available evidence and expert consensus opinion. It establishes minimum acceptable technical parameters for prostate mpMRI, simplifies and standardizes terminology and content of reports, and provides assessment categories that summarize levels of suspicion or risk of clinically significant prostate cancer that can be used to assist selection of patients for biopsies and management. It is intended to be used in routine clinical practice and also to facilitate data collection and outcome monitoring for research.

Prostate cancer: sextant localization at MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging before prostatectomy--results of ACRIN prospective multi-institutional clinicopathologic study.

PURPOSE To determine the incremental benefit of combined endorectal magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging, as compared with endorectal MR imaging alone, for sextant localization of peripheral zone (PZ) prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS This prospective multicenter study, conducted by the American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ACRIN) from February 2004 to June 2005, was institutional review board approved and HIPAA compliant. Research associates were required to follow consent guidelines approved by the Office for Human Research Protection and established by the institutional review boards. One hundred thirty-four patients with biopsy-proved prostate adenocarcinoma and scheduled to undergo radical prostatectomy were recruited at seven institutions. T1-weighted, T2-weighted, and spectroscopic MR sequences were performed at 1.5 T by using a pelvic phased-array coil in combination with an endorectal coil. Eight readers independently rated the likelihood of the presence of PZ cancer in each sextant by using a five-point scale-first on MR images alone and later on combined MR-MR spectroscopic images. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs) were calculated with sextant as the unit of analysis. The presence or absence of cancer at centralized histopathologic evaluation of prostate specimens was the reference standard. Reader-specific receiver operating characteristic curves for values obtained with MR imaging alone and with combined MR imaging-MR spectroscopic imaging were developed. The AUCs were estimated by using Mann-Whitney statistics and appropriate 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS Complete data were available for 110 patients (mean age, 58 years; range, 45-72 years). MR imaging alone and combined MR imaging-MR spectroscopic imaging had similar accuracy in PZ cancer localization (AUC, 0.60 vs 0.58, respectively; P > .05). AUCs for individual readers were 0.57-0.63 for MR imaging alone and 0.54-0.61 for combined MR imaging-MR spectroscopic imaging. CONCLUSION In patients who undergo radical prostatectomy, the accuracy of combined 1.5-T endorectal MR imaging-MR spectroscopic imaging for sextant localization of PZ prostate cancer is equal to that of MR imaging alone.

Diffusion-weighted imaging improves the diagnostic accuracy of conventional 3.0-T breast MR imaging

PURPOSE To evaluate the incremental value of diffusion-weighted (DW) imaging and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) mapping in relation to conventional breast magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in the characterization of benign versus malignant breast lesions at 3.0 T. MATERIALS AND METHODS This retrospective HIPAA-compliant study was approved by the institutional review board, with the requirement for informed patient consent waived. Of 550 consecutive patients who underwent bilateral breast MR imaging over a 10-month period, 93 women with 101 lesions met the following study inclusion criteria: They had undergone three-dimensional (3D) high-spatial-resolution T1-weighted contrast material-enhanced MR imaging, dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging, and DW imaging examinations at 3.0 T and either had received a pathologic analysis-proven diagnosis (96 lesions) or had lesion stability confirmed at more than 2 years of follow-up (five lesions). DW images were acquired with b values of 0 and 600 sec/mm(2). Regions of interest were drawn on ADC maps of breast lesions and normal glandular tissue. Morphologic features (margin, enhancement pattern), dynamic contrast-enhanced MR results (semiquantitative kinetic curve data), absolute ADCs, and glandular tissue-normalized ADCs were included in multivariate models to predict a diagnosis of benign versus malignant lesion. RESULTS Forty-one (44%) of the 93 patients were premenopausal, and 52 (56%) were postmenopausal. Thirty-three (32.7%) of the 101 lesions were benign, and 68 (67.3%) were malignant. Normalized ADCs were significantly different between the benign (mean ADC, 1.1 x 10(-3) mm(2)/sec +/- 0.4 [standard deviation]) and malignant (mean ADC, 0.55 x 10(-3) mm(2)/sec +/- 0.16) lesions (P < .001). Adding normalized ADCs to the 3D T1-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR data improved the diagnostic performance of MR imaging: The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve improved from 0.89 to 0.98, and the false-positive rate decreased from 36% (nine of 25 lesions) to 24% (six of 25 lesions). CONCLUSION DW imaging with glandular tissue-normalized ADC assessment improves the characterization of breast lesions beyond the characterization achieved with conventional 3D T1-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging at 3.0 T.

Synopsis of the PI-RADS v2 Guidelines for Multiparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Recommendations for Use

Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands; Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA; University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, USA; Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA; University Hospital of Bern, Bern, Switzerland; AdMeTech Foundation, Boston, MA, USA; g Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, Middlesex, UK; University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA; i Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA; University of Toronto, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada; Rene Descartes University, Paris, France; National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA

Principles and Applications of Diffusion-weighted Imaging in Cancer Detection, Staging, and Treatment Follow-up

Diffusion-weighted imaging relies on the detection of the random microscopic motion of free water molecules known as Brownian movement. With the development of new magnetic resonance (MR) imaging technologies and stronger diffusion gradients, recent applications of diffusion-weighted imaging in whole-body imaging have attracted considerable attention, especially in the field of oncology. Diffusion-weighted imaging is being established as a pivotal aspect of MR imaging in the evaluation of specific organs, including the breast, liver, kidney, and those in the pelvis. When used in conjunction with apparent diffusion coefficient mapping, diffusion-weighted imaging provides information about the functional environment of water in tissues, thereby augmenting the morphologic information provided by conventional MR imaging. Detected changes include shifts of water from extracellular to intracellular spaces, restriction of cellular membrane permeability, increased cellular density, and disruption of cellular membrane depolarization. These findings are commonly associated with malignancies; therefore, diffusion-weighted imaging has many applications in oncologic imaging and can aid in tumor detection and characterization and in the prediction and assessment of response to therapy.

3.0-T MR Imaging of the Abdomen: Comparison with 1.5 T

Three-tesla magnetic resonance (MR) imaging offers substantially higher signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) than 1.5-T MR imaging does, which can be used to improve image resolution and shorten imaging time. Because of these increases in SNR and CNR, as well as changes in T1 and T2 relaxation times, an increase in magnetic susceptibility, and an increase in chemical shift effect, many abdominal applications can benefit from 3.0-T imaging. Increased CNR obtained with a gadolinium-based contrast agent improves lesion conspicuity, requires less intravenous contrast material, and improves MR angiography by increasing spatial and temporal resolution. Increased SNR improves fluid conspicuity and resolution for applications such as MR cholangiopancreatography. Increased chemical shift effect also improves spectral resolution for MR spectroscopy. Several potential problems remain for abdominal imaging at 3.0 T. Limitations on energy deposition may require compromises in pulse sequence timing and flip angles. These compromises result in prolonged imaging time and altered image contrast. Magnetic susceptibility and chemical shift artifacts are worsened, but they may be counteracted by shortening echo time, performing parallel imaging, and increasing bandwidth. Radiofrequency field inhomogeneity is also a major concern in imaging larger fields of view and often leads to standing wave effects and large local variations in signal intensity. Many issues related to MR device compatibility and safety have yet to be addressed at 3.0 T. A 3.0-T MR imaging system has a higher initial cost and a higher cost of upkeep than a 1.5-T system does.

Advancements in MR Imaging of the Prostate: From Diagnosis to Interventions

Prostate cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in males and the second leading cause of cancer-related death in men. Assessment of prostate cancer can be divided into detection, localization, and staging; accurate assessment is a prerequisite for optimal clinical management and therapy selection. Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging has been shown to be of particular help in localization and staging of prostate cancer. Traditional prostate MR imaging has been based on morphologic imaging with standard T1-weighted and T2-weighted sequences, which has limited accuracy. Recent advances include additional functional and physiologic MR imaging techniques (diffusion-weighted imaging, MR spectroscopy, and perfusion imaging), which allow extension of the obtainable information beyond anatomic assessment. Multiparametric MR imaging provides the highest accuracy in diagnosis and staging of prostate cancer. In addition, improvements in MR imaging hardware and software (3-T vs 1.5-T imaging) continue to improve spatial and temporal resolution and the signal-to-noise ratio of MR imaging examinations. Another recent advancement in the field is MR imaging guidance for targeted prostate biopsy, which is an alternative to the current standard of transrectal ultrasonography-guided systematic biopsy.

Aortic Distensibility and Retinal Arteriolar Narrowing. The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis

Increased aortic stiffness and retinal arteriolar narrowing are subclinical vascular effects of chronic hypertension and predict future cardiovascular events. The relationship between these 2 vascular measures is uncertain and is examined in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis. This cross-sectional analysis involves 3425 participants (aged 45 to 85 years) free of clinical cardiovascular disease. Retinal vascular caliber was quantified from digital retinal photographs using standardized protocols. Aortic distensibility was determined from chest MRI. After controlling for age, squared age, gender, race, study center, height, weight, heart rate, cigarette smoking, past and current systolic blood pressure, use of antihypertensive medications, diabetes, fasting glucose, lipid profile, and C-reactive protein, reduced aortic distensibility (first versus fourth distensibility quartile) was associated with increased odds of retinal arteriolar narrowing (odds ratio: 1.72; 95% CI: 1.15 to 2.58, comparing lowest to highest quartile of arteriolar caliber). Further adjustments for atherosclerotic measures (carotid intima-media thickness, coronary calcium score, and ankle brachial index) had minimal impact on this association (odds ratio: 1.70; 95% CI: 1.13 to 2.55). Reduced aortic distensibility was not associated with retinal venular caliber. We conclude that increased aortic stiffness is associated with retinal arteriolar narrowing, independent of measured blood pressure levels and vascular risk factors. These data suggest that changes in the microvasculature may play a role linking aortic stiffness with clinical cardiovascular events.

18F-DCFBC PET/CT for PSMA-Based Detection and Characterization of Primary Prostate Cancer

We previously demonstrated the ability to detect metastatic prostate cancer using N-[N-[(S)-1,3-dicarboxypropyl]carbamoyl]-4-18F-fluorobenzyl-l-cysteine (18F-DCFBC), a low-molecular-weight radiotracer that targets the prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA). PSMA has been shown to be associated with higher Gleason grade and more aggressive disease. An imaging biomarker able to detect clinically significant high-grade primary prostate cancer reliably would address an unmet clinical need by allowing for risk-adapted patient management. Methods: We enrolled 13 patients with primary prostate cancer who were imaged with 18F-DCFBC PET before scheduled prostatectomy, with 12 of these patients also undergoing pelvic prostate MR imaging. Prostate 18F-DCFBC PET was correlated with MR imaging and histologic and immunohistochemical analysis on a prostate-segment (12 regions) and dominant-lesion basis. There were no incidental extraprostatic findings on PET suggestive of metastatic disease. Results: MR imaging was more sensitive than 18F-DCFBC PET for detection of primary prostate cancer on a per-segment (sensitivities of up to 0.17 and 0.39 for PET and MR imaging, respectively) and per-dominant-lesion analysis (sensitivities of 0.46 and 0.92 for PET and MR imaging, respectively). However, 18F-DCFBC PET was more specific than MR imaging by per-segment analysis (specificities of 0.96 and 0.89 for PET and MR imaging for corresponding sensitivity, respectively) and specific for detection of high-grade lesions (Gleason 8 and 9) greater than 1.0 mL in size (4/4 of these patients positive by PET). 18F-DCFBC uptake in tumors was positively correlated with Gleason score (ρ = 0.64; PSMA expression, ρ = 0.47; and prostate-specific antigen, ρ = 0.52). There was significantly lower 18F-DCFBC uptake in benign prostatic hypertrophy than primary tumors (median maximum standardized uptake value, 2.2 vs. 3.5; P = 0.004). Conclusion: Although the sensitivity of 18F-DCFBC for primary prostate cancer was less than MR imaging, 18F-DCFBC PET was able to detect the more clinically significant high-grade and larger-volume tumors (Gleason score 8 and 9) with higher specificity than MR imaging. In particular, there was relatively low 18F-DCFBC PET uptake in benign prostatic hypertrophy lesions, compared with cancer in the prostate, which may allow for more specific detection of primary prostate cancer by 18F-DCFBC PET. This study demonstrates the utility of PSMA-based PET, which may be used in conjunction with MR imaging to identify clinically significant prostate cancer.

Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast: Quantitative method for kinetic curve type assessment

OBJECTIVE The type of contrast enhancement kinetic curve (i.e., persistently enhancing, plateau, or washout) seen on dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) of the breast is predictive of malignancy. Qualitative estimates of the type of curve are most commonly used for interpretation of DCE-MRI. The purpose of this study was to compare qualitative and quantitative methods for determining the type of contrast enhancement kinetic curve on DCE-MRI. MATERIALS AND METHODS Ninety-six patients underwent breast DCE-MRI. The type of DCE-MRI kinetic curve was assessed qualitatively by three radiologists on two occasions. For quantitative assessment, the slope of the washout curve was calculated. Kappa statistics were used to determine inter- and intraobserver agreement for the qualitative method. Matched sample tables, the McNemar test, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve statistics were used to compare quantitative versus qualitative methods for establishing or excluding malignancy. RESULTS Seventy-eight lesions (77.2%) were malignant and 23 (22.8%) were benign. For the qualitative assessment, the intra- and interobserver agreement was good (kappa = 0.76-0.88), with an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.73-0.77. For the quantitative method, the highest AUC was 0.87, reflecting significantly higher diagnostic accuracies compared with qualitative assessment (p < 0.01 for the difference between the two methods). CONCLUSION Quantitative assessment of the type of contrast enhancement kinetic curve on breast DCE-MRI resulted in significantly higher diagnostic performance for establishing or excluding malignancy compared with assessment based on the standard qualitative method.