4.7 Article

Multiparametric 3T endorectal mri after external beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer

Journal

JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING
Volume 36, Issue 2, Pages 430-437

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.23672

Keywords

MRI; MR spectroscopy; diffusion MRI; prostate cancer; radiation therapy

Funding

  1. RSNA Research & Education Foundation [RSCH0709]
  2. NIH/NCRR/OD UCSF-CTSI [KL2 RR024130]
  3. National Institutes of Health (NIH) [R01CA059897, R01CA111291]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To determine the best combination of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) parameters for the detection of locally recurrent prostate cancer after external beam radiation therapy. Materials and Methods: Our Institutional Review Board approved this study with a waiver of informed consent. Twenty-six patients with suspected recurrence due to biochemical failure were part of this research. The MR protocol included T2-weighted, MR spectroscopy, and diffusion-weighted MRI. Transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy was the standard of reference. We used logistic regression to model the probability of a positive outcome and generalized estimating equations to account for clustering. The diagnostic performance of imaging was described using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Results: The area under the ROC curve of MR spectroscopic imaging (MRSI) was 83.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 75.589.1). The combination of all MR techniques did not significantly improve the performance of imaging beyond the accuracy of MRSI alone, but a trend toward improved discrimination was noted (86.9%; 95% CI = 77.693.4; P = 0.09). Conclusion: Incorporation of MRSI to T2-weighted and/or diffusion-weighted MRI significantly improves the assessment of patients with suspected recurrence after radiotherapy and a combined approach with all three modalities may have the best diagnostic performance. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2012;36:430437. (c) 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available