The Use of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Management of Prostate Cancer

  • Matthieu Durand
  • Aude Fregeville
  • Naveen Gumpeni
  • Abhishek Srivastava
  • Prasanna Sooriakumaran
  • Siobhan Gruschow
  • Niyati Harneja
  • Kristin M. Saunders
  • Jean Amiel
  • Ashutosh K. Tewari
Chapter

Abstract

In the current era, the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has become routine for the evaluation and management of prostate cancer (PCa), with most patients undergoing a 1.5-T MRI. There is a direct relationship between magnet strength and spatial resolution of the image: the higher the magnet, the higher the spatial resolution. In a 3-T MRI, a phased array pelvic coil is used instead of an endorectal coil, which could decrease patient refusal to undergo MR imaging due to avoidance of the discomfort associated with an endorectal coil. Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) has become the gold standard in PCa scanning and is more reliable than T2-weighted (T2W) MRI alone [1]. The T2-weighted MRI sequence has a lower specificity due to a high frequency of low signal intensity foci, which causes false positives. In standard practice, multiparametric imaging modalities are based on the combination of T2-weighted (T2W-MRI), dynamic contrast enhancement (DCE-MRI), and diffusion-weighted imaging (DW-MRI) to improve detection, location, and characterization of PCa. Due to its time-consuming nature, another technique known as MR spectroscopy (MRSI) is likely to be restricted for scientific purposes.

Keywords

Permeability Toxicity Citrate Choline Creatine 

References

  1. 1.
    Seitz M, Shukla-Dave A, Bjartell A, et al. Functional magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2009;55(4):801–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tanimoto A, Nakashima J, Kohno H, Shinmoto H, Kuribayashi S. Prostate cancer screening: the clinical value of diffusion-weighted imaging and dynamic MR imaging in combination with T2-weighted imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2007;25(1):146–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Weinreb JC, Blume JD, Coakley FV, et al. Prostate cancer: sextant localization at MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging before prostatectomy – results of ACRIN prospective multi-institutional clinicopathologic study. Radiology. 2009;251(1):122–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Eggener S, Salomon G, Scardino PT, et al. Focal therapy for prostate cancer: possibilities and limitations. Eur Urol. 2010;58(1):57–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mullerad M, Hricak H, Kuroiwa K, et al. Comparison of endorectal magnetic resonance imaging, guided prostate biopsy and digital rectal examination in the preoperative anatomical localization of prostate cancer. J Urol. 2005;174(6):2158–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Carroll PR, Coakley FV, Kurhanewicz J. Magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy of prostate cancer. Rev Urol. 2006;8 Suppl 1:S4–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Heijmink SW, Fütterer JJ, Hambrock T, et al. Prostate cancer: body-array versus endorectal coil MR imaging at 3 T – comparison of image quality, localization, and staging performance. Radiology. 2007;244(1):184–95.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fütterer JJ, Heijmink SW, Scheenen TW, et al. Prostate cancer: local staging at 3-T endorectal MR imaging – early experience1. Radiology. 2006;238(1):184–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mazaheri Y, Hricak H, Fine SW, et al. Prostate tumor volume measurement with combined T2-weighted imaging and diffusion-weighted MR: correlation with pathologic tumor volume. Radiology. 2009;252(2):449–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lawrentschuk N, Haider MA, Daljeet N, et al. ‘Prostatic evasive anterior tumours’: the role of magnetic resonance imaging. BJU Int. 2010;105(9):1231–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hambrock T, Somford DM, Hoeks C, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging guided prostate biopsy in men with repeat negative biopsies and increased prostate specific antigen. J Urol. 2010;183(2):520–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Beyersdorff D, Taupitz M, Winkelmann B, et al. Patients with a history of elevated prostate-specific antigen levels and negative transrectal US–guided quadrant or sextant biopsy results: value of MR imaging. Radiology. 2002;224(3):701–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Prando A, Kurhanewicz J, Borges AP, Oliveira Jr EM, Figueiredo E. Prostatic biopsy directed with endorectal MR spectroscopic imaging findings in patients with elevated prostate specific antigen levels and prior negative biopsy findings: early experience. Radiology. 2005;236(3):903–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lawrentschuk N, Fleshner N. The role of magnetic resonance imaging in targeting prostate cancer in patients with previous negative biopsies and elevated prostate-specific antigen levels. BJU Int. 2009;103(6):730–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sciarra A, Panebianco V, Ciccariello M, et al. Value of magnetic resonance spectroscopy imaging and dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging for detecting prostate cancer foci in men with prior negative biopsy. Clin Cancer Res. 2010;16(6):1875–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tokuda J, Fischer GS, DiMaio SP, et al. Integrated navigation and control software system for MRI-guided robotic prostate interventions. Comput Med Imaging Graph. 2010;34(1):3–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yakar D, Hambrock T, Hoeks C, Barentsz JO, Fütterer JJ. Magnetic resonance-guided biopsy of the prostate: feasibility, technique, and clinical applications. Top Magn Reson Imaging. 2008;19(6):291–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mettlin C, Littrup PJ, Kane RA, et al. Relative sensitivity and specificity of serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) level compared with age-referenced PSA, PSA density, and PSA change. Data from the American Cancer Society National Prostate Cancer Detection Project. Cancer. 1994;74(5):1615–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Comet-Batlle J, Vilanova-Busquets JC, Saladie-Roig JM, Gelabert-Mas A, Barcelo-Vidal C. The value of endorectal MRI in the early diagnosis of prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2003;44(2):201–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cheikh AB, Girouin N, Colombel M, et al. Evaluation of T2-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in localizing prostate cancer before repeat biopsy. Eur Radiol. 2009;19(3):770–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Silverman JM, Krebs TL. MR imaging evaluation with a transrectal surface coil of local recurrence of prostatic cancer in men who have undergone radical prostatectomy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;168(2):379–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sella T, Schwartz LH, Swindle PW, et al. Suspected local recurrence after radical prostatectomy: endorectal coil MR imaging. Radiology. 2004;231(2):379–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Leventis AK, Shariat SF, Slawin KM. Local recurrence after radical prostatectomy: correlation of US features with prostatic fossa biopsy findings. Radiology. 2001;219(2):432–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Berglund RK, Masterson TA, Vora KC, et al. Pathological upgrading and up staging with immediate repeat biopsy in patients eligible for active surveillance. J Urol. 2008;180(5):1964–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tavangar SM, Razi A, Mashayekhi R. Correlation between prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy Gleason gradings of 111 cases with prostatic adenocarcinoma. Urol J. 2004;1(4):246–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wang L, Hricak H, Kattan MW, et al. Prediction of organ-confined prostate cancer: incremental value of MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging to staging nomograms. Radiology. 2006;238(2):597–603.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Shukla-Dave A, Hricak H, Kattan MW, et al. The utility of ­magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy for predicting insignificant prostate cancer: an initial analysis. BJU Int. 2007;99(4):786–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Franiel T, Ludermann L, Taupitz M, et al. Pharmacokinetic MRI of the prostate: parameters for differentiating low-grade and high-grade prostate cancer. Rofo. 2009;181(6):536–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Villeirs GM, De Meerleer GO, De Visschere PJ, et al. Combined magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy in the assessment of high grade prostate carcinoma in patients with elevated PSA: a single-institution experience of 356 patients. Eur J Radiol. 2011;77(2):340–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Donnelly BJ, Saliken JC, Brasher PM, et al. A randomized trial of external beam radiotherapy versus cryoablation in patients with localized prostate cancer. Cancer. 2010;116(2):323–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Polascik TJ, Mouraviev V. Focal therapy for prostate cancer. Curr Opin Urol. 2008;18(3):269–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Marberger M, Carroll PR, Zelefsky MJ, et al. New treatments for localized prostate cancer. Urology. 2008;72(6 Suppl):S36–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lecornet E, Ahmed HU, Moore C, Emberton M. Focal therapy for prostate cancer: a potential strategy to address the problem of overtreatment. Arch Esp Urol. 2010;63(10):845–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hou AH, Sullivan KF, Crawford ED. Targeted focal therapy for prostate cancer: a review. Curr Opin Urol. 2009;19(3):283–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Sartor AO, Hricak H, Wheeler TM, et al. Evaluating localized prostate cancer and identifying candidates for focal therapy. Urology. 2008;72(6 Suppl):S12–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Jayram G, Eggener SE. Patient selection for focal therapy of localized prostate cancer. Curr Opin Urol. 2009;19(3):268–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kirkham AP, Emberton M, Allen C. How good is MRI at detecting and characterising cancer within the prostate? Eur Urol. 2006;50(6):1163–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Augustin H, Fritz GA, Ehammer T, Auprich M, Pummer K. Accuracy of 3-tesla magnetic resonance imaging for the staging of prostate cancer in comparison to the Partin tables. Acta Radiol. 2009;50(5):562–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Fütterer JJ, Scheenen TW, Huisman HJ, et al. Initial experience of 3 Tesla endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging and 1H-spectroscopic imaging of the prostate. Invest Radiol. 2004;39(11):671–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matthieu Durand
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Aude Fregeville
    • 4
  • Naveen Gumpeni
    • 5
  • Abhishek Srivastava
    • 6
  • Prasanna Sooriakumaran
    • 1
  • Siobhan Gruschow
    • 7
  • Niyati Harneja
    • 1
  • Kristin M. Saunders
    • 8
  • Jean Amiel
    • 3
  • Ashutosh K. Tewari
    • 9
  1. 1.Department of UrologyWeill Medical College of Cornell UniversityNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.Department of UrologyMontsouris InstituteParisFrance
  3. 3.Department of UrologyNice University HospitalNiceFrance
  4. 4.Department of RadiologyMontsouris InstituteParisFrance
  5. 5.Department of RadiologyNew York Presbyterian Hospital, Weill Medical College of Cornell UniversityNew YorkUSA
  6. 6.Department of UrologyWeill Medical College of Cornell UniversityNew YorkUSA
  7. 7.Department of UrologyWeill Medical College of Cornell UniversityNiceUSA
  8. 8.Department of UrologyNew York-Presbyterian Hospital, Weill Medical College of Cornell UniversityNew YorkUSA
  9. 9.Department of Urology , Institute of Prostate Cancer and LeFrak Center for Robotic Surgery, James Buchanan Brady FoundationWeill Medical College of Cornell UniversityNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations