Data on the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided targeted and systematic biopsy.

This is a data article from the original publication "Reasons for missing clinically significant prostate cancer by targeted magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy" [1]. From January 2014 to April 2019 a sample collective of 785 patients with 3T multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) of the prostate and subsequent combined systematic biopsy (SB) and magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound (US) fusion-guided biopsy (TB) was retrospectively analyzed. Prostate cancer (PCa) detection by TB and/or additional SB was analyzed.

Reasons for missing clinically significant prostate cancer by targeted magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy.

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluates cases with clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) missed by targeted biopsy (TB) and analyzes the diagnostic impact of an additional systematic biopsy (SB) in a large patient collective. METHODS: Consecutive patients with a 3 T multiparametric prostate MRI (mpMRI) and a subsequent MRI/US fusion-guided TB plus 12-core US-guided SB from 01/2014 to 04/2019 were included in this study. Primary study endpoint was the analysis of cases with a csPCa missed by TB and detected by SB. Secondary study objectives were the PCa detection and the correlation with clinical and MRI parameters. RESULTS: In total 785 patients met the inclusion criteria. 342 patients had a csPCa (median PSAD 0.29 ng/mL/cm3). In 42 patients (13 %), a csPCa was detected only by SB. In 36 of these cases, the localization of the positive SB cores matched with the cancer suspicious region described on mpMRI (mCSR). Cases with a csPCA missed by TB showed either an insufficient MRI segmentation (prostate boundary correlation) (31 %) and/or insufficient lesion registration (lesion transfer, tracking, and/or matching) (48 %), a missed small lesion (14 %), or a failed center of a large lesion (10 %). Median PSAD of patients with non-significant PCa detected by SB was 0.15 ng/mL/cm3. CONCLUSIONS: Main reasons for missing a csPCa by TB were insufficient prostate segmentation or imprecise lesion registration within MRI/US fusion-guided biopsy. Consequently, verification of MRI quality, exact mCSR assessment, and advanced biopsy experience may improve accuracy. Altogether, an additional SB adds limited clinical benefit in men with PSAD ≤ 0.15 ng/mL/cm3.

PSMA PET/CT vs. CT alone in newly diagnosed biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy: Comparison of detection rates and therapeutic implications.

OBJECTIVES: To compare prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA) Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography (PET/CT) and computed tomography (CT) alone for the detection of biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer (PCa) and effect on treatment. METHODS: This retrospective study included 59 patients with recently recorded biochemical recurrence of PCa (mean PSA 1.96 ± 1.64 ng/mL) after radical prostatectomy. Patients received PET/CT with either 68Ga-PSMA-11 (n = 36) or 18F-PSMA-1007 (n = 23). PET/CT and CT images were evaluated separately in regard to PCa lesion count, type, and localisation by two physicians. Histopathology, follow-up imaging and PSA levels after salvage irradiation served as reference standard. A McNemar test was used to compare detection rates. Changes in therapeutic approaches based on staging differences between CT alone and PET/CT were assessed in a virtual multidisciplinary tumour board. RESULTS: There were 142 lesions in 50 of 59 patients. PSMA PET/CT detected 141 lesions (99.3 %) in 50 patients (84.7 %), while CT detected 72 lesions (50.7 %) in 29 patients (49.2 %). A significantly higher detection rate of PSMA PET/CT was observed on a lesion-based analysis (p < 0.0001) and on a patient based analysis (p < 0.0001). Herein, both 68Ga- and 18F-PSMA PET/CT performed significantly better than CT alone (p < 0.0001, respectively). In 9 patients (15.3 %) no relapse was detectable by either modality. All lesions detected by CT were also detected by PSMA PET/CT. In 38 patients PSMA PET/CT detected more lesions than CT alone, altering the treatment approach in 22 of these patients. CONCLUSION: PSMA PET/CT is superior to CT alone in detecting biochemical recurrence in PCa patients after radical prostatectomy and offered additional therapeutic options in a substantial number of patients.

Magnetic resonance imaging improves the prediction of tumor staging in localized prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate 3 Tesla multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-based predictors for the pretherapeutic T staging of prostate cancer and their accuracy. METHODS: Consecutive patients with 3 Tesla mpMRI, positive systematic and MR-targeted biopsy, and subsequent radical prostatectomy (RPE) between 01/2016 and 12/2017 were included. MRI parameters such as measurable extraprostatic extension (EPE) (≥ 3 mm), length of (pseudo)capsular contact (LCC), invasion of neurovascular bundle (NVBI), and/or seminal vesicles lesion contact (SVC) or infiltration (SVI) were assessed and correlated to clinical and histopathological results. RESULTS: 136 men were included. In 76 cases, a pT2 stage was determined, in 29 cases a pT3a, and in 31 a pT3b stage. The positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV) for the detection of T3 by measurable EPE on MRI was 98% (CI 0.88-1) and 81% (CI 0.72-0.87). No visible NVBI was found in pT2 patients (NPV 100%; CI 0.95-1). ROC analysis for T3a prediction with LCC (AUC 0.81) showed a sensitivity of 87% and a specificity of 62% at a threshold of 12.5 mm (J = 0.485) and 93% and 58% at 11 mm (Jmax = 0.512). All patients with pT3a had a LCC > 5 mm. In case of pT3b, 29/31 patients showed a SVC (PPV 76%, CI 0.61-0.87; NPV 98%, CI 0.93-0.99), and 23/31 patients showed a SVI (PPV 100%, CI 0.86-1; NPV 93%, CI 0.87-0.96). EPE (p < 0.01), LCC (p = 0.05), and SVC (p = 0.01) were independent predictors of pT3. CONCLUSIONS: MRI-measurable EPE, LCC, and SVC were reliable, independent, preoperative predictors for a histopathological T3 stage. A LCC ≥ 11 mm indicated a pT3a stage, whereas a LCC < 5 mm excluded it. On MRI, visible SVI or even SVC of the PCa lesion was reliable preoperative predictors for a pT3b stage.

Magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate at 1.5 versus 3.0T: A prospective comparison study of image quality.

OBJECTIVES: This study prospectively evaluates objective image quality (IQ), subjective IQ, and PI-RADS scoring of prostate MRI at 3.0T (3T) and 1.5T (1.5T) within the same patients. METHODS: Sixty-three consecutive patients (64±9years) were prospectively included in this non-inferiority trial, powered at 80% to demonstrate a ≤10% difference in signal-to-noise (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) of T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted imaging (T2WI, DWI) at 1.5T compared to 3T. Secondary endpoints were analysis of subjective IQ and PI-RADS v2 scoring. RESULTS: All patients received multi-parametric prostate MRI on a 3T (T2WI, DWI, DCE) and bi-parametric MRI (T2WI, DWI) on a 1.5T scanner using body coils, respectively. SNR and CNR of T2WI were similar at 1.5T and 3T (p=0.7-1), but of DWI significantly lower at 1.5T (p<0.01). Subjective IQ was significantly better at 3T for both, T2WI and DWI (p<0.01). PI-RADS scores were comparable for both field strengths (p=0.05-1). Inter-reader agreement was excellent for subjective IQ assessment and PI-RADS scoring (k=0.9-1). CONCLUSION: Prostate MRI at 1.5T can reveal comparable objective image quality in T2WI, but is inferior to 3T in DWI and subjective IQ. However, similar PI-RADS scoring and thus diagnostic performance seems feasible independent of the field strength even without an endorectal coil.

Iterative metal artefact reduction in CT: can dedicated algorithms improve image quality after spinal instrumentation?

AIM: To investigate the value of dedicated computed tomography (CT) iterative metal artefact reduction (iMAR) algorithms in patients after spinal instrumentation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Post-surgical spinal CT images of 24 patients performed between March 2015 and July 2016 were retrospectively included. Images were reconstructed with standard weighted filtered back projection (WFBP) and with two dedicated iMAR algorithms (iMAR-Algo1, adjusted to spinal instrumentations and iMAR-Algo2, adjusted to large metallic hip implants) using a medium smooth kernel (B30f) and a sharp kernel (B70f). Frequencies of density changes were quantified to assess objective image quality. Image quality was rated subjectively by evaluating the visibility of critical anatomical structures including the central canal, the spinal cord, neural foramina, and vertebral bone. RESULTS: Both iMAR algorithms significantly reduced artefacts from metal compared with WFBP (p<0.0001). Results of subjective image analysis showed that both iMAR algorithms led to an improvement in visualisation of soft-tissue structures (median iMAR-Algo1=3; interquartile range [IQR]:1.5-3; iMAR-Algo2=4; IQR: 3.5-4) and bone structures (iMAR-Algo1=3; IQR:3-4; iMAR-Algo2=4; IQR:4-5) compared to WFBP (soft tissue: median 2; IQR: 0.5-2 and bone structures: median 2; IQR: 1-3; p<0.0001). Compared with iMAR-Algo1, objective artefact reduction and subjective visualisation of soft-tissue and bone structures were improved with iMAR-Algo2 (p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: Both iMAR algorithms reduced artefacts compared with WFBP, however, the iMAR algorithm with dedicated settings for large metallic implants was superior to the algorithm specifically adjusted to spinal implants.

Dose monitoring using the DICOM structured report: assessment of the relationship between cumulative radiation exposure and BMI in abdominal CT.

AIM: To perform a systematic, large-scale analysis using the Digital Imaging and Communication in Medicine structured report (DICOM-SR) to assess the relationship between body mass index (BMI) and radiation exposure in abdominal CT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of DICOM-SR of 3121 abdominal CT examinations between April 2013 and March 2014 was performed. All examinations were conducted using a 128 row CT system. Patients (mean age 61 ± 15 years) were divided into five groups according to their BMI: group A <20 kg/m(2) (underweight), group B 20-25 kg/m(2) (normal weight), group C 25-30 kg/m(2) (overweight), group D 30-35 kg/m(2) (obese), and group E > 35 kg/m(2) (extremely obese). CT dose index (CTDIvol) and dose-length product (DLP) were compared between all groups and matched to national diagnostic reference values. RESULTS: The mean CTDIvol and DLP were 5.4 ± 2.9 mGy and 243 ± 153 mGy.cm in group A, 6 ± 3.6 mGy and 264 ± 179 mGy.cm in group B, 7 ± 3.6 mGy and 320 ± 180 mGy.cm in group C, 8.1 ± 5.2 mGy and 375 ± 306 mGy.cm in group D, and 10 ± 8 mGy and 476 ± 403 mGy.cm in group E, respectively. Except for group A versus group B, CTDIvol and DLP differed significantly between all groups (p<0.05). Significantly more CTDIvol values exceeded national diagnostic reference values in groups D and E (2.1% and 6.3%) compared to group B (0.5%, p<0.05). CONCLUSION: DICOM-SR is a comprehensive, fast, and reproducible way to analyse dose-related data at CT. It allows for automated evaluation of radiation dose in a large study population. Dose exposition is related to the patient's BMI and is increased by up to 96% for extremely obese patients undergoing abdominal CT.