Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer: Present and future

John Kurhanewicz, Daniel Vigneron, Peter Carroll, Fergus Coakley

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

173 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this article is to review the current status of advanced MRI techniques based on anatomic, metabolic and physiologic properties of prostate cancer with a focus on their impact in managing prostate cancer patients. RECENT FINDINGS: Prostate cancer can be identified based on reduced T2 signal intensity on MRI, increased choline and decreased citrate and polyamines on magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging (MRSI), decreased diffusivity on diffusion tensor imaging (DTI), and increased uptake on dynamic contrast enhanced (DCE) imaging. All can be obtained within a 60-min 3T magnetic resonance exam. Each complementary method has inherent advantages and disadvantages: T2 MRI has high sensitivity but poor specificity; magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging has high specificity but poor sensitivity; diffusion tensor imaging has high spatial resolution, is the fastest, but sensitivity/specificity needs to be established; dynamic contrast enhanced imaging has high spatial resolution, but requires a gadolinium based contrast agent injection, and sensitivity/specificity needs to be established. SUMMARY: The best characterization of prostate cancer in individual patients will most likely result from a multiparametric (MRI/MRSI/DTI/DCE) exam using 3T magnetic resonance scanners but questions remain as to how to analyze and display this large amount of imaging data, and how to optimally combine the data for the most accurate assessment of prostate cancer. Histological correlations or clinical outcomes are required to determine sensitivity/specificity for each method and optimal combinations of these approaches.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)71-77
Number of pages7
JournalCurrent Opinion in Urology
Volume18
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2008
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Prostatic Neoplasms
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Diffusion Tensor Imaging
Sensitivity and Specificity
Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy
Contrast Sensitivity
Gadolinium
Polyamines
Choline
Contrast Media
Injections

Keywords

  • Diffusion tensor imaging
  • Dynamic contrast imaging
  • Magnetic resonance imaging
  • Magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging
  • Prostate cancer

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer : Present and future. / Kurhanewicz, John; Vigneron, Daniel; Carroll, Peter; Coakley, Fergus.

In: Current Opinion in Urology, Vol. 18, No. 1, 01.2008, p. 71-77.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kurhanewicz, John ; Vigneron, Daniel ; Carroll, Peter ; Coakley, Fergus. / Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer : Present and future. In: Current Opinion in Urology. 2008 ; Vol. 18, No. 1. pp. 71-77.
@article{b75d741ba77d4acdb009ec510cfe949b,
title = "Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer: Present and future",
abstract = "PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this article is to review the current status of advanced MRI techniques based on anatomic, metabolic and physiologic properties of prostate cancer with a focus on their impact in managing prostate cancer patients. RECENT FINDINGS: Prostate cancer can be identified based on reduced T2 signal intensity on MRI, increased choline and decreased citrate and polyamines on magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging (MRSI), decreased diffusivity on diffusion tensor imaging (DTI), and increased uptake on dynamic contrast enhanced (DCE) imaging. All can be obtained within a 60-min 3T magnetic resonance exam. Each complementary method has inherent advantages and disadvantages: T2 MRI has high sensitivity but poor specificity; magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging has high specificity but poor sensitivity; diffusion tensor imaging has high spatial resolution, is the fastest, but sensitivity/specificity needs to be established; dynamic contrast enhanced imaging has high spatial resolution, but requires a gadolinium based contrast agent injection, and sensitivity/specificity needs to be established. SUMMARY: The best characterization of prostate cancer in individual patients will most likely result from a multiparametric (MRI/MRSI/DTI/DCE) exam using 3T magnetic resonance scanners but questions remain as to how to analyze and display this large amount of imaging data, and how to optimally combine the data for the most accurate assessment of prostate cancer. Histological correlations or clinical outcomes are required to determine sensitivity/specificity for each method and optimal combinations of these approaches.",
keywords = "Diffusion tensor imaging, Dynamic contrast imaging, Magnetic resonance imaging, Magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging, Prostate cancer",
author = "John Kurhanewicz and Daniel Vigneron and Peter Carroll and Fergus Coakley",
year = "2008",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1097/MOU.0b013e3282f19d01",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "18",
pages = "71--77",
journal = "Current Opinion in Urology",
issn = "0963-0643",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer

T2 - Present and future

AU - Kurhanewicz, John

AU - Vigneron, Daniel

AU - Carroll, Peter

AU - Coakley, Fergus

PY - 2008/1

Y1 - 2008/1

N2 - PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this article is to review the current status of advanced MRI techniques based on anatomic, metabolic and physiologic properties of prostate cancer with a focus on their impact in managing prostate cancer patients. RECENT FINDINGS: Prostate cancer can be identified based on reduced T2 signal intensity on MRI, increased choline and decreased citrate and polyamines on magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging (MRSI), decreased diffusivity on diffusion tensor imaging (DTI), and increased uptake on dynamic contrast enhanced (DCE) imaging. All can be obtained within a 60-min 3T magnetic resonance exam. Each complementary method has inherent advantages and disadvantages: T2 MRI has high sensitivity but poor specificity; magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging has high specificity but poor sensitivity; diffusion tensor imaging has high spatial resolution, is the fastest, but sensitivity/specificity needs to be established; dynamic contrast enhanced imaging has high spatial resolution, but requires a gadolinium based contrast agent injection, and sensitivity/specificity needs to be established. SUMMARY: The best characterization of prostate cancer in individual patients will most likely result from a multiparametric (MRI/MRSI/DTI/DCE) exam using 3T magnetic resonance scanners but questions remain as to how to analyze and display this large amount of imaging data, and how to optimally combine the data for the most accurate assessment of prostate cancer. Histological correlations or clinical outcomes are required to determine sensitivity/specificity for each method and optimal combinations of these approaches.

AB - PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this article is to review the current status of advanced MRI techniques based on anatomic, metabolic and physiologic properties of prostate cancer with a focus on their impact in managing prostate cancer patients. RECENT FINDINGS: Prostate cancer can be identified based on reduced T2 signal intensity on MRI, increased choline and decreased citrate and polyamines on magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging (MRSI), decreased diffusivity on diffusion tensor imaging (DTI), and increased uptake on dynamic contrast enhanced (DCE) imaging. All can be obtained within a 60-min 3T magnetic resonance exam. Each complementary method has inherent advantages and disadvantages: T2 MRI has high sensitivity but poor specificity; magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging has high specificity but poor sensitivity; diffusion tensor imaging has high spatial resolution, is the fastest, but sensitivity/specificity needs to be established; dynamic contrast enhanced imaging has high spatial resolution, but requires a gadolinium based contrast agent injection, and sensitivity/specificity needs to be established. SUMMARY: The best characterization of prostate cancer in individual patients will most likely result from a multiparametric (MRI/MRSI/DTI/DCE) exam using 3T magnetic resonance scanners but questions remain as to how to analyze and display this large amount of imaging data, and how to optimally combine the data for the most accurate assessment of prostate cancer. Histological correlations or clinical outcomes are required to determine sensitivity/specificity for each method and optimal combinations of these approaches.

KW - Diffusion tensor imaging

KW - Dynamic contrast imaging

KW - Magnetic resonance imaging

KW - Magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging

KW - Prostate cancer

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=37349094329&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=37349094329&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/MOU.0b013e3282f19d01

DO - 10.1097/MOU.0b013e3282f19d01

M3 - Article

C2 - 18090494

AN - SCOPUS:37349094329

VL - 18

SP - 71

EP - 77

JO - Current Opinion in Urology

JF - Current Opinion in Urology

SN - 0963-0643

IS - 1

ER -