MP60-04 QUANTITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF T2-WEIGHTED MRI TO BETTER IDENTIFY PATIENTS WITH PROSTATE CANCER IN A SCREENING POPULATION (2015)

You have accessJournal of UrologyProstate Cancer: Detection and Screening II1 Apr 2015MP60-04 QUANTITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF T2-WEIGHTED MRI TO BETTER IDENTIFY PATIENTS WITH PROSTATE CANCER IN A SCREENING POPULATION Ahmad Algohary, Satish Viswanath, Prateek Prasanna, Shivani Pahwa, Vikas Gulani, Daniel Moses, Ronald Shnier, Maret Böhm, Anne-Maree Haynes, Phillip Brenner, Warick Delprado, James Thompson, Marley Pulbrock, Phillip Stricker, Lee Ponsky, and Anant Madabhushi Ahmad AlgoharyAhmad Algohary More articles by this author , Satish ViswanathSatish Viswanath More articles by this author , Prateek PrasannaPrateek Prasanna More articles by this author , Shivani PahwaShivani Pahwa More articles by this author , Vikas GulaniVikas Gulani More articles by this author , Daniel MosesDaniel Moses More articles by this author , Ronald ShnierRonald Shnier More articles by this author , Maret BöhmMaret Böhm More articles by this author , Anne-Maree HaynesAnne-Maree Haynes More articles by this author , Phillip BrennerPhillip Brenner More articles by this author , Warick DelpradoWarick Delprado More articles by this author , James ThompsonJames Thompson More articles by this author , Marley PulbrockMarley Pulbrock More articles by this author , Phillip StrickerPhillip Stricker More articles by this author , Lee PonskyLee Ponsky More articles by this author , and Anant MadabhushiAnant Madabhushi More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2015.02.2206AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES There is great interest in examining the use of MRI for identifying prostate cancer in a pre-biopsy, screening population. This may enable better patient selection for active surveillance vs immediate intervention. Despite recent efforts to standardize MRI assessment through the Prostate Imaging-Reporting And Data System, a significant number of patients may still be incorrectly assessed via MRI alone, as determined via follow-up biopsies. Patients may hence be MRI-negative but biopsy-positive (i.e. false negatives (FN); or MRI-positive but biopsy-negative (i.e. false positives (FP)); or both biopsy- and MRI-positive (i.e. true positives (TP)). In this work, we present the use of computational tools to derive a pseudo-quantitative value from T2-weighted MRI (by correcting for scanner drift), in a screening population. We will apply this value to determine how best to segregate true positives from false assessments for prostate cancer using MRI. METHODS A cohort of 45 patients were considered who underwent a screening T2-weighted MRI prior to trans-perineal grid directed 30-core sextant TRUS guided biopsy. All MRIs were assessed and annotated for regions suspicious for prostate cancer based on PIRADS reporting criteria, and divided into Groups 1 (FN), 2 (FP), 3 (TP); of 15 patients each. Each T2w MRI was corrected for inherent scanner variability using a previously presented drift correction algorithm, resulting in a pseudo-quantitative T2w MRI (pqT2) map. RESULTS Figure depicts boxplots of pqT2 values within the radiologist annotations for regions suspicious for prostate cancer in each Group. Group 1 (false negatives) have a relatively wide range (1000-3500). Group 2 (false positives) have a narrower range (1500-2900), but a marked number of outliers (samples falling outside the range). Group 3 (true positives) had the smallest range (15 00-2500), and minimal outliers. CONCLUSIONS Pseudo-quantitative T2w MRI appears to provide a quantitative assessment of differences between patient groups. Specifically, pqT2 values are able to differentiate between true positives and false positives/negatives, with biopsies as the gold standard. Computer-extracted features may be able to better discriminate these 3 categories. © 2015 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited byThompson J, van Leeuwen P, Moses D, Shnier R, Brenner P, Delprado W, Pulbrook M, Böhm M, Haynes A, Hayen A and Stricker P (2015) The Diagnostic Performance of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Detect Significant Prostate CancerJournal of Urology, VOL. 195, NO. 5, (1428-1435), Online publication date: 1-May-2016. Volume 193Issue 4SApril 2015Page: e739 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2015 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Ahmad Algohary More articles by this author Satish Viswanath More articles by this author Prateek Prasanna More articles by this author Shivani Pahwa More articles by this author Vikas Gulani More articles by this author Daniel Moses More articles by this author Ronald Shnier More articles by this author Maret Böhm More articles by this author Anne-Maree Haynes More articles by this author Phillip Brenner More articles by this author Warick Delprado More articles by this author James Thompson More articles by this author Marley Pulbrock More articles by this author Phillip Stricker More articles by this author Lee Ponsky More articles by this author Anant Madabhushi More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...