Revisiting DCE-MRI: Classification of Prostate Tissue Using Descriptive Signal Enhancement Features Derived From DCE-MRI Acquisition With High Spatiotemporal Resolution.
Journal
Investigative radiology
ISSN: 1536-0210
Titre abrégé: Invest Radiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0045377
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 09 2021
01 09 2021
Historique:
pubmed:
5
3
2021
medline:
16
10
2021
entrez:
4
3
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
A retrospective study (from January 2016 to July 2019) including 75 subjects (mean, 65 years; 46-80 years) with 2.5-second temporal resolution DCE-MRI and PIRADS 4 or 5 lesions was performed. Fifty-four subjects had biopsy-proven prostate cancer (Gleason 6, 15; Gleason 7, 20; Gleason 8, 13; Gleason 9, 6), whereas 21 subjects had negative MRI/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsies. Voxel-wise analysis of contrast signal enhancement was performed for all time points using custom-developed software, including automatic arterial input function detection. Seven descriptive parameter maps were calculated: normalized maximum signal intensity, time to start, time to maximum, time-to-maximum slope, and maximum slope with normalization on maximum signal and the arterial input function (SMN1, SMN2). The parameters were compared with ADC using multiparametric machine-learning models to determine classification accuracy. A Wilcoxon test was used for the hypothesis test and the Spearman coefficient for correlation. There were significant differences (P < 0.05) for all 7 DCE-derived parameters between the normal peripheral zone versus PIRADS 4 or 5 lesions and the biopsy-positive versus biopsy-negative lesions. Multiparametric analysis showed better performance when combining ADC + DCE as input (accuracy/sensitivity/specificity, 97%/93%/100%) relative to ADC alone (accuracy/sensitivity/specificity, 94%/95%/95%) and to DCE alone (accuracy/sensitivity/specificity, 78%/79%/77%) in differentiating the normal peripheral zone from PIRADS lesions, biopsy-positive versus biopsy-negative lesions (accuracy/sensitivity/specificity, 68%/33%/81%), and Gleason 6 versus ≥7 prostate cancer (accuracy/sensitivity/specificity, 69%/60%/72%). Descriptive perfusion characteristics derived from high-resolution DCE-MRI using model-free computations show significant differences between normal and cancerous tissue but do not reach the accuracy achieved with solely ADC-based classification. Combining ADC with DCE-based input features improved classification accuracy for PIRADS lesions, discrimination of biopsy-positive versus biopsy-negative lesions, and differentiation between Gleason 6 versus Gleason ≥7 lesions.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33660631
doi: 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000772
pii: 00004424-202109000-00003
pmc: PMC8373655
mid: NIHMS1707206
doi:
Substances chimiques
Contrast Media
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
553-562Subventions
Organisme : NIBIB NIH HHS
ID : P41 EB017183
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflicts of interest and sources of funding: none declare.
Références
Crawford ED. Epidemiology of prostate cancer. Urology . 2003;62:3–12.
Rawla P. Epidemiology of prostate cancer. World J Oncol . 2019;10:63–89.
Hugosson J, Carlsson S, Aus G, et al. Mortality results from the Göteborg randomised population-based prostate-cancer screening trial. Lancet Oncol . 2010;11:725–732.
Fütterer JJ, Briganti A, De Visschere P, et al. Can clinically significant prostate cancer be detected with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging? A systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol . 2015;68:1045–1053.
de Rooij M, Hamoen EH, Fütterer JJ, et al. Accuracy of multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer detection: a meta-analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol . 2014;202:343–351.
Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL, et al. PI-RADS prostate imaging—reporting and data system: 2015, version 2. Eur Urol . 2016;69:16–40.
Tofts PS, Brix G, Buckley DL, et al. Estimating kinetic parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced T(1)-weighted MRI of a diffusable tracer: standardized quantities and symbols. J Magn Reson Imaging . 1999;10:223–232.
Buckley DL. Uncertainty in the analysis of tracer kinetics using dynamic contrast-enhanced T1-weighted MRI. Magn Reson Med . 2002;47:601–606.
Heye T, Davenport MS, Horvath JJ, et al. Reproducibility of dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Part I. perfusion characteristics in the female pelvis by using multiple computer-aided diagnosis perfusion analysis solutions. Radiology . 2013;266:801–811.
Beuzit L, Eliat PA, Brun V, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: study of inter-software accuracy and reproducibility using simulated and clinical data. J Magn Reson Imaging . 2016;43:1288–1300.
Winkel DJ, Heye TJ, Benz MR, et al. Compressed sensing radial sampling MRI of prostate perfusion: utility for detection of prostate cancer. Radiology . 2019;290:702–708.
Rosenkrantz AB, Geppert C, Grimm R, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of the prostate with high spatiotemporal resolution using compressed sensing, parallel imaging, and continuous golden-angle radial sampling: preliminary experience. J Magn Reson Imaging . 2015;41:1365–1373.
Chen YJ, Chu WC, Pu YS, et al. Washout gradient in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI is associated with tumor aggressiveness of prostate cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging . 2012;36:912–919.
Hara T, Inoue Y, Satoh T, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging of local recurrent prostate cancer after radiation therapy: comparison with 22-core three-dimensional prostate mapping biopsy. Magn Reson Imaging . 2012;30:1091–1098.
Isebaert S, De Keyzer F, Haustermans K, et al. Evaluation of semi-quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI parameters for prostate cancer in correlation to whole-mount histopathology. Eur J Radiol . 2012;81:e217–2e22.
Franiel T, Hamm B, Hricak H. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and pharmacokinetic models in prostate cancer. Eur Radiol . 2011;21:616–626.
Renshaw AA, Richie JP, Loughlin KR, et al. Maximum diameter of prostatic carcinoma is a simple, inexpensive, and independent predictor of prostate-specific antigen failure in radical prostatectomy specimens. Validation in a cohort of 434 patients. Am J Clin Pathol . 1999;111:641–644.
Espagnet MR, Bangiyev L, Haber M, et al. High-resolution DCE-MRI of the pituitary gland using radial k-space acquisition with compressed sensing reconstruction. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol . 2015;36:1444–1449.
Parikh N, Ream JM, Zhang HC, et al. Performance of simultaneous high temporal resolution quantitative perfusion imaging of bladder tumors and conventional multi-phase urography using a novel free-breathing continuously acquired radial compressed-sensing MRI sequence. Magn Reson Imaging . 2016;34:694–698.
Chen J, Yao J, Thomasson D, eds. Automatic determination of arterial input function for dynamic contrast enhanced MRI in tumor assessment. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv . 2008;11:594–601.
Feng L, Huang C, Shanbhogue K, et al. RACER-GRASP: respiratory-weighted, aortic contrast enhancement-guided and coil-unstreaking golden-angle radial sparse MRI. Magn Reson Med . 2018;80:77–89.
Vapnik V. The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory . New York, NY: Springer Science & Business Media; 2013.
Hsu C-W, Chang C-C, Lin C-J. A practical guide to support vector classification. 2003;1396–1400.
Fisher RA. The use of multiple measurements in taxonomic problems. Ann Eugen . 1936;7:179–188.
Mika S, Ratsch G, Weston J, et al., eds. Fisher discriminant analysis with kernels. Proc IEEE Neural Networks for Signal Processing Workshop . 1999;41–48.
Bauer E, Kohavi R. An empirical comparison of voting classification algorithms: bagging, boosting, and variants. Machine Learning . 1999;36:105–139.
Martens HA, Dardenne P. Validation and verification of regression in small data sets. Chemom Intel Lab Syst . 1998;44:99–121.
Breiman L. Classification and Regression Trees . London, United Kingdom: Routledge; 2017.
Haffner J, Lemaitre L, Puech P, et al. Role of magnetic resonance imaging before initial biopsy: comparison of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted and systematic biopsy for significant prostate cancer detection. BJU Int . 2011;108:E171–E178.
Mehralivand S, Bednarova S, Shih JH, et al. Prospective evaluation of PI-RADS™ version 2 using the international society of urological pathology prostate cancer grade group system. J Urol . 2017;198:583–590.
Kitajima K, Kaji Y, Fukabori Y, et al. Prostate cancer detection with 3 T MRI: comparison of diffusion-weighted imaging and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in combination with T2-weighted imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging . 2010;31:625–631.
Iwazawa J, Mitani T, Sassa S, et al. Prostate cancer detection with MRI: is dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging necessary in addition to diffusion-weighted imaging? Diagn Interv Radiol . 2011;17:243–248.
Tanimoto A, Nakashima J, Kohno H, et al. 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;25:146–152.
Vilanova JC, Barceló-Vidal C, Comet J, et al. Usefulness of prebiopsy multifunctional and morphologic MRI combined with free-to-total prostate-specific antigen ratio in the detection of prostate cancer. Am J Roentgenol . 2011;196:W715–W722.
Rosenkrantz AB, Sabach A, Babb JS, et al. Prostate cancer: comparison of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI techniques for localization of peripheral zone tumor. Am J Roentgenol . 2013;201:W471–W478.
Ocak I, Bernardo M, Metzger G, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of prostate cancer at 3 T: a study of pharmacokinetic parameters. Am J Roentgenol . 2007;189:W192–W201.
Zelhof B, Lowry M, Rodrigues G, et al. Description of magnetic resonance imaging-derived enhancement variables in pathologically confirmed prostate cancer and normal peripheral zone regions. BJU Int . 2009;104:621–627.
Langer DL, Van der Kwast TH, Evans AJ, et al. Prostate cancer detection with multi-parametric MRI: logistic regression analysis of quantitative T2, diffusion-weighted imaging, and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging . 2009;30:327–334.
Antonelli M, Johnston EW, Dikaios N, et al. Machine learning classifiers can predict Gleason pattern 4 prostate cancer with greater accuracy than experienced radiologists. Eur Radiol . 2019;29:4754–4764.
Sheridan AD, Nath SK, Aneja S, et al. MRI-ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy of prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 category 5 lesions found false-positive at multiparametric prostate MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol . 2018;210:W218–W225.
Lee PQ, Guida A, Patterson S, et al. Model-free prostate cancer segmentation from dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI with recurrent convolutional networks: a feasibility study. Comput Med Imaging Graph . 2019;75:14–23.
Rydahl C, Thomsen HS, Marckmann P. High prevalence of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis in chronic renal failure patients exposed to gadodiamide, a gadolinium-containing magnetic resonance contrast agent. Invest Radiol . 2008;43:141–144.
Rogosnitzky M, Branch S. Gadolinium-based contrast agent toxicity: a review of known and proposed mechanisms. Biometals . 2016;29:365–376.
Tavakoli AA, Kuder TA, Tichy D, et al. Measured multipoint ultra-high b-value diffusion MRI in the assessment of MRI-detected prostate lesions. Invest Radiol . 2021;56:94–102.
Witten IH, Frank E, Hall MA, et al. Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques . Cambridge, MA: Morgan Kaufmann; 2005.
Hoeks CM, Barentsz JO, Hambrock T, et al. Prostate cancer: multiparametric MR imaging for detection, localization, and staging. Radiology . 2011;261:46–66.
Maas MC, Litjens GJ, Wright AJ, et al. A single-arm, multicenter validation study of prostate cancer localization and aggressiveness with a quantitative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging approach. Invest Radiol . 2019;54:437–447.
Esser M, Zinsser D, Kündel M, et al. Performance of an automated workflow for magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate: comparison with a manual workflow. Invest Radiol . 2020;55:277–284.
Mai J, Abubrig M, Lehmann T, et al. T2 mapping in prostate cancer. Invest Radiol . 2019;54:146–152.
Aksit Ciris P, Chiou JG, Glazer DI, et al. Accelerated segmented diffusion-weighted prostate imaging for higher resolution, higher geometric fidelity and multi-b perfusion estimation. Invest Radiol . 2019;54:238–246.