Top

Insights into Imaging

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2023 | Prostate Cancer | Original Article

Preoperative imaging accuracy in size determination of prostate cancer in men undergoing radical prostatectomy for clinically localised disease

Authors: Wael Ageeli, Nabi Soha, Xinyu Zhang, Magdalena Szewcyk-Bieda, Jennifer Wilson, Chunhui Li, Ghulam Nabi

Published in: Insights into Imaging | Issue 1/2023

Abstract

Objectives

To compare the accuracy of pre-surgical prostate size measurements using mpMRI and USWE with imaging-based 3D-printed patient-specific whole-mount moulds facilitated histopathology, and to assess whether size assessment varies between clinically significant and non-significant cancerous lesions including their locations in different zones of the prostate.

Methods

The study population included 202 men with clinically localised prostate cancer opting for radical surgery derived from two prospective studies. Protocol-based imaging data was used for measurement of size of prostate cancer in clinically localised disease using MRI (N = 106; USWE (N = 96). Forty-eight men overlapped between two studies and formed the validation cohort. The primary outcome of this study was to assess the accuracy of pre-surgical prostate cancerous size measurements using mpMRI and USWE with imaging-based 3D-printed patient-specific whole-mount moulds facilitated histopathology as a reference standard. Independent-samples T-tests were used for the continuous variables and a nonparametric Mann–Whitney U test for independent samples was applied to examine the distribution and median differences between mpMRI and USWE groups.

Results

A significant number of men had underestimation of prostate cancer using both mpMRI (82.1%; 87/106) and USWE (64.6%; 62/96). On average, tumour size was underestimated by a median size of 7 mm in mpMRI, and 1 mm in USWE. There were 327 cancerous lesions (153 with mpMRI and 174 for USWE). mpMRI and USWE underestimated the majority of cancerous lesions (108/153; 70.6%) and (88/174; 50.6%), respectively. Validation cohort data confirmed these findings MRI had a nearly 20% higher underestimation rate than USWE (χ² (1, N = 327) = 13.580, p = 0.001); especially in the mid and apical level of the gland. Clinically non-significant cancers were underestimated in significantly higher numbers in comparison to clinically significant cancers.

Conclusions

Size measurement of prostate cancers on preoperative imaging utilising maximum linear extent technique, underestimated the extent of cancer. Further research is needed to confirm our observations using different sequences, methods and approaches for cancer size measurement.

Farrokh A, Maass N, Treu L, Heilmann T, Schäfer FKW (2019) Accuracy of tumor size measurement: comparison of B-mode ultrasound, strain elastography, and 2D and 3D shear wave elastography with histopathological lesion size. Acta Radiol 60(4):451–458CrossRefPubMed

Hegde JV, Mulkern RV, Panych LP et al (2013) Multiparametric MRI of prostate cancer: An update on state-of-the-art techniques and their performance in detecting and localizing prostate cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 37(5):1035–1054CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Wei C, Li C, Szewczyk-Bieda M et al (2018) Performance characteristics of transrectal shear wave elastography (SWE) imaging in the evaluation of clinically localised prostate cancer: a prospective study. J Urol. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S002253471842856X

Priester A, Natarajan S, Le JD et al (2014) A system for evaluating magnetic resonance imaging of prostate cancer using patient-specific 3D printed molds. Am J Clin Exp Urol 2(2):127–135PubMedPubMedCentral

Kim Y, Hsu ICJ, Pouliot J, Noworolski SM, Vigneron DB, Kurhanewicz J (2005) Expandable and rigid endorectal coils for prostate MRI: Impact on prostate distortion and rigid image registration. Med Phys 32(12):3569–3578CrossRefPubMed

Gibson E, Gaed M, Gómez JA et al (2013) 3D prostate histology image reconstruction: quantifying the impact of tissue deformation and histology section location. J Pathol Inform 4:31CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Chappelow J, Bloch BN, Rofsky N et al (2011) Elastic registration of multimodal prostate MRI and histology via multiattribute combined mutual information. Med Phys 38(4):2005–2018CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Park H, Piert MR, Khan A et al (2008) Registration methodology for histological sections and in vivo imaging of human prostate. Acad Radiol 15(8):1027–1039CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Yamamoto H, Nir D, Vyas L et al (2014) A workflow to improve the alignment of prostate imaging with whole-mount histopathology. Acad Radiol 21(8):1009–1019CrossRefPubMed

10.

Chen LH, Ho H, Lazaro R et al (2010) Optimum slicing of radical prostatectomy specimens for correlation between histopathology and medical images. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 5(5):471–487CrossRefPubMed

11.

Mazaheri Y, Hricak H, Fine SW et al (2009) Prostate tumor volume measurement with combined T2-weighted imaging and diffusion-weighted MR: correlation with pathologic tumor volume. Radiology 252(2):449–457CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

12.

Jager GJ, Ruijter ETG, Van De Kaa CA et al (1996) Local staging of prostate cancer with endorectal MR imaging: correlation with histopathology. AJR Am J Roentgenol 166(4):845–852CrossRefPubMed

13.

Turkbey B, Mani H, Aras O et al (2012) Correlation of magnetic resonance imaging tumor volume with histopathology. J Urol 188(4):1157–1163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.06.011CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Le Nobin J, Orczyk C, Deng FM et al (2014) Prostate tumour volumes: evaluation of the agreement between magnetic resonance imaging and histology using novel co-registration software. BJU Int 114(6):E105–E112CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Le Nobin J, Rosenkrantz AB, Villers A et al (2015) Image guided focal therapy for magnetic resonance imaging visible prostate cancer: defining a 3-dimensional treatment margin based on magnetic resonance imaging histology co-registration analysis. J Urol 194(2):364–370CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

16.

Wei C, Li C, Szewczyk-Bieda M et al (2018) Performance characteristics of transrectal shear wave elastography imaging in the evaluation of clinically localized prostate cancer: a prospective study. J Urol 200(3):549–558CrossRefPubMed

17.

Szewczyk-Bieda M, Wei C, Coll K et al (2019) A multicentre parallel-group randomised trial assessing multiparametric MRI characterisation and image-guided biopsy of prostate in men suspected of having prostate cancer: MULTIPROS study protocol. Trials 20(1):1–8CrossRef

18.

Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R et al (2012) ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol 22(4):746–757CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Yoo EY, Nam SY, Choi HY, Hong MJ (2018) Agreement between MRI and pathologic analyses for determination of tumor size and correlation with immunohistochemical factors of invasive breast carcinoma. Acta Radiol 59(1):50–57CrossRefPubMed

20.

Grimsby GM, Gray R, Dueck A et al (2009) Is there concordance of invasive breast cancer pathologic tumor size with magnetic resonance imaging? Am J Surg 198(4):500–504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2009.07.012CrossRefPubMed

21.

Rominger M, Berg D, Frauenfelder T, Ramaswamy A, Timmesfeld N (2016) Which factors influence MRI-pathology concordance of tumour size measurements in breast cancer? Eur Radiol 26(5):1457–1465CrossRefPubMed

22.

Behjatnia B, Sim J, Bassett LW, Moatamed NA, Apple SK. Ijcep1002001. 2010;3(3):303–9. www.ijcep.com

23.

Berg WA, Gutierrez L, NessAiver MS et al (2004) Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology 233(3):830–849CrossRefPubMed

24.

Padhani AR, Weinreb J, Rosenkrantz AB, Villeirs G, Turkbey B, Barentsz J (2019) Prostate imaging-reporting and data system steering committee: PI-RADS v2 status update and future directions. Eur Urol 75(3):385–396CrossRefPubMed

25.

Sheikh N, Wei C, Szewczyk-Bieda M et al (2017) Combined T2 and diffusion-weighted MR imaging with template prostate biopsies in men suspected with prostate cancer but negative transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsies. World J Urol 35(2):213–220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-016-1855-xCrossRefPubMed

26.

Ageeli W, Wei C, Zhang X et al (2021) Quantitative ultrasound shear wave elastography (USWE)-measured tissue stiffness correlates with PIRADS scoring of MRI and Gleason score on whole-mount histopathology of prostate cancer: implications for ultrasound image-guided targeting approach. Insights Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-021-01039-wCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Bercoff J, Tanter M, Fink M (2004) Supersonic shear imaging: a new technique. IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control 51(4):396–409CrossRefPubMed

28.

Bercoff J, Chaffai S, Tanter M et al (2003) In vivo breast tumor detection using transient elastography. Ultrasound Med Biol 29(10):1387–1396CrossRefPubMed

29.

Gilchrist M, Samuels P. Community Project Module. 2015;1–32.

30.

Giavarina D. Understanding Bland Altman analysis. Biochem Medica. 2015;25(2):141–51. http://www.biochemia-medica.com/en/journal/25/2/10.11613/BM.2015.015

31.

WHO_OFFSET_48.pdf. 2009.

32.

Gui C, Lau JC, Kosteniuk SE, Lee DH, Megyesi JF (2019) Radiology reporting of low-grade glioma growth underestimates tumor expansion. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 161(3):569–576CrossRefPubMed

33.

Rosenkrantz AB, Verma S, Turkbey B (2015) Prostate cancer: top places where tumors hide on multiparametric MRI. Am J Roentgenol 204(4):W449–W456CrossRef

34.

Rosenkrantz AB, Taneja SS (2014) Radiologist, be aware: Ten pitfalls that confound the interpretation of multiparametric prostate MRI. Am J Roentgenol 202(1):109–120CrossRef

35.

Yu J, Fulcher AS, Turner MA, Cockrell CH, Cote EP, Wallace TJ (2014) Prostate cancer and its mimics at multiparametric prostate MRI. Br J Radiol 87(1037):1–7CrossRef

36.

Jonmarker S, Valdman A, Lindberg A, Hellström M, Egevad L (2006) Tissue shrinkage after fixation with formalin injection of prostatectomy specimens. Virchows Arch 449(3):297–301CrossRefPubMed

37.

Altman DG, Bland TM. Measurement in Medicine: The Analysis of Method Comparison Studies Author(s): D. G. Altman and J. M. Bland Published by: Wiley for the Royal Statistical Society Stable. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2987937 REFERENCES Linked references are ava. Statistician. 1983;32(3):307–17.

38.

Priester A, Natarajan S, Khoshnoodi P et al (2017) Magnetic resonance imaging underestimation of prostate cancer geometry: use of patient specific molds to correlate images with whole mount pathology. J Urol 197(2):320–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.07.084CrossRefPubMed

39.

Groenendaal G, Moman MR, Korporaal JG et al (2010) Validation of functional imaging with pathology for tumor delineation in the prostate. Radiother Oncol 94(2):145–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2009.12.034CrossRefPubMed

40.

Isebaert S, Van Den Bergh L, Haustermans K et al (2013) Multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer localization in correlation to whole-mount histopathology. J Magn Reson Imaging 37(6):1392–1401CrossRefPubMed

41.

Farrokh A, Treu L, Ohlinger R, Flieger C, Maass N, Schäfer FKW (2019) A prospective two center study comparing breast cancer lesion size defined by 2D shear wave elastography, B-mode ultrasound, and mammography with the histopathological size. Ultraschall Med 40(02):212–220CrossRefPubMed

42.

Rosenkrantz AB, Mendrinos S, Babb JS, Taneja SS (2012) Prostate cancer foci detected on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging are histologically distinct from those not detected. J Urol 187(6):2032–2038. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.01.074CrossRefPubMed

43.

Madabhushi A, Feldman MD, Metaxas DN, Tomaszeweski J, Chute D (2005) Automated detection of prostatic adenocarcinoma from high-resolution ex vivo MRI. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 24(12):1611–1625CrossRefPubMed

44.

Langer DL, van der Kwast TH, Evans AJ, Trachtenberg J, Wilson BC, Haider MA (2009) 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 30(2):327–334CrossRefPubMed

45.

Natarajan S, Marks LS, Margolis DJA et al (2011) Clinical application of a 3D ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy system. Urol Oncol 29(3):334–342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2011.02.014CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

46.

Sang L, Wang XM, Xu DY, Cai YF (2017) Accuracy of shear wave elastography for the diagnosis of prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Sci Rep 7(1):1–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-02187-0CrossRef

47.

Hajdinjak T, Pelzer AE (2018) Re: What are we missing? False-negative cancers at multiparametric MR imaging of the prostate. Eur Urol 73(4):637CrossRefPubMed

48.

Le JD, Tan N, Shkolyar E et al (2015) Multifocality and prostate cancer detection by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging: correlation with whole-mount histopathology. Eur Urol 67(3):569–576. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.08.079CrossRefPubMed

49.

Leddy R, Irshad A, Metcalfe A et al (2016) Comparative accuracy of preoperative tumor size assessment on mammography, sonography, and MRI: Is the accuracy affected by breast density or cancer subtype? J Clin Ultrasound 44(1):17–25CrossRefPubMed

50.

Onesti JK, Mangus BE, Helmer SD, Osland JS (2008) Breast cancer tumor size: correlation between magnetic resonance imaging and pathology measurements. Am J Surg 196(6):844–850. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2008.07.028CrossRefPubMed

51.

Ahmad S, Cao R, Varghese T, Bidaut L, Nabi G (2013) Transrectal quantitative shear wave elastography in the detection and characterisation of prostate cancer. Surg Endosc 27(9):3280–3287CrossRefPubMed

52.

Zippel D, Shalmon A, Rundstein A et al (2014) Freehand Elastography for Determination of Breast cancer size: comparison with B-mode sonography and histopathologic measurement. J Ultrasound Med 33(8):1441–1446CrossRefPubMed

53.

Ko KH, Jung HK, Park AY, Koh JE, Jang H, Kim Y (2020) Accuracy of tumor size measurement on shear wave elastography (SWE): correlation with histopathologic factors of invasive breast cancer. Medicine (Baltimore) 99(44):e23023CrossRefPubMed

Title: Preoperative imaging accuracy in size determination of prostate cancer in men undergoing radical prostatectomy for clinically localised disease
Authors: Wael Ageeli
Nabi Soha
Xinyu Zhang
Magdalena Szewcyk-Bieda
Jennifer Wilson
Chunhui Li
Ghulam Nabi
Publication date: 01-12-2023
Publisher: Springer Vienna
Keywords: Prostate Cancer
Prostate Cancer
Prostatectomy
Prostatectomy
Published in: Insights into Imaging / Issue 1/2023
Electronic ISSN: 1869-4101
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-023-01450-5

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Preoperative imaging accuracy in size determination of prostate cancer in men undergoing radical prostatectomy for clinically localised disease

Abstract

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2023

A multicenter study of artificial intelligence-aided software for detecting visible clinically significant prostate cancer on mpMRI

CheckList for EvaluAtion of Radiomics research (CLEAR): a step-by-step reporting guideline for authors and reviewers endorsed by ESR and EuSoMII

Hip MRI in flexion abduction external rotation for assessment of the ischiofemoral interval in patients with hip pain—a feasibility study

Natural language processing for automatic evaluation of free-text answers — a feasibility study based on the European Diploma in Radiology examination

MRI anatomy of the rectum: key concepts important for rectal cancer staging and treatment planning

Automatic analysis framework based on 3D-CT multi-scale features for accurate prediction of Ki67 expression levels in substantial renal cell carcinoma