Risk stratification of prostate cancer utilizing apparent diffusion coefficient value and lesion volume on multiparametric MRI

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/136035/1/jmri25363_am.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/136035/2/jmri25363.pd

Getting Started with Web-Based Learning in Nursing: The Essentials

Distance education via the World Wide Web has increased exponentially over the last 20 years. This article provides a brief historicalperspective and research on online education, a description of selected learning management systems, and advantages and disadvantages ofweb-based learning for students, faculty, and the organization. Pedagogical implications and best-practice strategies for web-based learningare included. The article concludes with recommendations for getting started with web-based learning, many of which are supported byevidence-based research literature

Focal therapy for prostate cancer: Evolutionary parallels to breast cancer treatment. Letter.

To the Editor:We read with great interest the recentmanuscript by Labbate et al reviewing the develop-ment of focal therapy in breast and prostate cancer(PCa).1Breast focal therapy (bFT) represents a suc-cessful model for organ-sparing cancer treatment, soas urologists sensible to prostate focal therapy (pFT)we can learn much about the complex process of bFTrecognition by the scientific community

Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy techniques compared to transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Multiparametric MRI localizes cancer in the prostate, allowing for MRI guided biopsy (MRI-GB) 43 alongside transrectal ultrasound-guided systematic biopsy (TRUS-GB). Three MRI-GB approaches exist; visual estimation (COG-TB); fusion software-assisted (FUS-TB) and MRI ‘in-bore’ biopsy (IB-TB). It is unknown whether any of these are superior. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to address three questions. First, whether MRI-GB is superior to TRUS-GB at detecting clinically significant PCa (csPCa). Second, whether MRI-GB is superior to TRUS-GB at avoiding detection of insignificant PCa. Third, whether any MRI-GB strategy is superior at detecting csPCa. Methods: A systematic literature review from 2015 to 2019 was performed in accordance with the START recommendations. Studies reporting PCa detection rates, employing MRI-GB and TRUS-GB were included and evaluated using the QUADAS-2 checklist. 1553 studies were found, of which 43 were included in the meta-analysis. Results: For csPCa, MRI-GB was superior in detection to TRUS-GB (0.83 vs. 0.63 [p = 0.02]). MRI-GB was superior in detection to TRUS-GB at avoiding detection of insignificant PCa. No MRI-GB technique was superior at detecting csPCa (IB-TB 0.87; COG TB 0.81; FUS-TB 0.81, [p = 0.55]). There was significant heterogeneity observed between the included studies. Conclusions: In patients with suspected PCa on MRI, MRI-GB offers superior rates of csPCa detection and reduces detection of insignificant PCa compared to TRUS-GB. No individual MRI-GB technique was found to be better in csPCa detection. Prospective adequately powered randomized controlled trials are required

The role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in focal therapy for prostate cancer: recommendations from a consensus panel

OBJECTIVE: To establish a consensus on the utility of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) to identify patients for focal therapy. METHODS: Urological surgeons, radiologists, and basic researchers, from Europe and North America participated in a consensus meeting about the use of mpMRI in focal therapy of prostate cancer. The consensus process was face-to-face and specific clinical issues were raised and discussed with agreement sought when possible. All participants are listed among the authors. Topics specifically did not include staging of prostate cancer, but rather identifying the optimal requirements for performing MRI, and the current status of optimally performed mpMRI to (i) determine focality of prostate cancer (e.g. localising small target lesions of \u3e/=0.5 mL), (ii) to monitor and assess the outcome of focal ablation therapies, and (iii) to identify the diagnostic advantages of new MRI methods. In addition, the need for transperineal template saturation biopsies in selecting patients for focal therapy was discussed, if a high quality mpMRI is available. In other words, can mpMRI replace the role of transperineal saturation biopsies in patient selection for focal therapy? RESULTS: Consensus was reached on most key aspects of the meeting; however, on definition of the optimal requirements for mpMRI, there was one dissenting voice. mpMRI is the optimum approach to achieve the objectives needed for focal therapy, if made on a high quality machine (3T with/without endorectal coil or 1.5T with endorectal coil) and judged by an experienced radiologist. Structured and standardised reporting of prostate MRI is paramount. State of the art mpMRI is capable of localising small tumours for focal therapy. State of the art mpMRI is the technique of choice for follow-up of focal ablation. CONCLUSIONS: The present evidence for MRI in focal therapy is limited. mpMRI is not accurate enough to consistently grade tumour aggressiveness. Template-guided saturation biopsies are no longer necessary when a high quality state of the art mpMRI is available; however, suspicious lesions should always be confirmed by (targeted) biopsy

Implementation of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging technology for evaluation of patients with suspicion for prostate cancer in the clinical practice setting

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/147814/1/bju14515_am.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/147814/2/bju14515.pd

Utilization of focal therapy for patients discontinuing active surveillance of prostate cancer: Recommendations of an international Delphi consensus

BACKGROUND: With the advancement of imaging technology, focal therapy (FT) has been gaining acceptance for the treatment of select patients with localized prostate cancer (CaP). We aim to provide details of a formal physician consensus on the utilization of FT for patients with CaP who are discontinuing active surveillance (AS). METHODS: A 3-stage Delphi consensus on CaP and FT was conducted. Consensus was defined as agreement by ≥80% of physicians. An in-person meeting was attended by 17 panelists to formulate the consensus statement. RESULTS: Fifty-six respondents participated in this interdisciplinary consensus study (82% urologist, 16% radiologist, 2% radiation oncology). The participants confirmed that there is a role for FT in men discontinuing AS (48% strongly agree, 39% agree). The benefit of FT over radical therapy for men coming off AS is: less invasive (91%), has a greater likelihood to preserve erectile function (91%), has a greater likelihood to preserve urinary continence (91%), has fewer side effects (86%), and has early recovery post-treatment (80%). Patients will need to undergo mpMRI of the prostate and/or a saturation biopsy to determine if they are potential candidates for FT. Our limitations include respondent's biases and that the participants of this consensus may not represent the larger medical community. CONCLUSIONS: FT can be offered to men coming off AS between the age of 60 to 80 with grade group 2 localized cancer. This consensus from a multidisciplinary, multi-institutional, international expert panel provides a contemporary insight utilizing FT for CaP in select patients who are discontinuing AS

D\u27Amico Risk Stratification Correlates with Degree of Suspicion of Prostate Cancer on Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

PURPOSE: We determined whether there is a correlation between D\u27Amico risk stratification and the degree of suspicion of prostate cancer on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging based on targeted biopsies done with our electromagnetically tracked magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion platform. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 101 patients underwent 3 Tesla multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate, consisting of T2, dynamic contrast enhanced, diffusion weighted and spectroscopy images in cases suspicious for or with a diagnosis of prostate cancer. All prostate magnetic resonance imaging lesions were then identified and graded by the number of positive modalities, including low-2 or fewer, moderate-3 and high-4 showing suspicion on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. The biopsy protocol included standard 12-core biopsy, followed by real-time magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion targeted biopsies of the suspicious magnetic resonance lesions. Cases and lesions were stratified by the D\u27Amico risk stratification. RESULTS: In this screening population 90.1% of men had a negative digital rectal examination. Mean±SD age was 62.7±8.3 years and median prostate specific antigen was 5.8 ng/ml. Of the cases 54.5% were positive for cancer on protocol biopsy. Chi-square analysis revealed a statistically significant correlation between magnetic resonance suspicion and D\u27Amico risk stratification (p CONCLUSIONS: Our data support the notion that using multiparametric magnetic resonance prostate imaging one may assess the degree of risk associated with magnetic resonance visible lesions in the prostate

Utilization of multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging in clinical practice and focal therapy: report from a Delphi consensus project

To codify the use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) for the interrogation of prostate neoplasia (PCa) in clinical practice and focal therapy (FT). An international collaborative consensus project was undertaken using the Delphi method among experts in the field of PCa. An online questionnaire was presented in three consecutive rounds and modified each round based on the comments provided by the experts. Subsequently, a face-to-face meeting was held to discuss and finalize the consensus results. mpMRI should be performed in patients with prior negative biopsies if clinical suspicion remains, but not instead of the PSA test, nor as a stand-alone diagnostic tool or mpMRI-targeted biopsies only. It is not recommended to use a 1.5 Tesla MRI scanner without an endorectal or pelvic phased-array coil. mpMRI should be performed following standard biopsy-based PCa diagnosis in both the planning and follow-up of FT. If a lesion is seen, MRI-TRUS fusion biopsies should be performed for FT planning. Systematic biopsies are still required for FT planning in biopsy-naïve patients and for patients with residual PCa after FT. Standard repeat biopsies should be taken during the follow-up of FT. The final decision to perform FT should be based on histopathology. However, these consensus statements may differ for expert centers versus non-expert centers. The mpMRI is an important tool for characterizing and targeting PCa in clinical practice and FT. Standardization of acquisition and reading should be the main priority to guarantee consistent mpMRI quality throughout the urological communit