Prostate Zones and Tumor Morphological Parameters on Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Predicting the Tumor-stage Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer

Overview

Journal Diagn Interv Radiol

Publisher Galenos Publishing House

Date 2023 Oct 3

PMID 37787046

Authors

Shanshan Xu

Xiaobing Liu

Xiaoqin Zhang

Huihui Ji

Runyuan Wang

Huilin Cui

Jinfeng Ma

Yongjian Nian

Yi Wu

Ximei Cao

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: To determine whether the morphological parameters of prostate zones and tumors on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can predict the tumor-stage (T-stage) of prostate cancer (PCa) and establish an optimal T-stage diagnosis protocol based on three-dimensional reconstruction and quantization after image segmentation.

Methods: A dataset of the prostate MRI scans and clinical data of 175 patients who underwent biopsy and had pathologically proven PCa from January 2018 to November 2020 was retrospectively analyzed. The authors manually segmented and measured the volume, major axis, and cross-sectional area of the peripheral zone (PZ), transition zone, central zone (CZ), anterior fibromuscular stroma, and tumor. The differences were evaluated by the One-Way analysis of variance, Pearson's chi-squared test, or independent samples t-test. Spearman's correlation coefficient and receiver operating characteristic curve analyses were also performed. The cut-off values of the T-stage diagnosis were generated using Youden's J index.

Results: The prostate volume (PV), PZ volume (PZV), CZ volume, tumor's major axis (TA), tumor volume (TV), and volume ratio of the TV and PV were significantly different among stages T1 to T4. The cut-off values of the PV, PZV, CZV, TA, TV, and the ratio of TV/PV for the discrimination of the T1 and T2 stages were 53.63 cm, 11.60 cm, 1.97 cm, 2.30 mm, 0.90 cm, and 0.03 [area under the curves (AUCs): 0.628, 0.658, 0.610, 0.689, 0.724, and 0.764], respectively. The cut-off values of the TA, TV, and the ratio of TV/PV for the discrimination of the T2 and T3 stages were 2.80 mm, 8.29 cm, and 0.12 (AUCs: 0.769, 0.702, and 0.688), respectively. The cut-off values of the TA, TV, and the ratio of TV/PV for the discrimination of the T3 and T4 stages were 4.17 mm, 18.71 cm, and 0.22 (AUCs: 0.674, 0.709, and 0.729), respectively.

Conclusion: The morphological parameters of the prostate zones and tumors on the MRIs are simple and valuable diagnostic factors for predicting the T-stage of patients with PCa, which can help make accurate diagnoses and lateral treatment decisions.

Citing Articles

Detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in PI-RADS 3 Lesions Using T2w-Derived Radiomics Feature Maps in 3T Prostate MRI.

Jensen L, Kim D, Elgeti T, Steffen I, Schaafs L, Haas M Curr Oncol. 2024; 31(11):6814-6828.

PMID: 39590134 PMC: 11592716. DOI: 10.3390/curroncol31110503.

References

Njor S, Andersen B, Friis-Hansen L, de Haas N, Linnemann D, Norgaard H . The optimal cut-off value in fit-based colorectal cancer screening: An observational study. Cancer Med. 2021; 10(5):1872-1879. PMC: 7940214. DOI: 10.1002/cam4.3761. View

Mayer R, Simone 2nd C, Turkbey B, Choyke P . Prostate tumor eccentricity predicts Gleason score better than prostate tumor volume. Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2022; 12(2):1096-1108. PMC: 8739117. DOI: 10.21037/qims-21-466. View

Bianchi L, Schiavina R, Bortolani B, Cercenelli L, Gaudiano C, Mottaran A . Novel Volumetric and Morphological Parameters Derived from Three-dimensional Virtual Modeling to Improve Comprehension of Tumor's Anatomy in Patients with Renal Cancer. Eur Urol Focus. 2021; 8(5):1300-1308. DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2021.08.002. View

Baba H, Sakamoto S, Zhao X, Yamada Y, Rii J, Fujimoto A . Tumor Location and a Tumor Volume over 2.8 cc Predict the Prognosis for Japanese Localized Prostate Cancer. Cancers (Basel). 2022; 14(23). PMC: 9740872. DOI: 10.3390/cancers14235823. View

McNeal J . The zonal anatomy of the prostate. Prostate. 1981; 2(1):35-49. DOI: 10.1002/pros.2990020105. View

Giganti F, Allen C . Imaging quality and prostate MR: it is time to improve. Br J Radiol. 2020; 94(1118):20200934. PMC: 7934318. DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20200934. View

Yang L, Li M, Zhang M, Yao J, Song B . Association of prostate zonal volume with location and aggressiveness of clinically significant prostate cancer: A multiparametric MRI study according to PI-RADS version 2.1. Eur J Radiol. 2022; 150:110268. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2022.110268. View

Obuchowski N, Bullen J . Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves: review of methods with applications in diagnostic medicine. Phys Med Biol. 2018; 63(7):07TR01. DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/aab4b1. View

Hashimoto Y, Okamoto A, Imai A, Yoneyama T, Hatakeyama S, Yoneyama T . Biochemical outcome of small-volume or insignificant prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy in Japanese population. Int J Clin Oncol. 2011; 17(2):119-23. DOI: 10.1007/s10147-011-0267-6. View

10.

Reinhardt D, Helfand B, Cooper P, Roehl K, Catalona W, Loeb S . Prostate cancer risk alleles are associated with prostate cancer volume and prostate size. J Urol. 2013; 191(6):1733-6. PMC: 4107200. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.12.030. View

11.

Wolters T, Roobol M, van Leeuwen P, van den Bergh R, Hoedemaeker R, van Leenders G . A critical analysis of the tumor volume threshold for clinically insignificant prostate cancer using a data set of a randomized screening trial. J Urol. 2010; 185(1):121-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2010.08.082. View

12.

Sellers J, Wagstaff R, Helo N, de Riese W . Quantitative measurements of prostatic zones by MRI and their dependence on prostate size: possible clinical implications in prostate cancer. Ther Adv Urol. 2021; 13:17562872211000852. PMC: 8020739. DOI: 10.1177/17562872211000852. View

13.

Hamzaoui D, Montagne S, Granger B, Allera A, Ezziane M, Luzurier A . Prostate volume prediction on MRI: tools, accuracy and variability. Eur Radiol. 2022; 32(7):4931-4941. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-022-08554-4. View

14.

Tan N, Lin W, Khoshnoodi P, Asvadi N, Yoshida J, Margolis D . In-Bore 3-T MR-guided Transrectal Targeted Prostate Biopsy: Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2-based Diagnostic Performance for Detection of Prostate Cancer. Radiology. 2016; 283(1):130-139. PMC: 5375629. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2016152827. View

15.

. Hematuria in Adults. N Engl J Med. 2021; 385(6):576. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMx210011. View

16.

Sato S, Kimura T, Onuma H, Egawa S, Takahashi H . Transition zone prostate cancer is associated with better clinical outcomes than peripheral zone cancer. BJUI Compass. 2022; 2(3):169-177. PMC: 8988520. DOI: 10.1002/bco2.47. View

17.

Chang A, Autio K, Roach 3rd M, Scher H . High-risk prostate cancer-classification and therapy. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2014; 11(6):308-23. PMC: 4508854. DOI: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2014.68. View

18.

Frost J, Smith L, Sharma P, de Riese W . Possible clinical implications of peripheral zone changes depending on prostate size. Int Urol Nephrol. 2019; 51(10):1721-1726. DOI: 10.1007/s11255-019-02221-2. View

19.

Castiglione F, Delloglio P, Tosco L, Everaerts W, Albersen M, Hakim L . Tumor Volume and Clinical Failure in High-Risk Prostate Cancer Patients Treated With Radical Prostatectomy. Prostate. 2016; 77(1):3-9. DOI: 10.1002/pros.23242. View

20.

Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel R, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A . Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021; 71(3):209-249. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21660. View