Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×

Online ordering will be unavailable from 17:00 GMT on Friday, April 25 until 17:00 GMT on Sunday, April 27 due to maintenance. We apologise for the inconvenience.

Hostname: page-component-669899f699-vbsjw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-26T05:02:05.866Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

6 - Diffusion-weighted MRI of the prostate

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 November 2010

By
Sophie F. Riches  and
Nandita M. deSouza
Edited by
Bachir Taouli
Bachir Taouli
Affiliation:
Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York
Get access

Summary

Background

Epidemiology

Prostate cancer is the most frequently diagnosed carcinoma in men in the UK. It occurs at an increasing rate with advancing age with most patients being over the age of 60 years at the time of diagnosis. The incidence of detected carcinoma of the prostate has increased dramatically due to new screening and biopsy techniques and varies dramatically with screening levels. In Western Europe, the age-standardized incidence rate is 61.6 per 100 000 compared with 119.9 in North America where screening is widespread; however, there is little variation in the mortality rates of 17.5 per 100 000 in Western Europe and 15.8 per 100 000 in North America. There are also remarkable racial differences in incidence: in the USA the incidence rate is 40% lower in Asians and 50% higher in African Americans than in Whites, and the African American population also have the highest death rates from prostate cancer. About 10% of cases are familial, with a significantly increased risk in men whose first-degree relatives have had the disease. Patients with a BRACA2 mutation have a higher incidence of prostate cancer. However, the vast majority of cases are sporadic.

The cause of prostatic carcinoma is unknown. Because of the distribution in incidence worldwide there is some suggestion but no proof yet that dietary fat may increase the risk of developing prostate adenocarcinoma by influencing levels of testosterone, which in turn affects the growth of the prostate. There is no evidence of a relationship between benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and carcinoma.

Type
Chapter
Information
Extra-Cranial Applications of Diffusion-Weighted MRI , pp. 72 - 85
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

,CancerResearchUK. http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/cancerstats October 2009.
Reissigl, A, Pointner, J, Strasser, H, et al. Frequency and clinical significance of transition zone cancer in prostate cancer screening. Prostate 1997;30 (2):130–5.3.0.CO;2-S>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bill-Axelson, A, Holmberg, L, Ruutu, M, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2005;352 (19):1977–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Graser, A, Heuck, A, Sommer, B, et al. Per-sextant localization and staging of prostate cancer: correlation of imaging findings with whole-mount step section histopathology. Am J Roentgenol 2007:188 (1)84–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kirkham, AP, Emberton, M, Allen, C.How good is MRI at detecting and characterising cancer within the prostate?Eur Urol 2006;50 (6)1163–74; discussion 1175.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dhingsa, R, Qayyum, A, Coakley, FV, et al. Prostate cancer localization with endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging: effect of clinical data on reader accuracy. Radiology 2004;230 (1):215–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Futterer, JJ, Scheenen, TW, Heijmink, SW, et al. Standardized threshold approach using three-dimensional proton magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging in prostate cancer localization of the entire prostate. Investig Radiol 2007;42 (2):116–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, L, Hricak, H, Kattan, MW, et al. Prediction of organ-confined prostate cancer: incremental value of MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging to staging nomograms. Radiology 2006;238 (2):597–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, AS, Parker, CC, Norman, AR, et al. Tumour staging using magnetic resonance imaging in clinically localised prostate cancer: relationship to biochemical outcome after neo-adjuvant androgen deprivation and radical radiotherapy. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2005;17 (3):167–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
deSouza, NM, Gilderdale, DJ, Puni, R, et al. A solid reusable endorectal receiver coil for magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate: design, use, and comparison with an inflatable endorectal coil. J Magn Reson Imag 1996;6 (5):801–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Husband, JE, Padhani, AR, MacVicar, AD, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of prostate cancer: comparison of image quality using endorectal and pelvic phased array coils. Clin Radiol 1998;53 (9):673–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Futterer, JJ, Engelbrecht, MR, Jager, GJ, et al. Prostate cancer: comparison of local staging accuracy of pelvic phased-array coil alone versus integrated endorectal-pelvic phased-array coils. Local staging accuracy of prostate cancer using endorectal coil MR imaging. Eur Radiol 2007;17 (4):1055–65.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rosen, Y, Bloch, BN, Lenkinski, RE, et al. 3 T MR of the prostate: reducing susceptibility gradients by inflating the endorectal coil with a barium sulfate suspension. Magn Reson Med 2007;57 (5):898–904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choi, H, Ma, J.Use of perfluorocarbon compound in the endorectal coil to improve MR spectroscopy of the prostate. Am J Roentgenol 2008;190 (4):1055–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Riches, SF, Payne, GS, Morgan, V, et al. MRI in the detection of prostate cancer: combined apparent diffusion coefficient, metabolite ratio, and vascular parameters. Am J Roentgenol 2009;193 (6):1583–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Park, BK, Kim, B, Kim, CK, et al. Comparison of phased-array 3.0-T and endorectal 1.5-T magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of local staging accuracy for prostate cancer. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2007;31 (4):534–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Torricelli, P, Cinquantini, F, Ligabue, G, et al. Comparative evaluation between external phased array coil at 3 T and endorectal coil at 1.5 T: preliminary results. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2006;30 (3):355–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heijmink, SW, Futterer, JJ, Hambrock, T, et al. Prostate cancer: body-array versus endorectal coil MR imaging at 3 T: comparison of image quality, localization, and staging performance. Radiology 2007;244 (1):184–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miao, H, Fukatsu, H, Ishigaki, T.Prostate cancer detection with 3-T MRI: comparison of diffusion-weighted and T2-weighted imaging. Eur J Radiol 2007;61 (2):297–302.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pickles, MD, Gibbs, P, Sreenivas, M, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging of normal and malignant prostate tissue at 3.0T. J Magn Reson Imag 2006;23 (2):130–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gibbs, P, Pickles, MD, Turnbull, LW. Repeatability of echo-planar-based diffusion measurements of the human prostate at 3 T. Magn Reson Imag 2007.
Gibbs, P, Pickles, MD, Turnbull, LW.Diffusion imaging of the prostate at 3.0 tesla. Investig Radiol 2006;41 (2): 185–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kozlowski, P, Chang, SD, Goldenberg, SL.Diffusion-weighted MRI in prostate cancer: comparison between single-shot fast spin echo and echo planar imaging sequences. Magn Reson Imag 2008;26 (1):72–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mulkern, RV, Barnes, AS, Haker, SJ, et al. Biexponential characterization of prostate tissue water diffusion decay curves over an extended b-factor range. Magn Reson Imag 2006;24 (5):563–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
deSouza, NM, Reinsberg, SA, Scurr, ED, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer: the value of apparent diffusion coefficients for identifying malignant nodules. Br J Radiol 2007;80 (950):90–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gibbs, P, Tozer, DJ, Liney, GP, et al. Comparison of quantitative T2 mapping and diffusion-weighted imaging in the normal and pathologic prostate. Magn Reson Med 2001;46 (6);1054–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hosseinzadeh, K, Schwarz, SD.Endorectal diffusion-weighted imaging in prostate cancer to differentiate malignant and benign peripheral zone tissue. J Magn Reson Imag 2004;20 (4):654–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Issa, B.In vivo measurement of the apparent diffusion coefficient in normal and malignant prostatic tissues using echo-planar imaging. J Magn Reson Imag 2002;16 (2):196–200.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reinsberg, SA, Payne, GS, Riches, SF, et al. Combined use of diffusion-weighted MRI and 1H MR spectroscopy to increase accuracy in prostate cancer detection. Am J Roentgenol 2007;188 (1):91–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sato, C, Naganawa, S, Nakamura, T, et al. Differentiation of noncancerous tissue and cancer lesions by apparent diffusion coefficient values in transition and peripheral zones of the prostate. J Magn Reson Imag 2005;21 (3):258–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hayashida, Y, Hirai, T, Morishita, S, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging of metastatic brain tumors: comparison with histologic type and tumor cellularity. Am J Neuroradiol 2006;27 (7):1419–25.Google ScholarPubMed
Xing, D, Papadakis, NG, Huang, CL, et al. Optimised diffusion-weighting for measurement of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) in human brain. Magn Reson Imag 1997;15 (7):771–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bito, Y, Hirata, S, Yamamoto, E. Optimum gradient factors for apparent diffusion coefficient measurements. Proc Int Soc Mag Reson Med 1995; 913.
Kitajima, K, Kaji, Y, Kuroda, K, et al. High b-value diffusion-weighted imaging in normal and malignant peripheral zone tissue of the prostate: effect of signal-to-noise ratio. Magn Reson Med Sci 2008;7 (2):93–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dietrich, O, Heiland, S, Sartor, K.Noise correction for the exact determination of apparent diffusion coefficients at low SNR. Magn Reson Med 2001;45 (3):448–53.3.0.CO;2-W>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walker-Samuel, S, Orton, M, McPhail, LD, et al. Robust estimation of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) in heterogeneous solid tumors. Magn Reson Med 2009;62 (2):420–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
As, N, Charles-Edwards, E, Jackson, A, et al. Correlation of diffusion-weighted MRI with whole mount radical prostatectomy specimens. Br J Radiol 2008;81 (966):456–62.Google ScholarPubMed
Riches, SF, Hawtin, K, Charles-Edwards, EM, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging of the prostate and rectal wall: comparison of biexponential and monoexponential modelled diffusion and associated perfusion coefficients. NMR Biomed 2008.
Bihan, D, Breton, E, Lallemand, D, et al. Separation of diffusion and perfusion in intravoxel incoherent motion MR imaging. Radiology 1988;168 (2):497–505.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kristoffersen, A.Optimal estimation of the diffusion coefficient from non-averaged and averaged noisy magnitude data. J Magn Reson 2007;187 (2):293–305.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gürses, B, Kabakci, N, Kovanlikaya, A, et al. Diffusion tensor imaging of the normal prostate at 3 tesla. Eur Radiol 2008;18 (4):716–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tozer, D, Gibbs, P, Turnbull, LS. Diffusion tensor imaging of the prostate. Proc Int Soc Mag Reson Med 2003;460.
Reinsberg, S, Brewster, J, Payne, GS, et al. Anisotropic diffusion in prostate cancer: fact or artefact? In Proc 13th Annual Meeting International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine: Miami;. 2005.Google Scholar
Shukla-Dave, A, Hricak, H, Eberhardt, SC, et al. Chronic prostatitis: MR imaging and 1H MR spectroscopic imaging findings – initial observations. Radiology 2004;231 (3):717–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shimofusa, R, Fujimoto, H, Akamata, H, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging of prostate cancer. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2005;29 (2):149–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morgan, VA, Kyriazi, S, Ashley, SE, et al. Evaluation of the potential of diffusion-weighted imaging in prostate cancer detection. Acta Radiol 2007;48 (6):695–703.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Song, SK, Qu, Z, Garabedian, EM, et al. Improved magnetic resonance imaging detection of prostate cancer in a transgenic mouse model. Cancer Res 2002;62 (5):1555–8.Google Scholar
Xu, J, Humphrey, P, Kibel, A, et al. Magnetic resonance diffusion characteristics of histologically defined prostate cancer in humans. In Proc 16th Scientific Meeting International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine: Toronto; 2008.Google Scholar
deSouza, NM, Riches, SF, Vanas, NJ, et al. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging: a potential non-invasive marker of tumour aggressiveness in localized prostate cancer. Clin Radiol 2008;63 (7):774–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Valonen, PK, Lehtimaki, KK, Vaisanen, TH, et al. Water diffusion in a rat glioma during ganciclovir-thymidine kinase gene therapy-induced programmed cell death in vivo: correlation with cell density. J Magn Reson Imag 2004;19 (4):389–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, D, Ran, S, Constantinescu, A, et al. Tumor oxygen dynamics: correlation of in vivo MRI with histological findings. Neoplasia 2003;5 (4):308–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Riches, SF, Morgan, V, Payne, GS, Dearnaley, D, deSouza, N. Diffusion weighted imaging of androgen deprivation hormone therapy prostate cancer patients. Proc Int Soc Mag Reson Med 2007:793.
D'Amico, AV, Halabi, S, Tempany, C, et al. Tumor volume changes on 1.5 tesla endorectal MRI during neoadjuvant androgen suppression therapy for higher-risk prostate cancer and recurrence in men treated using radiation therapy: results of the phase II CALGB 9682 study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008;71 (1):9–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cohen, RJ, Fujiwara, K, Holland, JW, et al. Polyamines in prostatic epithelial cells and adenocarcinoma; the effects of androgen blockade. Prostate 2001;49 (4):278–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Takayama, Y, Kishimoto, R, Hanaoka, S, et al. ADC value and diffusion tensor imaging of prostate cancer: changes in carbon-ion radiotherapy. J Magn Reson Imag 2008;27 (6):1331–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petraki, CD, Sfikas, CP.Histopathological changes induced by therapies in the benign prostate and prostate adenocarcinoma. Histol Histopathol 2007;22 (1):107–18.Google ScholarPubMed
Chen, J, Daniel, BL, Diederich, CJ, et al. Monitoring prostate thermal therapy with diffusion-weighted MRI. Magn Reson Med 2008;59 (6):1365–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kumar, V, Jagannathan, NR, Kumar, R, et al. Correlation between metabolite ratios and ADC values of prostate in men with increased PSA level. Magn Reson Imag 2006;24 (5):541–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mazaheri, Y, Shukla-Dave, A, Hricak, H, et al. Prostate cancer: identification with combined diffusion-weighted MR imaging and 3D 1H MR spectroscopic imaging: correlation with pathologic findings. Radiology 2008;246 (2):480–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×