Comparison of rigid and deformable coregistration between mpMRI and CT images in radiotherapy of prostate bed cancer recurrence

Ultrasound and advanced imaging techniques in prostate cancer diagnosis: A comparative study of mpMRI, TRUS, and PET/CT

ObjectiveThis study aims to assess and compare the diagnostic performance of three advanced imaging modalities-multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), transrectal ultrasound (TRUS), and positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT)-in detecting prostate cancer in patients with elevated PSA levels and abnormal DRE findings.MethodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 150 male patients aged 50-75 years with elevated PSA and abnormal DRE. The diagnostic accuracy of each modality was assessed through sensitivity, specificity, and the area under the curve (AUC) to compare performance in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer (Gleason score ≥ 7).ResultsMpMRI demonstrated the highest diagnostic performance, with a sensitivity of 90%, specificity of 85%, and AUC of 0.92, outperforming both TRUS (sensitivity 76%, specificity 78%, AUC 0.77) and PET/CT (sensitivity 82%, specificity 80%, AUC 0.81). MpMRI detected clinically significant tumors in 80% of cases. Although TRUS and PET/CT had similar detection rates for significant tumors, their overall accuracy was lower. Minor adverse events occurred in 5% of patients undergoing TRUS, while no significant complications were associated with mpMRI or PET/CT.ConclusionThese findings suggest that mpMRI is the most reliable imaging modality for early detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. It reduces the need for unnecessary biopsies and optimizes patient management.

Head-to-head comparison of prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

Our main goal of this meta-analytical analysis was to evaluate the diagnostic effectiveness of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) against multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in the context of identifying biochemical recurrence in patients with prostate cancer (PCa).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A thorough search covering articles published until March 2023 was carried out across major databases such as PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. Studies examining the direct comparison of PSMA PET/CT and mpMRI in patients with PCa suffering biochemical recurrence were included in the inclusion criteria. Using the renowned Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Performance Studies-2 technique, each study's methodological rigor was assessed.

RESULTS

We analyzed data from six eligible studies involving 290 patients in total. The combined data showed that for PSMA PET/CT and mpMRI, respectively, the pooled overall detection rates for recurrent PCa after definitive treatment were 0.69 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.45-0.89) and 0.70 (95% CI: 0.44-0.91). The detection rates for local recurrence were specifically 0.52 (95% CI: 0.39-0.65) and 0.62 (95% CI: 0.31-0.89), while they were 0.50 (95% CI: 0.26-0.74) and 0.32 (95% CI: 0.18-0.48) for lymph node metastasis. Notably, there was no discernible difference between the two imaging modalities in terms of the overall detection rate (P = 0.95). The detection rates for local recurrence and lymph node metastasis did not differ statistically significantly (P = 0.55, 0.23).

CONCLUSION

The performance of PSMA PET/CT and mpMRI in identifying biochemical recurrence in PCa appears to be comparable. However, the meta-analysis' findings came from research with modest sample sizes. In this context, more extensive research should be conducted in the future.

Head-to-head comparison of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT and 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MRI in the detection of biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer: summary of head-to-head comparison studies

PURPOSE

Our meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT vs. 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MRI for biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer.

METHODS

We searched for relevant articles in PubMed and Embase until February 2022. Studies evaluating head-to-head comparison of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT and 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MRI in men with prostate cancer biochemical recurrence were included. The quality of each study was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Performance Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool.

RESULTS

A total of 5 studies with 219 patients were included in the analysis. The pooled overall detection rates of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT and 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MRI in detecting recurrent PCa after definitive treatment were 0.89 (95% CI: 0.65-1.00), 0.92 (95% CI: 0.77-1.00), while the detection rates were 0.20 (95% CI: 0.05-0.41) and 0.29 (95% CI: 0.10-0.53) in local recurrence, 0.51 (95% CI: 0.33-0.69) and 0.52 (95% CI: 0.44-0.61) in lymph node metastasis, 0.18 (95% CI: 0.07-0.33) and 0.20 (95% CI: 0.09-0.35) in bone metastasis. There was no significant difference between the two imaging modalities in the overall detection rate (P = 0.82). In addition, detection rates were also not significantly different in local recurrence, lymph node metastasis, or bone metastasis (P = 0.54, 1.00, 0.82).

CONCLUSIONS

68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT and 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MRI seem to have equivalent performance in detecting biochemical recurrence in prostate cancer. However, the results of the meta-analysis were drawn from studies with small samples. Further larger studies in this setting are warranted.

The Prognostic Value of DCE-MRI Findings before Salvage Radiotherapy after Radical Prostatectomy

BACKGROUND

To investigate the predictive role of dynamic contrast-enhanced-magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) findings before salvage radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy (RP).

METHODS

This retrospective study selected patients with biochemical failure (BF) after RP restaged with DCE-MRI. Patients underwent sRT in 30 fractions delivering 66-69 Gy and 73.5 Gy to the prostatic fossa and to the local failure as per DCE-MRI, respectively. Pelvic nodes were treated to 54 Gy in selected patients. The endpoint was BF after sRT.

RESULTS

In total, 236 patients were analyzed and 146 (61.9%) had presumed local failure at DCE-MRI: 54.8%, 23.8% and 21.4% were found at the vesico-urethral anastomosis (VUA), the bladder neck and the retro-vesical space, respectively. The presence of a local failure at DCE-MRI halved the risk of BF; VUA-only location and lesion volume were independently correlated with survival without evidence of biochemical failure (bNED) at multivariable analysis. For patients with VUA-only disease up to 0.4 cc, the 4-year-bNED was 94.6% (95%CI: 80.2-98.6%) as opposed to 80.9% (95%CI: 71.6-87.4%) and 73.7% (95%CI: 63.1-81.8%) for other lesions and no macrodisease, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

DCE-MRI at restaging for BF after RP provides predictive and therapeutic information. Patients with small lesions at the VUA have an excellent prognosis after sRT.

Evaluation of DIR algorithm performance in real patients for radiotherapy treatments: A systematic review of operator-dependent strategies

PURPOSE

The performance of deformable medical image registration (DIR) algorithms has become a major concern.

METHODS

We aimed to obtain updated information on DIR algorithm performance quantification through a literature review of articles published between 2010 and 2022. We focused only on studies using operator-based methods to treat real patients. The PubMed, Google Scholar and Embase databases were searched following PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

One hundred and seven articles were identified. The mean number of patients and registrations per publication was 20 and 63, respectively. We found 23 different geometric metrics appearing at least twice, and the dosimetric impact of DIR was quantified in 32 articles. Forty-eight different at-risk organs were described, and target volumes were studied in 43 publications. Prostate, head-and-neck and thoracic locations represented more than ¾ of the studied locations. We summarized the type of DIR and the images used, and other key elements. Intra/interobserver variability, threshold values and the correlation between metrics were also discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

This literature review covers the past decade and should facilitate the implementation of DIR algorithms in clinical practice by providing practical and pertinent information to quantify their performance on real patients.