This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Hricak, H Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Hricak, H

MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging in the pre-treatment evaluation of prostate cancer

Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue C278, New York, NY 10021 USA

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H MRSI) are emerging as the most sensitive tools for the non-invasive, anatomic and metabolic evaluation of prostate cancer. This article reviews the current applications of MRI and 1H MRSI in clinical practice and discusses the promise of these modalities for improving prostate cancer management. MRI demonstrates zonal anatomy with excellent contrast resolution and can reveal tumours in areas not routinely sampled on biopsy and not palpable on digital rectal examination. In addition, MR images allow assessment of local extent (including extracapsular extension and seminal vesicle invasion) and thus can assist in local staging while providing surgeons and radiation therapists with a visual road-map for treatment planning. The addition of 1H MRSI to MRI can improve prostate cancer detection and assessment of tumour volume; it also contributes indirectly to improved local staging. In addition, 1H MRSI metabolic and volumetric data correlate with pathological Gleason grade and thus may offer a non-invasive means to better predict prostate cancer aggressiveness. Combined MRI/1H MRSI is currently of greatest value for high-risk patients. With greater understanding of the relationship between spectroscopic data and tumour biology, it may become possible to use MRI/1H MRSI to achieve more precise stratification of patients in clinical trials, to monitor the progress of patients who select watchful waiting or minimally aggressive cancer therapies, and to guide and assess emerging local prostate cancer therapies.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. Plathow and W. A. Weber Tumor Cell Metabolism Imaging J. Nucl. Med., June 1, 2008; 49(Suppl_2): 43S - 63S. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. K. Kuhl, F. Traber, J. Gieseke, W. Drahanowsky, N. Morakkabati-Spitz, W. Willinek, M. von Falkenhausen, C. Manka, and H. H. Schild Whole-Body High-Field-Strength (3.0-T) MR Imaging in Clinical Practice * Part II. Technical Considerations and Clinical Applications Radiology, April 1, 2008; 247(1): 16 - 35. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Wang, Y. Mazaheri, J. Zhang, N. M. Ishill, K. Kuroiwa, and H. Hricak Assessment of Biologic Aggressiveness of Prostate Cancer: Correlation of MR Signal Intensity with Gleason Grade after Radical Prostatectomy Radiology, December 1, 2007; 246(1): 168 - 176. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]