Novel application of three-dimensional shear wave elastography in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer

Shoji,Sunao; Hashimoto,Akio; Nakamura,Tomoya; Hiraiwa,Shinichiro; Sato,Haruhiro; Sato,Yoshinobu; Tajiri,Takuma; Miyajima,Akira

doi:10.3892/br.2018.1059

Novel application of three-dimensional shear wave elastography in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer

Authors:
- Sunao Shoji
- Akio Hashimoto
- Tomoya Nakamura
- Shinichiro Hiraiwa
- Haruhiro Sato
- Yoshinobu Sato
- Takuma Tajiri
- Akira Miyajima
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Urology, Tokai University Hachioji Hospital, Hachioji, Tokyo, 192-0032, Japan, Department of Radiology, Tokai University Hachioji Hospital, Hachioji, Tokyo, 192-0032, Japan, Department of Pathology, Tokai University Hachioji Hospital, Hachioji, Tokyo, 192-0032, Japan, Department of Internal Medicine, Kanagawa Dental University, Yokosuka, Kanagawa, 238-8580, Japan, Imaging-based Computational Biomedicine Laboratory, Graduate School of Information Science, Nara Institute of Science and Technology, Ikoma, Nara 630-0192, Japan, Department of Urology, Tokai University School of Medicine, Shimokasuya, Kanagawa 259-1193, Japan
Published online on: February 7, 2018 https://doi.org/10.3892/br.2018.1059
Pages: 373-377

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

The present study evaluated three-dimensional shear wave elastography (3D SWE) in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. Clinically significant prostate cancer was defined by a minimum of one biopsy core with a Gleason score of 3+4 or 6 with a maximum cancer core length >4 mm. Patients with serum prostate-specific antigen levels of 4.0-20.0 ng/ml who were suspected of having prostate cancer from multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) were prospectively recruited. The 3D SWE was performed pre-biopsy, after which patients underwent MRI-transrectal ultrasound image-guided targeted biopsies for cancer-suspicious lesions and 12-core systematic biopsies. The pathological biopsy results were compared with the mpMRI and 3D SWE images. A total of 12 patients who were suspected of having significant cancer on mpMRI were included. The median pre-biopsy PSA value was 5.65 ng/ml. Of the 12 patients, 10 patients were diagnosed as having prostate cancer. In the targeted biopsy lesions, there was a significant difference in Young's modulus between the cancer-detected area (median 64.1 kPa, n=20) and undetected area (median 30.8 kPa, n=8; P<0.0001). On evaluation of receiver operating characteristics, a cut-off value of the Young's modulus of 41.0 kPa was used for the detection of clinically significant cancer, with which the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of cancer detection were 58, 97, 86 and 87%, respectively. When combining this cut-off tissue elasticity value with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) scores, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of cancer detection were improved to 70, 98, 91 and 92%, respectively. In the cancer-detected lesions, a significant correlation was identified between the tissue elasticity value of the lesions and Gleason score (r=0.898, P<0.0001). In conclusion, PI-RADS combined with measurement of Young's modulus by 3D SWE may improve the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer.

View Figures

View References

1	Postema A, Mischi M, de la Rosette J and Wijkstra H: Multiparametric ultrasound in the detection of prostate cancer: A systematic review. World J Urol. 33:1651–1659. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
2	Good DW, Stewart GD, Hammer S, Scanlan P, Shu W, Phipps S, Reuben R and McNeill AS: Elasticity as a biomarker for prostate cancer: A systematic review. BJU Int. 113:523–534. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
3	Aigner F, Pallwein L, Schocke M, Lebovici A, Junker D, Schäfer G, Mikuz G, Pedross F, Horninger W, Jaschke W, et al: Comparison of real-time sonoelastography with T2-weighted endorectal magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer detection. J Ultrasound Med. 30:643–649. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
4	Correas JM, Tissier AM, Khairoune A, Khoury G, Eiss D and Hélénon O: Ultrasound elastography of the prostate: State of the art. Diagn Interv Imaging. 94:551–560. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
5	Nelson ED, Slotoroff CB, Gomella LG and Halpern EJ: Targeted biopsy of the prostate: The impact of color Doppler imaging and elastography on prostate cancer detection and Gleason score. Urology. 70:1136–1140. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
6	Ophir J, Garra B, Kallel F, Konofagou E, Krouskop T, Righetti R and Varghese T: Elastographic imaging. Ultrasound Med Biol. 26 Suppl 1:S23–S29. 2000. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
7	Mitri FG, Urban MW, Fatemi M and Greenleaf JF: Shear wave dispersion ultrasonic vibrometry for measuring prostate shear stiffness and viscosity: An in vitro pilot study. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 58:235–242. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
8	Woo S, Kim SY, Lee MS, Cho JY and Kim SH: Shear wave elastography assessment in the prostate: An intraobserver reproducibility study. Clin Imaging. 39:484–487. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
9	Barr RG, Memo R and Schaub CR: Shear wave ultrasound elastography of the prostate: Initial results. Ultrasound Q. 28:13–20. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
10	Harnden P, Naylor B, Shelley MD, Clements H, Coles B and Mason MD: The clinical management of patients with a small volume of prostatic cancer on biopsy: What are the risks of progression? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer. 112:971–981. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11	Vilanova JC, Barceló-Vidal C, Comet J, Boada M, Barceló J, Ferrer J and Albanell J: Usefulness of prebiopsy multifunctional and morphologic MRI combined with free-to-total prostate-specific antigen ratio in the detection of prostate cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 196:W715–22. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
12	Delongchamps NB, Rouanne M, Flam T, Beuvon F, Liberatore M, Zerbib M and Cornud F: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for the detection and localization of prostate cancer: Combination of T2-weighted, dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted imaging. BJU Int. 107:1411–1418. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
13	Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R, Choyke P, Verma S, Villeirs G, Rouviere O, Logager V and Fütterer JJ; European Society of Urogenital Radiology, : ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol. 22:746–757. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
14	Röthke M, Blondin D, Schlemmer HP and Franiel T: PI-RADS classification: Structured reporting for MRI of the prostate. Rofo. 185:253–261. 2013.(In German). PubMed/NCBI
15	Hamoen EHJ, de Rooij M, Witjes JA, Barentsz JO and Rovers MM: Use of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) for Prostate Cancer Detection with Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Diagnostic Meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 67:1112–1121. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
16	Oto A, Kayhan A, Jiang Y, Tretiakova M, Yang C, Antic T, Dahi F, Shalhav AL, Karczmar G and Stadler WM: Prostate cancer: Differentiation of central gland cancer from benign prostatic hyperplasia by using diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology. 257:715–723. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
17	Shoji S, Hiraiwa S, Ogawa T, Kawakami M, Nakano M, Hashida K, Sato Y, Hasebe T, Uchida T and Tajiri T: Accuracy of real-time magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound fusion image-guided transperineal target biopsy with needle tracking with a mechanical position-encoded stepper in detecting significant prostate cancer in biopsy-naïve men. Int J Urol. 24:288–294. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
18	Gleason DF, Mellinger GT, Arduino LJ, Bailar JC III, Becker LE III, Berman HI III, Bischoff AJ, Byar DP, Blackard CE, Doe RP, et al: Prediction of prognosis for prostatic adenocarcinoma by combined histological grading and clinical staging. J Urol. 111:58–64. 1974. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
19	Ahmad S, Cao R, Varghese T, Bidaut L and Nabi G: Transrectal quantitative shear wave elastography in the detection and characterisation of prostate cancer. Surg Endosc. 27:3280–3287. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
20	Correas JM, Tissier AM, Khairoune A, Vassiliu V, Méjean A, Hélénon O, Memo R and Barr RG: Prostate cancer: Diagnostic performance of real-time shear-wave elastography. Radiology. 275:280–289. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
21	Woo S, Kim SY, Cho JY and Kim SH: Shear wave elastography for detection of prostate cancer: A preliminary study. Korean J Radiol. 15:346–355. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI