Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
S. Hong, B. Han, Seung Lee, S. Kim, K. Min, S. Jeong, Hyeon Jeong, S. Byun, H. Lee, G. Choe, Sang Lee (2009)
Prediction of Gleason score upgrading in low-risk prostate cancers diagnosed via multi (≥12)-core prostate biopsyWorld Journal of Urology, 27
R. Montironi, R. Mazzucchelli, T. Kwast (2003)
Morphological assessment of radical prostatectomy specimens. A protocol with clinical relevanceVirchows Archiv, 443
S. Jung, O. Donati, H. Vargas, D. Goldman, H. Hricak, O. Akin (2013)
Transition zone prostate cancer: incremental value of diffusion-weighted endorectal MR imaging in tumor detection and assessment of aggressiveness.Radiology, 269 2
H. Ahmed, M. Arya, A. Freeman, M. Emberton (2012)
Do low-grade and low-volume prostate cancers bear the hallmarks of malignancy?The Lancet. Oncology, 13 11
E. Vos, G. Litjens, T. Kobus, T. Hambrock, C. Kaa, J. Barentsz, H. Huisman, T. Scheenen (2013)
Assessment of prostate cancer aggressiveness using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging at 3 T.European urology, 64 3
L. Axel, J. Costantini, J. Listerud (1987)
Intensity correction in surface-coil MR imaging.AJR. American journal of roentgenology, 148 2
J. Nickel, M. Speakman (2012)
SHOULD WE REALLY CONSIDER GLEASON 6 PROSTATE CANCER?BJU International, 109
V. Giannini, A. Vignati, L. Morra, D. Persano, D. Brizzi, L. Carbonaro, A. Bert, F. Sardanelli, D. Regge (2010)
A fully automatic algorithm for segmentation of the breasts in DCE-MR images2010 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology
Hyeyeol Bae, S. Yoshida, Y. Matsuoka, H. Nakajima, E. Ito, Hiroshi Tanaka, Miyako Oya, T. Nakayama, H. Takeshita, T. Kijima, J. Ishioka, N. Numao, F. Koga, K. Saito, T. Akashi, Y. Fujii, K. Kihara (2014)
Apparent diffusion coefficient value as a biomarker reflecting morphological and biological features of prostate cancerInternational Urology and Nephrology, 46
J. Jones, Amit Patel, L. Schoenfield, J. Rabets, C. Zippe, C. Magi-Galluzzi (2006)
Saturation technique does not improve cancer detection as an initial prostate biopsy strategy.The Journal of urology, 175 2
S. Willard, S. Koochekpour (2012)
Regulators of gene expression as biomarkers for prostate cancer.American journal of cancer research, 2 6
A. Rosenkrantz, E. Sigmund, G. Johnson, J. Babb, T. Mussi, J. Melamed, S. Taneja, V. Lee, J. Jensen (2012)
Prostate cancer: feasibility and preliminary experience of a diffusional kurtosis model for detection and assessment of aggressiveness of peripheral zone cancer.Radiology, 264 1
B. Turkbey, P. Albert, K. Kurdziel, P. Choyke (2009)
Imaging localized prostate cancer: current approaches and new developments.AJR. American journal of roentgenology, 192 6
J. Barentsz, J. Richenberg, R. Clements, P. Choyke, S. Verma, G. Villeirs, O. Rouvière, V. Løgager, J. Fütterer (2012)
ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012European Radiology, 22
N. Tustison, B. Avants, P. Cook, Yuanjie Zheng, Alexander Egan, Paul Yushkevich, J. Gee (2010)
N4ITK: Improved N3 Bias CorrectionIEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, 29
(2011)
Prostate cancer: multiparametric MR imaging for detection, localization, and staging
L. Klotz (2012)
Cancer overdiagnosis and overtreatmentCurrent Opinion in Urology, 22
A. Heidenreich, J. Bellmunt, M. Bolla, S. Joniau, M. Mason, V. Matveev, N. Mottet, H. Schmid, T. Kwast, T. Wiegel, F. Zattoni (2011)
EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised disease.European urology, 59 1
T. Hambrock, D. Somford, H. Huisman, I. Oort, J. Witjes, C. Kaa, T. Scheenen, J. Barentsz (2011)
Relationship between apparent diffusion coefficients at 3.0-T MR imaging and Gleason grade in peripheral zone prostate cancer.Radiology, 259 2
S. Viswanath, D. Palumbo, J. Chappelow, Pratik Patel, B. Bloch, N. Rofsky, R. Lenkinski, E. Genega, A. Madabhushi (2011)
Empirical evaluation of bias field correction algorithms for computer-aided detection of prostate cancer on T2w MRI, 7963
R. Montironi, A. López-Beltran, R. Mazzucchelli, M. Scarpelli, E. Bollito (2001)
Assessment of radical prostatectomy specimens and diagnostic reporting of pathological findings.Pathologica, 93 3
Liang Wang, Y. Mazaheri, Jingbo Zhang, N. Ishill, K. Kuroiwa, H. Hricak (2008)
Assessment of biologic aggressiveness of prostate cancer: correlation of MR signal intensity with Gleason grade after radical prostatectomy.Radiology, 246 1
M. Huber, K. Bunte, Mahesh Nagarajan, Michael Biehl, L. Ray, A. Wismüller (2011)
Texture feature selection with relevance learning to classify interstitial lung disease patterns, 7963
G. Aus, C. Abbou, M. Bolla, A. Heidenreich, H. Schmid, H. Poppel, J. Wolff, F. Zattoni (2001)
EAU guidelines on prostate cancer.European urology, 48 4
Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common solid neoplasm in males and a major cause of cancer-related death. Behaviour of PCa is dichotomous, as patients may either have an indolent clinical course or rapidly progress towards metastatic disease. Unfortunately, biopsy Gleason score (GS) may fail to predict cancer aggressiveness; tumour heterogeneity and inaccurate sampling during biopsy are major causes of underestimation. As a consequence, this frequently results in over-treatment, i.e. low-risk patients overcautiously undergo radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy, frequently with devastating side-effects. Some patients with PCa could be offered a more conservative approach if it were possible to predict patient risk confidently, especially in subjects lying in the grey zone of intermediate risk (i.e. GS = 7), which are in the majority. Recent studies have demonstrated that magnetic resonance (MR) imaging may help improve risk stratification in patients with PCa, providing imaging biomarkers of cancer aggressiveness. The aim of this study is to implement an automatic algorithm pipeline to discriminate different risks of progression from T2-weighted (T2-w) MR imaging. The obtained results confirm that T2-w signal intensity, together with other imaging biomarkers, may represent a new non-invasive approach to assess cancer aggressiveness, potentially helping to plan personalised treatments, and thus dramatically limiting over-diagnosis and over-treatment risks, and reducing the costs for the national healthcare system.
Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering: Imaging & Visualization – Taylor & Francis
Published: Jul 3, 2016
Keywords: prostate cancer; endorectal MR imaging; tumour aggressiveness; T2-weighted MR images
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.