Using 320-slice perfusion computed tomography in visuali zation of prostate cancer

Visualization of prostate cancer remains an actual problem in urology and oncology. Purpose of the study – evaluation of prostate cancer visualization using 320-slice perfusion computed tomography (PCT). PCT results of 15 patients with suspected prostate cancer were evaluated. Studies were performed with the 320-slice spiral computed tomography Aquilion One (Toshiba, Japan). Perfusion of the prostate was calculated by the maximum gradient. Next, the areas of interest were placed on each perfusion map. For each of the areas of interest, the following indicators were calculated: the average blood flow velocity, normalized blood flow velocity, the difference of blood flow velocity in the contralateral areas of interest, the difference of the normalized blood flow velocity in the contralateral areas of interest. Differences between indexes depending on the results of histological examination for each area of interest were evaluated by the variance analysis and by pairwise comparison with the Tukey’s criterion. Statistical significance of differences was assessed by the specialized computer language R v 3.2, using pROC packets. Totally, 180 biopsies were obtained. 19 – prostate cancer Σ Gleason 6, 17 – prostate cancer Σ Gleason 7, 5 – prostate cancer Gleason Σ 8, 7 – inflammation, 121 – not pathological, 11 – prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN). The areas under the ROC curves for the studied parameters were: average blood flow velocity 0.6343, normalized blood flow velocity 0.5300, difference of blood flow velocity in contralateral areas of interest 0.5875, difference of normalized blood flow velocity in the contralateral areas of interest 0.6263. The results of our study shows low sensitivity of the method in detection of lowgrade prostate cancer.

1. Злокачественные новообразования в России в 2013 году (заболеваемость и смертность) / под ред. А. Д. Каприна, В. В. Старинского, Г. В. Петровой. – М., 2015.

2. Elizabeth P. Ives, Melissa A. Burke, Pamela R. Edmonds et al. Perfusion of Prostate Cancer: Correlation with Whole-Mount Pathology // Clinical Prostate Cancer. – 2005. –Vol. 4. –№ 2. – Р. 17–21.

3. Emory T. H. et al. Use of CT to reduce understaging in prostatic cancer: comparison with conventional staging techniques // Am. J. Roentgenol. –1983. –Vol. 141. – № 2. –P. 351–354.

4. Engeler C. E., Wasserman N. F., Zhang G. Preoperative assessment of prostatic carcinoma by computerized tomography. Weaknesses and new perspectives // Urology. –1992. –Vol. 40. – № 4. –P. 346–350.

5. Glazer D. I., Davenport M. S., Khalatbari S. et al. Mass-like peripheral zone enhancement on CT is predictive of higher-grade (Gleason 4 + 3 and higher) prostate cancer //Abdom Imaging. – 2014.

6. Golimbu M. et al. CAT scanning in staging of prostatic cancer // Urology. –1981. –Vol. 18. – № 3. –P. 305–308.

7. Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. In: EAU Guidelines, edition presented at the 31th EAU Annual Congress, Munich 2016. URL: http://uroweb. org/guideline/prostate-cancer/#5(дата обращения 16.06.2016).

8. Hricak H. et al. Prostatic carcinoma: staging by clinical assessment, CT, and MR imaging // Radiology. –1987. –Vol. 162. – № 2. –P. 331–336.

9. Jia J. B. et al. Prostate cancer on computed tomography: A direct comparison with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and tissue pathology // Eur. J. of Radiology. – 2016. – Vol. 85. – № 1. –P. 261–267.

10. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Prostate Cancer. Version1. 2016. URL: http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/prostate.pdf (дата обращения 15.03.2016).

11. Osimani M., Bellini D., Di Cristofano Cl. et al. Perfusion MDCT of Prostate Cancer: Correlation of Perfusion CT Parameters and Immunohistochemical Markers of Angiogenesis // AJR. – 2012. –№ 199. –Р. 1042–1048.

12. Prando A.,Wallace S. Helical CT of prostate cancer: early clinical experience // Am. J.Roentgenol. – 2000. – № 175. – Р. 343–346.

13. Schieda N., AlDandan O., Shabana W. et al. Is primary tumor detectable in prostatic carcinoma at routine contrast-enhanced CT? // Clinical Imaging. – 2015. –№ 39. –Р. 623–626.

14. Weinreb, Jeffrey C., Jelle O. Barentsz et al. Prostate Imaging – Reporting and Data System: 2015, Version 2 // Eur. Urology. – 2016. – № 69(1). –Р. 16–40.