Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion Guided Prostate Biopsy Improves Cancer Detection Following Transrectal Ultrasound Biopsy and Correlates With Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging

2011; Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; Volume: 186; Issue: 4 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1016/j.juro.2011.05.078

1527-3792

Peter A. Pinto, Paul H. Chung, Ardeshir R. Rastinehad, Angelo A. Baccala, Jochen Kruecker, Compton J. Benjamin, Sheng Xu, Pingkun Yan, Samuel Kadoury, Celene Chua, Julia K. Locklin, Barış Türkbey, Joanna H. Shih, S. Gates, Carey Buckner, Gennady Bratslavsky, W. Marston Linehan, Neil Glossop, Peter L. Choyke, Bradford J. Wood,

Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging

No AccessJournal of UrologyAdult Urology1 Oct 2011Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion Guided Prostate Biopsy Improves Cancer Detection Following Transrectal Ultrasound Biopsy and Correlates With Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Peter A. Pinto, Paul H. Chung, Ardeshir R. Rastinehad, Angelo A. Baccala, Jochen Kruecker, Compton J. Benjamin, Sheng Xu, Pingkun Yan, Samuel Kadoury, Celene Chua, Julia K. Locklin, Baris Turkbey, Joanna H. Shih, Stacey P. Gates, Carey Buckner, Gennady Bratslavsky, W. Marston Linehan, Neil D. Glossop, Peter L. Choyke, and Bradford J. Wood Peter A. PintoPeter A. Pinto Urologic Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland , Paul H. ChungPaul H. Chung Urologic Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland , Ardeshir R. RastinehadArdeshir R. Rastinehad Urologic Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland , Angelo A. BaccalaAngelo A. Baccala Urologic Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland , Jochen KrueckerJochen Kruecker Philips Research North America, Briarcliff Manor, New York , Compton J. BenjaminCompton J. Benjamin Urologic Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland , Sheng XuSheng Xu Philips Research North America, Briarcliff Manor, New York , Pingkun YanPingkun Yan Philips Research North America, Briarcliff Manor, New York , Samuel KadourySamuel Kadoury Philips Research North America, Briarcliff Manor, New York , Celene ChuaCelene Chua Urologic Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland , Julia K. LocklinJulia K. Locklin Center for Interventional Oncology, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland , Baris TurkbeyBaris Turkbey Molecular Imaging Program, Center for Cancer Research, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland , Joanna H. ShihJoanna H. Shih Philips Research North America, Briarcliff Manor, New York , Stacey P. GatesStacey P. Gates Center for Interventional Oncology, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland , Carey BucknerCarey Buckner Center for Interventional Oncology, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland , Gennady BratslavskyGennady Bratslavsky Urologic Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland , W. Marston LinehanW. Marston Linehan Urologic Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland , Neil D. GlossopNeil D. Glossop Biometric Research Branch, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, Maryland, Philips Healthcare, Toronto, Canada , Peter L. ChoykePeter L. Choyke Molecular Imaging Program, Center for Cancer Research, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland , and Bradford J. WoodBradford J. Wood Center for Interventional Oncology, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2011.05.078AboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract Purpose: A novel platform was developed that fuses pre-biopsy magnetic resonance imaging with real-time transrectal ultrasound imaging to identify and biopsy lesions suspicious for prostate cancer. The cancer detection rates for the first 101 patients are reported. Materials and Methods: This prospective, single institution study was approved by the institutional review board. Patients underwent 3.0 T multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging with endorectal coil, which included T2-weighted, spectroscopic, dynamic contrast enhanced and diffusion weighted magnetic resonance imaging sequences. Lesions suspicious for cancer were graded according to the number of sequences suspicious for cancer as low (2 or less), moderate (3) and high (4) suspicion. Patients underwent standard 12-core transrectal ultrasound biopsy and magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion guided biopsy with electromagnetic tracking of magnetic resonance imaging lesions. Chi-square and within cluster resampling analyses were used to correlate suspicion on magnetic resonance imaging and the incidence of cancer detected on biopsy. Results: Mean patient age was 63 years old. Median prostate specific antigen at biopsy was 5.8 ng/ml and 90.1% of patients had a negative digital rectal examination. Of patients with low, moderate and high suspicion on magnetic resonance imaging 27.9%, 66.7% and 89.5% were diagnosed with cancer, respectively (p <0.0001). Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion guided biopsy detected more cancer per core than standard 12-core transrectal ultrasound biopsy for all levels of suspicion on magnetic resonance imaging. Conclusions: Prostate cancer localized on magnetic resonance imaging may be targeted using this novel magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion guided biopsy platform. Further research is needed to determine the role of this platform in cancer detection, active surveillance and focal therapy, and to determine which patients may benefit. References 1 : Cancer statistics, 2009. CA Cancer J Clin2009; 59: 225. Google Scholar 2 : Optimal biopsy strategies for the diagnosis and staging of prostate cancer. Curr Opin Urol2009; 19: 232. Google Scholar 3 : Extended peripheral zone biopsy schemes increase cancer detection rates and minimize variance in prostate specific antigen and age related cancer rates: results of a community multi-practice study. J Urol2003; 169: 125. Link, Google Scholar 4 : A comparative analysis of sextant and an extended 11-core multisite directed biopsy strategy. J Urol2000; 163: 152. Link, Google Scholar 5 : Systematic 5 region prostate biopsy is superior to sextant method for diagnosing carcinoma of the prostate. J Urol1997; 157: 199. Link, Google Scholar 6 : Impact of transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy on quality of life: a prospective randomized trial comparing 6 versus 12 cores. J Urol2001; 165: 100. Link, Google Scholar 7 : Saturation technique does not improve cancer detection as an initial prostate biopsy strategy. J Urol2006; 175: 485. Link, Google Scholar 8 : Imaging localized prostate cancer: current approaches and new developments. AJR Am J Roentgenol2009; 192: 1471. Google Scholar 9 : Imaging techniques for prostate cancer: implications for focal therapy. Nat Rev Urol2009; 6: 191. Google Scholar 10 : Assessment of biologic aggressiveness of prostate cancer: correlation of MR signal intensity with Gleason grade after radical prostatectomy. Radiology2008; 246: 168. Google Scholar 11 : Is apparent diffusion coefficient associated with clinical risk scores for prostate cancers that are visible on 3-T MR images?. Radiology2011; 258: 488. Google Scholar 12 : MR imaging-guided prostate biopsy with a closed MR unit at 1.5 T: initial results. Radiology2005; 234: 576. Google Scholar 13 : Magnetic resonance imaging guided prostate biopsy in men with repeat negative biopsies and increased prostate specific antigen. J Urol2010; 183: 520. Link, Google Scholar 14 : System for MR image-guided prostate interventions: canine study. Radiology2003; 228: 886. Google Scholar 15 : Patient selection determines the prostate cancer yield of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging-guided transrectal biopsies in a closed 3-Tesla scanner. BJU Int2008; 101: 181. Google Scholar 16 : D'Amico risk stratification correlates with degree of suspicion of prostate cancer on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. J Urol2011; 185: 815. Link, Google Scholar 17 : Real time MRI-ultrasound image guided stereotactic prostate biopsy. Magn Reson Imaging2002; 20: 295. Google Scholar 18 : Real-time Virtual Sonography for navigation during targeted prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance imaging data. Int J Urol2010; 17: 855. Google Scholar 19 : Image fusion of MR images and real-time ultrasonography: evaluation of fusion accuracy combining two commercial instruments, a neuronavigation system and a ultrasound system. Acta Neurochir (Wien)2004; 146: 271. Google Scholar 20 : Real-time MRI-TRUS fusion for guidance of targeted prostate biopsies. Comput Aided Surg2008; 13: 255. Google Scholar 21 : Prostate cancer: value of multiparametric MR imaging at 3 T for detection–histopathologic correlation. Radiology2010; 255: 89. Google Scholar 22 : Saturation biopsy protocol enhances prediction of pT3 and surgical margin status on prostatectomy specimen. World J Urol2006; 24: 676. Google Scholar 23 : Parasagittal biopsies add minimal information in repeat saturation prostate biopsy. Urology2004; 63: 87. Google Scholar 24 : Prostate cancer detection with office based saturation biopsy in a repeat biopsy population. J Urol2004; 172: 94. Link, Google Scholar 25 : High incidence of prostate cancer detected by saturation biopsy after previous negative biopsy series. Eur Urol2006; 50: 498. Google Scholar 26 : Three-dimensional prostate mapping biopsy has a potentially significant impact on prostate cancer management. J Clin Oncol2009; 27: 4321. Google Scholar 27 : Transperineal magnetic resonance image guided prostate biopsy. J Urol2000; 164: 385. Link, Google Scholar © 2011 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited byGoldberg H, Ahmad A, Chandrasekar T, Klotz L, Emberton M, Haider M, Taneja S, Arora K, Fleshner N, Finelli A, Perlis N, Tyson M, Klaassen Z and Wallis C (2019) Comparison of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Transrectal Ultrasound Informed Prostate Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis in Biopsy Naïve Men: A Systematic Review and Meta-AnalysisJournal of Urology, VOL. 203, NO. 6, (1085-1093), Online publication date: 1-Jun-2020.Di Carlo H, Maruf M, Massanyi E, Shah B, Tekes A and Gearhart J (2019) 3-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Guided Pelvic Floor Dissection for Bladder Exstrophy: A Single Arm TrialJournal of Urology, VOL. 202, NO. 2, (406-412), Online publication date: 1-Aug-2019.Gold S, Shih J, Rais-Bahrami S, Bloom J, Vourganti S, Singla N, Baroni R, Coker M, Fialkoff J, Noschang J, Roehrborn C, Turkbey B, Pinto P, Hale G, Rayn K, Wood B, Merino M, Choyke P, Mehralivand S, Nix J, Gordetsky J, Porter K, Thomas J, Noschang J, Shakir N, Passoni N and Costa D (2019) When to Biopsy the Seminal Vesicles: A Validated Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Target Driven Model to Detect Seminal Vesicle Invasion of Prostate CancerJournal of Urology, VOL. 201, NO. 5, (943-949), Online publication date: 1-May-2019.Taneja S (2018) Re: MRI-Targeted or Standard Biopsy for Prostate-Cancer DiagnosisJournal of Urology, VOL. 200, NO. 4, (697-699), Online publication date: 1-Oct-2018.Mortezavi A, Märzendorfer O, Donati O, Rizzi G, Rupp N, Wettstein M, Gross O, Sulser T, Hermanns T and Eberli D (2018) Diagnostic Accuracy of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Fusion Guided Targeted Biopsy Evaluated by Transperineal Template Saturation Prostate Biopsy for the Detection and Characterization of Prostate CancerJournal of Urology, VOL. 200, NO. 2, (309-318), Online publication date: 1-Aug-2018.Truong M, Weinberg E, Hollenberg G, Borch M, Park J, Gantz J, Feng C, Frye T, Ghazi A, Wu G, Joseph J, Rashid H and Messing E (2016) Institutional Learning Curve Associated with Implementation of a Magnetic Resonance/Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy Program Using PI-RADS™ Version 2: Factors that Influence SuccessUrology Practice, VOL. 5, NO. 1, (69-75), Online publication date: 1-Jan-2018.Taneja S (2017) Re: Diagnostic Accuracy of Multi-Parametric MRI and TRUS Biopsy in Prostate Cancer (PROMIS): A Paired Validating Confirmatory StudyJournal of Urology, VOL. 198, NO. 1, (101-102), Online publication date: 1-Jul-2017.Lee D, Recabal P, Sjoberg D, Thong A, Lee J, Eastham J, Scardino P, Vargas H, Coleman J and Ehdaie B (2016) Comparative Effectiveness of Targeted Prostate Biopsy Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging Ultrasound Fusion Software and Visual Targeting: a Prospective StudyJournal of Urology, VOL. 196, NO. 3, (697-702), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2016.Taneja S (2016) Re: Prostate Cancer Detection with Magnetic Resonance-Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy: The Role of Systematic and Targeted BiopsiesJournal of Urology, VOL. 196, NO. 1, (101-102), Online publication date: 1-Jul-2016.Chelluri R, Kilchevsky A, George A, Sidana A, Frye T, Su D, Fascelli M, Ho R, Abboud S, Turkbey B, Merino M, Choyke P, Wood B and Pinto P (2016) Prostate Cancer Diagnosis on Repeat Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy of Benign Lesions: Recommendations for Repeat SamplingJournal of Urology, VOL. 196, NO. 1, (62-67), Online publication date: 1-Jul-2016.Felker E, Wu J, Natarajan S, Margolis D, Raman S, Huang J, Dorey F and Marks L (2015) Serial Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer: Incremental ValueJournal of Urology, VOL. 195, NO. 5, (1421-1427), Online publication date: 1-May-2016.Costa D, Lotan Y, Rofsky N, Roehrborn C, Liu A, Hornberger B, Xi Y, Francis F and Pedrosa I (2015) Assessment of Prospectively Assigned Likert Scores for Targeted Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Biopsies in Patients with Suspected Prostate CancerJournal of Urology, VOL. 195, NO. 1, (80-87), Online publication date: 1-Jan-2016.Bryk D, Llukani E, Huang W and Lepor H (2015) Natural History of Pathologically Benign Cancer Suspicious Regions on Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Following Targeted BiopsyJournal of Urology, VOL. 194, NO. 5, (1234-1240), Online publication date: 1-Nov-2015.Raskolnikov D, George A, Rais-Bahrami S, Turkbey B, Siddiqui M, Shakir N, Okoro C, Rothwax J, Walton-Diaz A, Sankineni S, Su D, Stamatakis L, Merino M, Choyke P, Wood B and Pinto P (2015) The Role of Magnetic Resonance Image Guided Prostate Biopsy in Stratifying Men for Risk of Extracapsular Extension at Radical ProstatectomyJournal of Urology, VOL. 194, NO. 1, (105-111), Online publication date: 1-Jul-2015.Siddiqui M, Truong H, Rais-Bahrami S, Stamatakis L, Logan J, Walton-Diaz A, Turkbey B, Choyke P, Wood B, Simon R and Pinto P (2015) Clinical Implications of a Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Based Nomogram Applied to Prostate Cancer Active SurveillanceJournal of Urology, VOL. 193, NO. 6, (1943-1949), Online publication date: 1-Jun-2015.Abraham N, Mendhiratta N and Taneja S (2014) Patterns of Repeat Prostate Biopsy in Contemporary Clinical PracticeJournal of Urology, VOL. 193, NO. 4, (1178-1184), Online publication date: 1-Apr-2015.Raskolnikov D, Rais-Bahrami S, George A, Turkbey B, Shakir N, Okoro C, Rothwax J, Walton-Diaz A, Siddiqui M, Su D, Stamatakis L, Yan P, Kruecker J, Xu S, Merino M, Choyke P, Wood B and Pinto P (2014) The Role of Image Guided Biopsy Targeting in Patients with Atypical Small Acinar ProliferationJournal of Urology, VOL. 193, NO. 2, (473-478), Online publication date: 1-Feb-2015.Shakir N, George A, Siddiqui M, Rothwax J, Rais-Bahrami S, Stamatakis L, Su D, Okoro C, Raskolnikov D, Walton-Diaz A, Simon R, Turkbey B, Choyke P, Merino M, Wood B and Pinto P (2014) Identification of Threshold Prostate Specific Antigen Levels to Optimize the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer by Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion Guided BiopsyJournal of Urology, VOL. 192, NO. 6, (1642-1649), Online publication date: 1-Dec-2014.Crawford E, Rove K, Stone N, Lucia M, Barqawi A and La Rosa F (2014) Moving Forward the State of the Art in Prostate Cancer Treatment: Targeted Focal TherapyUrology Practice, VOL. 1, NO. 3, (156-164), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2014.Porpiglia F, Russo F, Manfredi M, Mele F, Fiori C, Bollito E, Papotti M, Molineris I, Passera R and Regge D (2014) The Roles of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging, PCA3 and Prostate Health Index—Which is the Best Predictor of Prostate Cancer after a Negative Biopsy?Journal of Urology, VOL. 192, NO. 1, (60-66), Online publication date: 1-Jul-2014.Rastinehad A, Turkbey B, Salami S, Yaskiv O, George A, Fakhoury M, Beecher K, Vira M, Kavoussi L, Siegel D, Villani R and Ben-Levi E (2013) Improving Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Guided Prostate BiopsyJournal of Urology, VOL. 191, NO. 6, (1749-1754), Online publication date: 1-Jun-2014.Raskolnikov D, Rais-Bahrami S, Turkbey B, Rastinehad A, Choyke P, Wood B and Pinto P (2014) Current Ability of Multiparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Targeted Biopsy to Improve the Detection of Prostate CancerUrology Practice, VOL. 1, NO. 1, (13-21), Online publication date: 1-May-2014.Albertsen P and Marks L (2013) MRI before Prostate Biopsy—Yes or No?Journal of Urology, VOL. 190, NO. 6, (1978-1980), Online publication date: 1-Dec-2013.Walton Diaz A, Hoang A, Turkbey B, Hong C, Truong H, Sterling T, Rais-Bahrami S, Siddiqui M, Stamatakis L, Vourganti S, Nix J, Logan J, Harris C, Weintraub M, Chua C, Merino M, Choyke P, Wood B and Pinto P (2013) Can Magnetic Resonance-Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy Improve Cancer Detection in Enlarged Prostates?Journal of Urology, VOL. 190, NO. 6, (2020-2025), Online publication date: 1-Dec-2013.Villers A and Puech P (2013) When and How Should Magnetic Resonance Imaging be Used in Evaluation of the Patient with Prostate Cancer or Increased Prostate Specific Antigen?Journal of Urology, VOL. 190, NO. 5, (1641-1642), Online publication date: 1-Nov-2013.Rais-Bahrami S, Siddiqui M, Turkbey B, Stamatakis L, Logan J, Hoang A, Walton-Diaz A, Vourganti S, Truong H, Kruecker J, Merino M, Wood B, Choyke P and Pinto P (2013) Utility of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Suspicion Levels for Detecting Prostate CancerJournal of Urology, VOL. 190, NO. 5, (1721-1727), Online publication date: 1-Nov-2013.Numao N, Yoshida S, Komai Y, Ishii C, Kagawa M, Kijima T, Yokoyama M, Ishioka J, Matsuoka Y, Koga F, Saito K, Masuda H, Fujii Y, Kawakami S and Kihara K (2013) Usefulness of Pre-biopsy Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Clinical Variables to Reduce Initial Prostate Biopsy in Men with Suspected Clinically Localized Prostate CancerJournal of Urology, VOL. 190, NO. 2, (502-508), Online publication date: 1-Aug-2013.Kasivisvanathan V, Dufour R, Moore C, Ahmed H, Abd-Alazeez M, Charman S, Freeman A, Allen C, Kirkham A, van der Meulen J and Emberton M (2012) Transperineal Magnetic Resonance Image Targeted Prostate Biopsy Versus Transperineal Template Prostate Biopsy in the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate CancerJournal of Urology, VOL. 189, NO. 3, (860-866), Online publication date: 1-Mar-2013.Delongchamps N, Peyromaure M, Schull A, Beuvon F, Bouazza N, Flam T, Zerbib M, Muradyan N, Legman P and Cornud F (2012) Prebiopsy Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Prostate Cancer Detection: Comparison of Random and Targeted BiopsiesJournal of Urology, VOL. 189, NO. 2, (493-499), Online publication date: 1-Feb-2013.Sonn G, Natarajan S, Margolis D, MacAiran M, Lieu P, Huang J, Dorey F and Marks L (2012) Targeted Biopsy in the Detection of Prostate Cancer Using an Office Based Magnetic Resonance Ultrasound Fusion DeviceJournal of Urology, VOL. 189, NO. 1, (86-92), Online publication date: 1-Jan-2013.Vourganti S, Rastinehad A, Yerram N, Nix J, Volkin D, Hoang A, Turkbey B, Gupta G, Kruecker J, Linehan W, Choyke P, Wood B and Pinto P (2012) Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy Detect Prostate Cancer in Patients with Prior Negative Transrectal Ultrasound BiopsiesJournal of Urology, VOL. 188, NO. 6, (2152-2157), Online publication date: 1-Dec-2012.Rosenkrantz A and Taneja S (2012) Targeted Prostate Biopsy: Opportunities and Challenges in the Era of Multiparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance ImagingJournal of Urology, VOL. 188, NO. 4, (1072-1073), Online publication date: 1-Oct-2012.Gomella L (2012) The Quest for the Perfect Prostate Biopsy ContinuesJournal of Urology, VOL. 187, NO. 6, (1954-1955), Online publication date: 1-Jun-2012. Volume 186Issue 4October 2011Page: 1281-1285 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2011 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Keywordsbiopsymagnetic resonance imagingearly detection of cancerultrasonographyprostatic neoplasmsMetricsAuthor Information Peter A. Pinto Urologic Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland Equal study contribution. Financial interest and/or other relationship with National Institutes of Health/Philips Healthcare. More articles by this author Paul H. Chung Urologic Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland Equal study contribution. Nothing to disclose. More articles by this author Ardeshir R. Rastinehad Urologic Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland Nothing to disclose. More articles by this author Angelo A. Baccala Urologic Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland Nothing to disclose. More articles by this author Jochen Kruecker Philips Research North America, Briarcliff Manor, New York Financial interest and/or other relationship with Philips. More articles by this author Compton J. Benjamin Urologic Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland Nothing to disclose. More articles by this author Sheng Xu Philips Research North America, Briarcliff Manor, New York Financial interest and/or other relationship with Philips. More articles by this author Pingkun Yan Philips Research North America, Briarcliff Manor, New York Financial interest and/or other relationship with Philips. More articles by this author Samuel Kadoury Philips Research North America, Briarcliff Manor, New York Financial interest and/or other relationship with Philips. More articles by this author Celene Chua Urologic Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland Nothing to disclose. More articles by this author Julia K. Locklin Center for Interventional Oncology, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland Nothing to disclose. More articles by this author Baris Turkbey Molecular Imaging Program, Center for Cancer Research, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland Nothing to disclose. More articles by this author Joanna H. Shih Philips Research North America, Briarcliff Manor, New York Nothing to disclose. More articles by this author Stacey P. Gates Center for Interventional Oncology, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland Nothing to disclose. More articles by this author Carey Buckner Center for Interventional Oncology, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland Nothing to disclose. More articles by this author Gennady Bratslavsky Urologic Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland Nothing to disclose. More articles by this author W. Marston Linehan Urologic Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland Nothing to disclose. More articles by this author Neil D. Glossop Biometric Research Branch, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, Maryland, Philips Healthcare, Toronto, Canada Financial interest and/or other relationship with Philips. More articles by this author Peter L. Choyke Molecular Imaging Program, Center for Cancer Research, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland Financial interest and/or other relationship with Philips Medical Systems, General Electric Health Care and Siemens Medical Solutions. More articles by this author Bradford J. Wood Center for Interventional Oncology, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Clinical Center & National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland Financial interest and/or other relationship with National Institutes of Health/Philips Healthcare. More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...