Quantitative T2-mapping using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) allows measurement of tissue T2-relaxation times to complement anatomical and spatial information derived from T2-weighted imaging. Studies have shown varying T2-relaxation times between prostate malignancy and non-malignant prostatic tissue. This paper aims to critically review the literature in a systematic review, to determine the usefulness of T2-mapping in the evaluation of prostate malignancy. A literature search of PubMed and Embase databases was performed. There were 17 studies, up to 31 June 2018, that measured T2-relaxation times of prostate cancer and non-malignant prostatic tissue. Data reviewed from each study included: number of patients and regions of interest evaluated; patient age; study design; T2-mapping technique utilized; reported T2-relaxation values; method of data analysis; method of “ground-truth” assessment; and reported limitations. The T2-relaxation times of prostate cancer and non-malignant prostatic tissue were compared. The T2-relaxation times in the transition zone (TZ) are generally lower than the peripheral zone (PZ). The T2-relaxation times in prostate malignancy are significantly lower than normal PZ in all the studies that performed a statistical comparison. In three out of four studies that performed a statistical comparison, there was no significant difference in the T2-relaxation times between prostate malignancy and non-malignant TZ. T2-mapping appears useful in identifying prostate malignancy in the peripheral zone but is unable to reliably distinguish prostate malignancy and non-malignant transition zone. Further studies are recommended to determine if T2-mapping can improve diagnostic accuracy when used in conjunction with multiparametric MRI for detection of prostate malignancy.
HegdeJVMulkernRVPanychLP, et al.
Multiparametric MRI of prostate cancer: an update on state-of-the-art techniques and their performance in detecting and localizing prostate cancer.J Magn Reson Imaging2013;
37:1035–1054.
2.
BarentszJORichenbergJClementsR, et al.
ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012.Eur Radiol2012;
22:746–757.
3.
Garcia-ReyesKPassoniNMPalmeriML, et al.
Detection of prostate cancer with multiparametric MRI (mpMRI): effect of dedicated reader education on accuracy and confidence of index and anterior cancer diagnosis.Abdom Imaging2015;
40:134–142.
4.
RuprechtOWeisserPBodelleB, et al.
MRI of the prostate: interobserver agreement compared with histopathologic outcome after radical prostatectomy.Eur J Radiol2012;
81:456–460.
5.
ShinmotoHTamuraCSogaS, et al.
An intravoxel incoherent motion diffusion-weighted imaging study of prostate cancer.AJR Am J Roentgenol2012;
199:W496–500.
6.
GürsesBTasdelenNYencilekF, et al.
Diagnostic utility of DTI in prostate cancer.Eur J Radiol2011;
79:172–176.
7.
TamuraCShinmotoHSogaS, et al.
Diffusion kurtosis imaging study of prostate cancer: preliminary findings.J Magn Reson Imaging2014;
40:723–729.
8.
NöthUShresthaMSchüreJR, et al.
Quantitative in vivo T2 mapping using fast spin echo techniques - A linear correction procedure.Neuroimage2017;
157:476–485.
9.
NguyenKSarkarAJainAK.Prostate cancer grading: use of graph cut and spatial arrangement of nuclei.IEEE Trans Med Imaging2014;
33:2254–2270.
10.
MoherDLiberatiATetzlaffJ, et al.
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.J Clin Epidemiol2009;
62:1006–1012.
11.
PennyFWAnneWSMarieEW, et al.QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med2011;
155:529–536.
12.
HigginsJPTGreenS.Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011].
Oxford:
The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available at: http://handbook.cochrane.org.
13.
LiuWTurkbeyBSenegasJ, et al.
Accelerated T2 mapping for characterization of prostate cancer.Magn Reson Med2011;
65:1400–1406.
14.
GibbsPLineyGPPicklesMD, et al.
Correlation of ADC and T2 measurements with cell density in prostate cancer at 3.0 Tesla.Invest Radiol2009;
44:572–576.
15.
LangerDLvan der KwastTHEvansAJ, et al.
Prostate tissue composition and MR measurements: investigating the relationships between ADC, T2, K(trans), v(e), and corresponding histologic features.Radiology2010;
255:485–494.
16.
LangerDLvan der KwastTHEvansAJ, et al.
Prostate cancer detection with multi-parametric MRI: logistic regression analysis of quantitative T2, diffusion-weighted imaging, and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI.J Magn Reson Imaging2009;
30:327–334.
17.
YamauchiFIPenzkoferTFedorovA, et al.
Prostate cancer discrimination in the peripheral zone with a reduced field-of-view T(2)-mapping MRI sequence.Magn Reson Imaging2015;
33:525–530.
18.
DregelyIMargolisDASungK, et al.
Rapid quantitative T2 mapping of the prostate using three-dimensional dual echo steady state MRI at 3T.Magn Reson Med2016;
76:1720–1729.
19.
Van HoudtPJAgarwalHKvan BuurenLD, et al.
Performance of a fast and high-resolution multi-echo spin-echo sequence for prostate T2 mapping across multiple systems.Magn Reson Med2018;
79:1586–1594.
20.
GibbsPTozerDJLineyGP, et al.
Comparison of quantitative T2 mapping and diffusion-weighted imaging in the normal and pathologic prostate.Magn Reson Med2001;
46:1054–1058.
21.
SabouriSFazliLChangSD, et al.
MR measurement of luminal water in prostate gland: Quantitative correlation between MRI and histology.J Magn Reson Imaging2017;
46:861–869.
22.
SabouriSChangSDSavdieR, et al.
Luminal water imaging: a new MR imaging T2 mapping technique for prostate cancer diagnosis.Radiology2017;
284:451–459.
23.
FoltzWDChopraSChungP, et al.
Clinical prostate T2 quantification using magnetization-prepared spiral imaging.Magn Reson Med2010;
64:1155–1161.
24.
GigantiFGambarotaGMooreCM, et al.
Prostate cancer detection using quantitative T2 and T2 -weighted imaging: The effects of 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors in men on active surveillance.J Magn Reson Imaging2018;
47:1646–1653.
25.
SkorpilMBrynolfssonPEngströmM.Motion corrected DWI with integrated T2-mapping for simultaneous estimation of ADC, T2-relaxation and perfusion in prostate cancer.Magn Reson Imaging2017;
39:162–167.
26.
ChanIWellsW3rdMulkernRV, et al.
Detection of prostate cancer by integration of line-scan diffusion, T2-mapping and T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging; a multichannel statistical classifier.Med Phys2003;
30:2390–2398.
27.
FoltzWDWuAChungP, et al.
Changes in apparent diffusion coefficient and T2 relaxation during radiotherapy for prostate cancer.J Magn Reson Imaging2013;
37:909–916.
28.
StoråsTHGjesdalKIGadmarOB, et al.
Three-dimensional balanced steady state free precession imaging of the prostate: flip angle dependency of the signal based on a two component T2-decay model.J Magn Reson Imaging2010;
31:1124–1131.
29.
Hoang DinhASouchonRMelodelimaC, et al.
Characterization of prostate cancer using T2 mapping at 3T: a multi-scanner study.Diagn Interv Imaging2015;
96:365–372.
30.
KimPKHongYJImDJ, et al.
Myocardial T1 and T2 mapping: techniques and clinical applications.Korean J Radiol2017;
18:113–131.
31.
KnightMJMcCannBTsivosD, et al.
Quantitative T2 mapping of white matter: applications for ageing and cognitive decline.Phys Med Biol2016;
61:5587–5605.
32.
MamischTCTrattnigSQuirbachS, et al.
Quantitative T2 mapping of knee cartilage: differentiation of healthy control cartilage and cartilage repair tissue in the knee with unloading - initial results.Radiology2010;
254:818–826.
33.
LimKB.Epidemiology of clinical benign prostatic hyperplasia.Asian J Urol2017;
4:148–151.
34.
GuneyliSWardEThomasS, et al.
Magnetic resonance imaging of benign prostatic hyperplasia.Diagn Interv Radiol2016;
22:215–219.
35.
SchieblerMLTomaszewskiJEBezziM, et al.
Prostatic carcinoma and benign prostatic hyperplasia: correlation of high-resolution MR and histopathologic findings.Radiology1989;
172:131–137.
36.
ChesnaisALNiafEBratanF, et al.
Differentiation of transitional zone prostate cancer from benign hyperplasia nodules: evaluation of discriminant criteria at multiparametric MRI.Clin Radiol2013;
68:e323–330.
37.
WeinrebJCBarentszJOChoykePL, et al.
PI-RADS Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System: 2015, Version 2.Eur Urol2016;
69:16–40.
38.
PatelVMerrickGSAllenZA, et al.
The incidence of transition zone prostate cancer diagnosed by transperineal template-guided mapping biopsy: implications for treatment planning.Urology2011;
77:1148–1152.
39.
AhmedHUEl-ShaterBABrownLC, et al.
Diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study.Lancet2017;
389:815–822.
40.
KitzingYXPrandoAVarolC, et al.
Benign conditions that mimic prostate carcinoma: MR imaging features with histopathologic correlation.Radiographics2016;
36:162–175.
41.
BourneRMKurniawanNCowinG, et al.
Biexponential diffusion decay in formalin-fixed prostate tissue: preliminary findings.Magn Reson Med2012;
68:954–959.
42.
PrinceMRLeeHGLeeCH, et al.
Safety of gadobutrol in over 23,000 patients: the GARDIAN study, a global multicentre, prospective, non-interventional study.Eur Radiol2017;
27:286–295.
43.
GulaniVCalamanteFShellockFG, et al.
Gadolinium deposition in the brain: summary of evidence and recommendations.Lancet Neurol2017;
16:564–570.
44.
PuryskoASRosenkrantzABBarentszJO, et al.
PI-RADS version 2: a pictorial update.RadioGraphics2016;
36:1354–1372.
