| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Priority Reports |
Departments of 1 Pathology, 2 Radiology, and 3 Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
Requests for reprints: Leo L. Cheng, Pathology Research CNY-7, 149 13th Street, Charlestown, MA 02129; Phone: 617-724-6593; Fax: 617-726-5684; E-mail: cheng{at}nmr.mgh.harvard.edu.
Diagnostic advancements for prostate cancer have so greatly increased early detections that hope abounds for improved patient outcomes. However, histopathology, which guides treatment, often subcategorizes aggressiveness insufficiently among moderately differentiated Gleason score (6 and 7) tumors (>70% of new cases). Here, we test the diagnostic capability of prostate metabolite profiles measured with intact tissue magnetic resonance spectroscopy and the sensitivity of local prostate metabolites in predicting prostate cancer status. Prostate tissue samples (n = 199) obtained from 82 prostate cancer patients after prostatectomy were analyzed with high-resolution magic angle spinning proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy, and afterwards with quantitative pathology. Metabolite profiles obtained from principal component analysis of magnetic resonance spectroscopy were correlated with pathologic quantitative findings by using linear regression analysis and evaluated against patient pathologic statuses by using ANOVA. Paired t tests show that tissue metabolite profiles can differentiate malignant from benign samples obtained from the same patient (P < 0.005) and correlate with patient serum prostate-specific antigen levels (P < 0.006). Furthermore, metabolite profiles obtained from histologically benign tissue samples of Gleason score 6 and 7 prostates can delineate a subset of less aggressive tumors (P < 0.008) and predict tumor perineural invasion within the subset (P < 0.03). These results indicate that magnetic resonance spectroscopy metabolite profiles of biopsy tissues may help direct treatment plans by assessing prostate cancer pathologic stage and aggressiveness, which at present can be histopathologically determined only after prostatectomy.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
D. A. Torigian, S. S. Huang, M. Houseni, and A. Alavi Functional Imaging of Cancer with Emphasis on Molecular Techniques CA Cancer J Clin, July 1, 2007; 57(4): 206 - 224. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. M. Claudino, A. Quattrone, L. Biganzoli, M. Pestrin, I. Bertini, and A. Di Leo Metabolomics: Available Results, Current Research Projects in Breast Cancer, and Future Applications J. Clin. Oncol., July 1, 2007; 25(19): 2840 - 2846. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. G. Sorensen Magnetic Resonance As a Cancer Imaging Biomarker J. Clin. Oncol., July 10, 2006; 24(20): 3274 - 3281. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. Shah, A. Sattar, M. Benanti, S. Hollander, and L. Cheuck Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy as an Imaging Tool for Cancer: A Review of the Literature J Am Osteopath Assoc, January 1, 2006; 106(1): 23 - 27. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Cancer Research | Clinical Cancer Research |
| Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention | Molecular Cancer Therapeutics |
| Molecular Cancer Research | Cancer Prevention Research |
| Cancer Prevention Journals Portal | Cancer Reviews Online |
| Annual Meeting Education Book | Cell Growth & Differentiation |