CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03292874Updated Apr 3, 2024Results posted

High Resolution MRI Study for Prostate Cancer

An interventional study of high resolution MRI (hrMRI) in Prostate Cancer, sponsored by Cedars-Sinai Medical Center. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to male participants aged 19 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-04-03.

Sponsored by Cedars-Sinai Medical Center · Not applicable, Interventional, and Diagnostic

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
64
Allocation
Not applicable
Ages
19 Years and older
Sex
Male
01

Study summary

This high resolution MRI (hrMRI), along with stand MRI (sMRI) will be obtained at baseline and again in approximately 1 year in patients on prostate cancer active surveillance. Changes in lesion size and ADC values will be assessed on the serial studies. This study evaluates the hypothesis that hrMRI will detect changes that sMRI cannot detect and that these changes will correlate with prostate cancer progression as determined on prostate biopsy.

Read the detailed description

2.0 BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE

Multiparametric MRI Multiparametric MRI combining T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted, and dynamic contrast enhanced (DCE) images is commonly employed for detection and localization of prostate lesions. Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) is sensitive to the diffusion of water molecules interacting with surrounding macromolecules. DWI, which provides a quantitative biological parameter called apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value, is a robust MRI parameter for differentiating benign and malignant prostate tissue. In fact, the latest version of the Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) scoring system relies almost exclusively on DWI to identify tumors in the peripheral zone, which is where the vast majority of prostate cancers form. Findings on T2 images are not used to identify cancer, and DCE images are only used to differentiate between some PI-RADS 3 and 4 lesions. In a pilot study of prostate cancer AS, DW-MRI was useful for detecting progression of Gleason score based on changes in ADC value. Tumor size is another important clinical criterion for defining low risk prostate cancer, and tumor size based on DWI has been shown to crudely predict low risk prostate cancer. However, conventional DWI using single-shot echo-planar imaging is unable to detect small tumors, low grade tumors, or small changes in tumor size on serial imaging. Approximately 20% of small, low grade tumors found in men on AS are detected on modern prostate MRI.

High Resolution MRI Investigators introduce a new three-dimensional (3D) high-resolution diffusion-weighted imaging sequence (HR-DWI), which improves image quality while conferring at least a 5-fold improvement in resolution when compared to standard two-dimensional (2D) DWI (S-DWI). This novel 3D DWI technique has been developed by our team and can be applied on existing 1.5T or 3T MRI systems. S-DWI suffers from two important limitations. a) It uses single-shot echo-planar imaging (EPI) for data acquisition, which produces magnetic susceptibility induced streaking artifacts and geometric distortions so that round objects may appear oval. b) The relatively low signal-to-noise ratio and 2D image acquisition with S-DWI limit spatial resolution, which is defined by the minimum distance between two objects required to resolve them uniquely. Our HR-DWI overcomes these limitations by using magnetization prepared, multi-shot, turbo-spin-echo acquisition, which improves signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), spatial resolution, and image quality, and eliminates geometric distortions and streaking artifacts associated with EPI.

Preliminary studies

In preliminary studies assessing the performance of our HR-DWI in a prospective pilot trial of prostate cancer AS patients, the technique could detect tumors not seen on S-DWI and measure ADC, which correlates with grade. This is important because the long-term natural history of small prostate cancers invisible to S-DWI has never been prospectively defined, in part due to lack of adequate imaging technology. In the era of molecular diagnostics and next-generation sequencing, an important step in understanding the biology of these lesions is to develop technologies to image and characterize these lesions. Importance of HR-DWI includes:

  • Better imaging will allow these lesions to be monitored serially and targeted for biopsy, providing tissue for both histologic and molecular characterization.
  • Higher resolution imaging will better delineate tumor boundaries, which can improve tumor staging and identify margins during partial-gland ablation by cryotherapy or high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), which was approved in 2015 by the U.S. FDA.
  • Improved imaging resolution will allow for more accurate measurement of tumor size and ADC, and detection of small changes in size or grade over time. Standard prostate DWI has poor resolution; therefore, tumor growth kinetics have never been accepted as clinical criteria for cancer progression while on AS. If tumor growth kinetics or changes in grade determined by ADC prove prognostic, AS can rely less on serial transrectal biopsies, which can lead to serious complications.
02

Conditions studied

  • Prostate Cancer

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • prostate cancer
  • MRI
03

Who can participate

Ages eligible
19 Years and older
Sexes eligible
Male
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Age over 18 years
  • Patients diagnosed with clinically localized prostate cancer
  • Low or Low-intermediate Risk Prostate cancer1 defined as:
  • Pre-operative prostate specific antigen (PSA) ≤ 20.0 ng/ml
  • Clinical stage cT1 or cT2
  • Gleason score 3+3 or 3+4
  • Patients choosing AS or already on AS as primary management strategy
  • No previous treatment for prostate cancer with radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or hormonal therapy
  • No contraindications for gadolinium enhanced MRI

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • No exclusion criteria
04

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Diagnostic
Allocation
Not applicable
Intervention model
Single group
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
64 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Other
    Paired imaging

    Single arm, paired imaging of high resolution MRI (hrMRI) and stand MRI (sMRI)

    Diagnostic Test: high resolution MRI (hrMRI)

Interventions

  • Diagnostic testhigh resolution MRI (hrMRI)

    high resolution MRI (hrMRI) and standard MRI (sMRI) will be obtained at baseline and again in approximately 1 year in patients on prostate cancer active surveillance.

05

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Sensitivity and Specificity of High Resolution Versus Standard MRI in Identifying Adverse Histology

    The primary endpoint of the clinical trial was the presence of adverse histology (AH) on prostate biopsy. We defined adverse histology (AH) as either overall Gleason score of 7 or more on any biopsy, or an increase of 3 or more positive cores on serial systematic biopsies. The primary hypothesis was that change in tumor size or apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) as detected by high resolution MRI (hrMRI) would better predict AH than standard MRI (sMRI). AH histology was a measure intended to capture patients with high Gleason grade component (i.e. Gleason Grade 4 or 5) and patients progressing (e.g. from Gleason Group 1 to Gleason Group 2 or from Gleason Group 2 to Gleason Group 3). The sample size was too small and the followup duration of approximately 12 months was too short to assess only true cancer progression as the endpoint. The presence of AH alone is clinically important since these patients may need close followup and may consider definitive local therapy.

    Time frame: 6-12 months after enrollment

  2. Area Under the Receiver Operator Curve of High Resolution Versus Standard MRI in Identifying Adverse Histology

    The primary endpoint of the clinical trial was the presence of adverse histology (AH) on prostate biopsy. We defined adverse histology (AH) as either overall Gleason score of 7 or more on any biopsy, or an increase of 3 or more positive cores on serial systematic biopsies. The primary hypothesis was that change in tumor size or apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) as detected by high resolution MRI (hrMRI) would better predict AH than standard MRI (sMRI). AH histology was a measure intended to capture patients with high Gleason grade component (i.e. Gleason Grade 4 or 5) and patients progressing (e.g. from Gleason Group 1 to Gleason Group 2 or from Gleason Group 2 to Gleason Group 3). The sample size was too small and the followup duration of approximately 12 months was too short to assess only true cancer progression as the endpoint. The presence of AH alone is clinically important since these patients may need close followup and may consider definitive local therapy.

    Time frame: 6-12 months after enrollment

06

Results

Posted Apr 3, 2024
Limitations and caveats
The number of patients in our study was relatively small. The reference standard was prostate biopsies, which is subject to sampling error. However, this was necessary when investigating a low-risk, small-volume cancer that is managed nonoperatively. Our study was performed at a single center and the imaging protocol was developed by our team.

Participant flow

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestonePaired Imaging
Started64
Completed59
Not completed5
Withdrew: Due to pandemic5

Outcome measures

PrimarySensitivity and Specificity of High Resolution Versus Standard MRI in Identifying Adverse Histology

The primary endpoint of the clinical trial was the presence of adverse histology (AH) on prostate biopsy. We defined adverse histology (AH) as either overall Gleason score of 7 or more on any biopsy, or an increase of 3 or more positive cores on serial systematic biopsies. The primary hypothesis was that change in tumor size or apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) as detected by high resolution MRI (hrMRI) would better predict AH than standard MRI (sMRI). AH histology was a measure intended to capture patients with high Gleason grade component (i.e. Gleason Grade 4 or 5) and patients progressing (e.g. from Gleason Group 1 to Gleason Group 2 or from Gleason Group 2 to Gleason Group 3). The sample size was too small and the followup duration of approximately 12 months was too short to assess only true cancer progression as the endpoint. The presence of AH alone is clinically important since these patients may need close followup and may consider definitive local therapy.

Time frame:
6-12 months after enrollment
Reported as:
Number · percent
Sensitivity and Specificity of High Resolution Versus Standard MRI in Identifying Adverse Histology
percentHigh Resolution MRI (hrMRI)Standard MRI (sMRI)
sensitivity7571
specificity8454.8
PrimaryArea Under the Receiver Operator Curve of High Resolution Versus Standard MRI in Identifying Adverse Histology

The primary endpoint of the clinical trial was the presence of adverse histology (AH) on prostate biopsy. We defined adverse histology (AH) as either overall Gleason score of 7 or more on any biopsy, or an increase of 3 or more positive cores on serial systematic biopsies. The primary hypothesis was that change in tumor size or apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) as detected by high resolution MRI (hrMRI) would better predict AH than standard MRI (sMRI). AH histology was a measure intended to capture patients with high Gleason grade component (i.e. Gleason Grade 4 or 5) and patients progressing (e.g. from Gleason Group 1 to Gleason Group 2 or from Gleason Group 2 to Gleason Group 3). The sample size was too small and the followup duration of approximately 12 months was too short to assess only true cancer progression as the endpoint. The presence of AH alone is clinically important since these patients may need close followup and may consider definitive local therapy.

Time frame:
6-12 months after enrollment
Reported as:
Number · probability
Area Under the Receiver Operator Curve of High Resolution Versus Standard MRI in Identifying Adverse Histology
probabilityHigh Resolution MRI (hrMRI)Standard MRI (sMRI)
Area Under the Receiver Operator Curve of High Resolution Versus Standard MRI in Identifying Adverse Histology0.7940.631
Statistical analysis
  • High Resolution MRI (hrMRI) vs Standard MRI (sMRI) · nonparametric method · p = 0.014 (Areas under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) were compared between models with standard and high-resolution MRI variables using the nonparametric method described by DeLong. DeLong. Biometrics 1988;44(3):837-45.)

Adverse events

Collected over 12 months. Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
hrMRI0/59 (0%)0/59 (0%)0/59 (0%)
sMRI0/59 (0%)0/59 (0%)0/59 (0%)

Baseline characteristics

Age, Categorical
Age, Categorical(Participants)Paired Imaging
<=18 years0
Between 18 and 65 years27
>=65 years32
Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)Paired Imaging
Mean65 ± 6.7
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)Paired Imaging
Female0
Male59
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)(Participants)Paired Imaging
Hispanic or Latino2
Not Hispanic or Latino57
Unknown or Not Reported0
Race (NIH/OMB)
Race (NIH/OMB)(Participants)Paired Imaging
American Indian or Alaska Native0
Asian7
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander0
Black or African American6
White46
More than one race0
Unknown or Not Reported0
PSA
PSA(nanograms per milliliter)Paired Imaging
Mean6.0 ± 2.8
Histologic Grade
Histologic Grade(Participants)Paired Imaging
Low grade (Gleason 3+3)45
Intermediate grade (Gleason 3+4)14
No. positive cores on prostate biopsy
No. positive cores on prostate biopsy(Number of positive cores)Paired Imaging
Mean2.9 ± 2.4

2 further baseline measures are reported on the registry.

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Cedars Sinai Medical Center
    Los Angeles, California 90048, United States
08

References and documents

Study documents

  • Protocol and statistical analysis plan · Apr 7, 2020

Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.

09

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03292874
Lead sponsor
Cedars-Sinai Medical Center
Responsible party
Hyung L. Kim, MD (Principal Investigator, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center) — Principal investigator
First posted
Sep 26, 2017
Start date
Sep 13, 2017
Primary completion
Dec 14, 2022
Completion
Dec 14, 2022
Results posted
Apr 3, 2024
Last update
Apr 3, 2024

Study contacts

Hyung L Kim, MD
principal investigator · Cedars-Sinai Medical Center

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
Yes
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Mar 2024. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion