Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess state-level trends in per beneficiary Medicare spending on medical imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Medicare part B 5% research identifiable files from 2004 through 2012 were used to compute national and state-by-state annual average per beneficiary spending on imaging. State-to-state geographic variation and temporal trends were analyzed. RESULTS: National average per beneficiary Medicare part B spending on imaging increased 7.8% annually between 2004 ($350.54) and its peak in 2006 ($405.41) then decreased 4.4% annually between 2006 and 2012 ($298.63). In 2012, annual per beneficiary spending was highest in Florida ($367.25) and New York ($355.67) and lowest in Ohio ($67.08) and Vermont ($72.78). Maximum state-to-state geographic variation increased over time, with the ratio of highest-spending state to lowest-spending state increasing from 4.0 in 2004 to 5.5 in 2012. Spending in nearly all states decreased since peaks in 2005 (six states) or 2006 (43 states). The average annual decrease among states was 5.1% +/- 1.8% (range, 1.2-12.2%) The largest decrease was in Ohio. In only two states did per beneficiary spending increase (Maryland, 12.5% average annual increase since 2005; Oregon, 4.8% average annual increase since 2008). CONCLUSION: Medicare part B average per beneficiary spending on medical imaging declined in nearly every state since 2005 and 2006 peaks, abruptly reversing previously reported trends. Spending continued to increase, however, in Maryland and Oregon. Identification of state-level variation may facilitate future investigation of the potential effect of specific and regional changes in spending on patient access and outcomes.

This article reviews recent and ongoing developments in multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) of the prostate. Advances in T2-weighted imaging, diffusion-weighted imaging, dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging, and spectroscopic imaging are described along with advances related to radiofrequency coils and imaging at high magnetic field. As mpMRI is increasingly becoming routine in various aspects of clinical prostate cancer management, its role in detection, localization, staging, assessment of aggressiveness, and active surveillance is discussed. Combined with growing clinical adoption of the techniques already at hand, continual optimization of acquisition techniques and image interpretation schemes will further strengthen the role of mpMRI as an important diagnostic test in prostate cancer management.

AIM: To evaluate the performance of normalised apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values for prostate cancer assessment when performed by independent observers blinded to histopathology findings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-eight patients undergoing 3 T phased-array coil magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) including diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI; maximal b-value 1000 s/mm2) before prostatectomy were included. Two radiologists independently evaluated the images, unaware of the histopathology findings. Regions of interest (ROIs) were drawn within areas showing visually low ADC within the peripheral zone (PZ) and transition zone (TZ) bilaterally. ROIs were also placed within regions in both lobes not suspicious for tumour, allowing computation of normalised ADC (nADC) ratios between suspicious and non-suspicious regions. The diagnostic performance of ADC and nADC were compared. RESULTS: For PZ tumour detection, ADC achieved significantly higher area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC; p=0.026) and specificity (p=0.021) than nADC for reader 1, and significantly higher AUC (p=0.025) than nADC for reader 2. For TZ tumour detection, nADC achieved significantly higher specificity (p=0.003) and accuracy (p=0.004) than ADC for reader 2. For PZ Gleason score >3+3 tumour detection, ADC achieved significantly higher AUC (p=0.003) and specificity (p=0.005) than nADC for reader 1, and significantly higher AUC (p=0.023) than nADC for reader 2. For TZ Gleason score >3+3 tumour detection, ADC achieved significantly higher specificity (p=0.019) than nADC for reader 1. CONCLUSION: In contrast to prior studies performing unblinded evaluations, ADC was observed to outperform nADC overall for two independent observers blinded to the histopathology findings. Therefore, although strategies to improve the utility of ADC measurements in prostate cancer assessment merit continued investigation, caution is warranted when applying normalisation to improve diagnostic performance in clinical practice.